Lucky Obukohwo, Reporting
Renowned Human rights lawyer Femi Falana has picked holes in the proposed migration agreement between United Kingdom and Nigeria, describing it as the violation of their fundamental human rights.
He argued that the arrangement designed to fast-track the return of Nigerians without legal status runs foul to constitutional safeguards and established legal procedures. Central to his concern is the reported use of so-called “UK letters” in place of standard travel documents.
Falana dismissed the provision outright, insisting that it falls short of acceptable legal standards. “The use of the ‘UK letters’ to return Nigerians is not and cannot be a substitute for proper travel documents,” he said, warning that such a measure risks wrongful or arbitrary deportations.
The legal luminary pointed out that the agreement undermines the right to fair hearing, noting that individuals affected may not be given a meaningful opportunity to challenge their removal. In his view, this places the deal in direct conflict with the 1999 Constitution, as amended.
Beyond domestic law, Falana pointed to Nigeria’s obligations under international conventions, including the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, stressing that any deportation framework must uphold human dignity and provide adequate legal remedies.
He also expressed concern about the broader human impact, particularly on families. According to him, many Nigerians in the UK have established lives there, and any abrupt deportation process could disrupt family structures and violate fundamental rights.
Perhaps most significantly, Falana questioned the legal standing of the agreement itself, noting the absence of legislative backing.
He cited constitutional provisions requiring treaties to be domesticated by the National Assembly before acquiring the force of law, warning that any attempt to enforce the deal without such approval could be struck down by the courts.
In firm terms, he concluded that Nigeria must not compromise its legal standards or become a receptacle for externally driven migration policies. Until due process is followed and proper legal backing secured, he maintained, the agreement cannot be legitimately enforced.
