In his recent paper, “Who Belongs Where? The Politics of Internal Deportation, Nativism and Migration in Nigeria”, Ezenwa Olumba raises compelling concerns about internal deportations within Nigeria, particularly the actions of the Lagos State Government in forcibly relocating individuals deemed “non-indigenes.” The paper, steeped in academic rigor, explores these actions through the lenses of nativism, internal migration governance, and constitutional rights.
Yet, while the scholarship is important and the concerns valid, the realities of contemporary Nigerian urban and rural governance, especially as they relate to security, territorial survival, and public order, demand a more pragmatic interpretation.
The Hard Truth: Lagos Is Under Siege from Urban Pressures
Lagos is not just a city, it is a melting pot of over 22 million people, growing chaotically. Its infrastructure, services, and law enforcement are overwhelmed. Unregulated internal migration, driven by poverty and systemic failure in other states, threatens to collapse the city under its own weight.
In this context, the relocation of 371 people in 2024, most of whom, according to Lagos officials, requested help to return to their home states, must be seen not as ethnic persecution, but as a survival mechanism for a megacity nearing its threshold.
The Case for Targeted Internal Deportations: The Example of Imo State
While the article focuses on Lagos, it fails to acknowledge an emerging and far more dangerous threat in other states, particularly Imo State, which now faces an existential security crisis from embedded foreign criminal elements, especially from Sahelian Fulani backgrounds.
Across vast forests in Ihiagwa, Avu, Oforola, Ohaji, Ngor-Okpala, Orlu, and Okigwe zones, intelligence reports and community testimonies confirm the entrenchment of criminal groups operating under the guise of cattle herding or forest settlements. These groups are involved in:
Kidnappings for ransom, often abducting villagers and travellers and using forest encampments as operational bases;
Cold-blooded murders and ritual killings;
Dismantling and sale of stolen vehicles, in conjunction with rogue local auto dealers;
Illegal trade in human parts, often disguised under herbalist or traditional medicine fronts;
Armed invasions of farm settlements, displacing locals and destroying livelihoods.
This is not about ethnic profiling, it is about confronting a verified and escalating security threat. Many of these Sahel-linked infiltrators have no verifiable ties to any community in Imo, and are often shielded by corrupt local collaborators.
For Imo to survive, the state must act decisively, not just through dialogue or soft interventions, but through:
well-planned intelligence-led raids,
biometric identification and screening of undocumented persons in forests and settlements, and
immediate deportation of those with no traceable origin or legitimate purpose.
If Lagos can act to preserve urban order, Imo must act even more urgently to preserve rural integrity and human life.
Constitutional Rights Must Coexist With Security Realities
Section 41 of the Nigerian Constitution guarantees freedom of movement, but it does not guarantee freedom to terrorize, kill, or dismantle a state from within. Just as no state is obliged to harbor criminals under the cloak of human rights, Imo State cannot afford to keep ignoring the silent invasion of its forests by violent non-state actors.
Those who argue for blind constitutionalism in this context ignore the fact that Nigeria is already engaged in asymmetric warfare, and many of these infiltrators are not regular migrants, but foreign combatants using Nigeria’s porous security apparatus to wage economic and physical war on communities.
Not Every Deportation is Nativism, Some Are Self-Preservation
The deportation debate must be nuanced. While arbitrary or ethnically targeted deportations are unconstitutional, targeted removal of violent or undocumented elements is a legitimate act of governance. It is time we stopped confusing justice with permissiveness.
Rather than dismiss all internal deportations as bigotry, we should focus on legal frameworks that enable states to distinguish between legitimate settlers and embedded threats, between those who contribute to a community and those who prey on it.
Ultimately: Nigeria Needs a National Internal Migration and Security Policy
This is not just Lagos’ problem, or Imo’s. Nigeria urgently needs:
A central registry for internal migrants and settlers;
A harmonized internal migration law that balances freedom of movement with state-level security prerogatives;
Empowered vigilante and forest ranger units trained and equipped to detect embedded criminal networks;
Deportation protocols for individuals with no legal or community recognition, who constitute a proven risk to society.
The goal is not ethnic exclusion. The goal is national survival.
Until Nigeria gets serious about this growing threat, starting with Imo State, criminals will continue to exploit our leniency and constitutional ambiguities, and our communities will continue to suffer in silence.
By Hon. Chimazuru Nnadi-Oforgu
OBLONG MEDIA UNLIMITED 
Leave a comment