65 Years After, Falana Insists Britain Never Gave Nigeria Real Independence

Femi Falana, a lawyer, says Nigerian politicians now lack ideology and see political power as a vehicle for acquiring power rather than serving the people.

Human rights lawyer and Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Femi Falana, has taken a critical look at the nation’s 65-year journey since independence, declaring that what Britain handed over in 1960 was little more than “flag independence.”

Speaking on Channels Television’s special Independence Day broadcast, Falana lamented that the colonial structure was left almost completely intact, leaving subsequent generations of Nigerian leaders unable, or unwilling, to fully reshape the country’s governance to serve its people.

According to him, the political class that succeeded colonial administrators missed the opportunity to transform Nigeria’s foundation into a system truly owned by its citizens. Instead, he argued, politicians of today have drifted even further from the spirit of public service, treating political office as an avenue for self-enrichment rather than responsibility.

“The British colonial regime did not dismantle its structure,” Falana said. “What was handed over in 1960 was not real independence. It was what I call flag independence. Unfortunately, the politicians at the time didn’t make the best of it before the system collapsed.”

A Decline In Political Ideology

Falana contrasted the present political landscape with Nigeria’s early republics, where, according to him, political parties were guided by clear ideologies. He recalled that parties in the First Republic, and even in the Second Republic, competed on the strength of their principles and policy direction. “They knew what they wanted,” he explained, stressing that the parties were not merely vehicles for seizing power but instruments for shaping society.

Today, however, he argued that this sense of ideological grounding has been lost. Modern political parties, in his view, are focused almost exclusively on winning elections, often without offering coherent visions for governance. This, he noted, has fostered a culture where the pursuit of office overshadows service to the people.

Read also: President Tinubu’s Independence Day Speech

“The political class now lacks ideology,” he said. “What we see is a situation where political parties are formed as vehicles for acquiring power, not for addressing the needs of the masses. That is why, 65 years after independence, the country is still struggling with the same fundamental issues.”

Falana’s reflections come against a backdrop of widespread debate on Nigeria’s democracy and governance, with critics frequently accusing leaders of mismanaging the nation’s vast resources while leaving millions of citizens in poverty.

From Colonial Legacy To Constitutional Confusion

The lawyer also traced Nigeria’s constitutional journey, recalling how the shift from parliamentary to presidential governance was made without cultivating the necessary political culture. He pointed to the Murtala Mohammed regime’s role in steering Nigeria away from the Westminster-style parliamentary system into the American-modeled presidential system in the late 1970s.

“Chief Rotimi Williams headed the Constitution Review Committee, with the late Professor Ben Nwabueze and many others involved in drafting,” Falana recalled. “At the end of their work, 47 members agreed to go the American way. But they chose it without adopting the political culture of America. That is part of the confusion we are facing today.”

For Falana, Nigeria’s constitutional framework has been shaped by both colonial hangovers and domestic missteps. He argued that the inability of leaders to adapt these frameworks to Nigerian realities has contributed to instability and poor governance outcomes.

As the country marked its 65th independence anniversary, his remarks carried a sobering message: independence did not automatically translate into self-determination, and six decades on, the failure to rethink foundational structures continues to haunt Nigeria.

Falana’s critique underscores a recurring concern among analysts, that without ideological parties, a responsive constitution, and genuine public accountability, Nigeria may remain trapped in cycles of political dysfunction.

Independence, he insisted, must be more than symbolic. To be meaningful, it must translate into structures, policies, and practices that empower citizens and prioritize national progress over personal ambition. Until then, Nigeria’s “flag independence” will remain a haunting reminder of what could have been.