A treaty of friendship and preferential trade that Britain concluded with Yorubaland in 1888 has been in concealment for more than a century. The Yoruba Party in the UK (YPUK) seeks its immediate implementation in accordance with British and international law.
Yorubaland is a distinct geographical entity in West Africa, enclosed by the natural barriers of the River Niger to the north and east, and the Atlantic Ocean to the south, which the Yoruba, probably one of the largest mono-ethnic groups in Africa, have occupied and owned, continuously, undisputed and uninterrupted, since time immemorial.
YPUK was registered with the UK Electoral Commission on 13 February 2023 as a purely Yoruba ethnic political party, which entitled members to claim the mantle of heirs to the Yoruba legacy, similar to the State of Israel, a political entity, claiming the mantle of ‘heirs to the 6 million’. YPUK was formed to provide a political voice for the Yoruba community domicile in the UK.
On 23 July 1888, Queen Victoria, the Queen of Great Britain, and Alaafin Adeyemi, the Head of Yorubaland, entered their nations into a treaty of friendship and trade (the 1888 Britain-Yorubaland Treaty). The treaty was so important to Britain that the government published a notice of it in London amongst notices of its agreements with other States. On 16 June 1890, Queen Victoria ratified the treaty in accordance with the British domestic law. Alaafin Adeyemi on the same date ratified the treaty by accepting a treaty-related payment from the British government. By ratifying the treaty, Britain accepted Yorubaland as its equal.
The 1888 Britain-Yorubaland Treaty covered the ‘four corners’ of Yorubaland ‘embracing within its area that inhabited by all Yoruba-speaking peoples’. The treaty was intended to maintain ‘for ever, friendly relations with the subjects of Her majesty, the Queen’. The treaty was intended to develop ‘the resources of Yoruba by means of legitimate trade with the subjects of Her Majesty…’.
The 1888 Britain-Yorubaland Treaty further provided for:
i. ‘peace and friendship between the subjects of Her Majesty…and of the Alaafin’ (Article 1).
ii. ‘the subjects of the Queen may always trade freely with the people of Oyo and the Yoruba-speaking countries in every article’ (Article 2).
iii. British subjects would be charged ‘tolls, duties, fees, imposts or charges’ that were customary and reasonable or as agreed between the parties (Article 3).
iv. ‘all differences or disputes shall be adjusted by [the Alaafin]’ or referred by him to arbitration (Article 4).
v. ‘no session of territory and no other Treaty or Agreement shall be made by’ [the Alaafin] other than this one (Article 7).
vi. ‘In consideration of the faithful observance of the foregoing Articles of Agreement’, the Alaafin would be paid a yearly stipend unless he committed a breach or neglect of all or one of the terms (Article 8).The existence of the treaty is not in doubt. Indeed, its existence was made public in government publications in London at the time. The treaty document has been archived, and today, members of the public can easily obtain copies. Because of a built-in imbalance of power between the parties to the 1888 Britain-Yorubaland Treaty, Britain hitherto has treated the treaty with utter contempt, and actively prevented Yorubaland from fulfilling its side of the bargain, indeed going as far as to assassinate the Alaafin in 1895. Britain’s behaviour however is not permissible under the international law of treaties. No nation is above the international law. The Yoruba are entitled by that law to seek enforcement of the 1888 Britain-Yorubaland Treaty.
Both Britain and Yorubaland had intended in the 1888 Britain-Yorubaland Treaty to be bound by international law. The parties established the boundary and frontiers of the Yorubaland and imbued it with international personality. According to the legal Doctrine of Recognition, when an established State concluded an agreement with a territory that it had not previously recognised, it was recognising that territory as a State from that date onward. The day of ratification, that is to say, 16 June 1890, was the critical date for the 1888 Britain-Yorubaland Treaty in accordance with the Critical Date Rule. Reference to ‘countries’ at Article 2 of the treaty makes it unambiguous the 1888 Britain-Yorubaland Treaty was between two independent states – Great Britain and Yorubaland – and bound by international law as later codified in 1969 by the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (VCLT):
i. Yorubaland possessed the capacity under international law to conclude treaties (VCLT Article 1).
ii. The Alaafin had full power to enter into the 1888 Britain-Yorubaland Treaty (VCLT Article 7).
iii. Britain consented to be bound by the terms of the 1888 Britain-Yorubaland Treaty by the means ofa. the signature of its representative, the Governor of the Lagos Colony, (VCLT Article 12) and
b. ratification of the treaty by the Queen on 16 June 1890 (VCLT Article 14).
iv. The Yoruba had the legitimate expectation that the two signatories to the 1888 Britain-Yorubaland Treaty would,a. refrain from acts that would defeat the object and purpose of the treaty that they had signed and ratified (VCLT Article 18);
b. be bound by the treaty terms and to perform them in good faith (pacta sunt servanda) (VCLT Article 26); and,
c. be bound in respect of the entire Yoruba territory unless a different interpretation was established or discernible from the treaty (VCLT Article 29).
Parliamentary legislation was not needed at the time of making the 1888 Britain-Yorubaland Treaty because British domestic law did not have to be changed or made to implement the treaty. The treaty made no changes to Britain’s constitutional arrangement. Nevertheless, it is clear that the parties intended the 1888 Britain-Yorubaland Treaty also to be domestic law. Reference to ‘consideration’ at Article 8 of the treaty, for example, made its contractual nature wholly unambiguous.
i. On 23 May 1888, the Queen in a letter (Ref No 115/77) made an Offer of a treaty to the Alaafin on the grounds that Yorubaland was exclusively owned by the Yoruba.
ii. On 23 July 1888, the Alaafin made Acceptance of this offer in writing, and appended his signature to the text.
iii. The quid quo pro was a yearly stipend to the Alaafin, and on 16 June 1890, Britain made the first treaty-related payment of £35.5s to the Alaafin which rendered the contract life.Both Britain and Yorubaland intended the 1888 Britain-Yorubaland Treaty to be permanent, not provisional or temporary. Hence, they did not insert into the treaty any escape clause or provisions for termination or for withdrawal from it by either party. The passage of time thus is irrelevant. On 11 March 2002, the ICJ established and used the legal longevity of this type of treaty to decide the Bakassi Peninsula territorial claim (Cameroon v Nigeria). The ICJ determined that the boundary between Nigeria and Cameroon was delimited by the Anglo-German Agreement of 11 March 1913.
The 1888 Britain-Yorubaland Treaty is one of the most important and consequential treaties that Britain entered into with African nations in the aftermath of the Berlin Act of 1885. Our forefathers bequeathed the 1888 Britain-Yorubaland Treaty to us. It is our sacred duty as heirs to ensure its implementation.
Baasegun (Dr) Olusola Oni
Leader, The Yoruba Party in the UK