The Catholic Bishops Conference of Nigeria (CBCN) has condemned the recent Samoa Agreement, describing it as “a threat to the sovereignty and values of Nigeria.”
In a 25-point communiqué issued yesterday, the CBCN highlighted their concerns over the agreement and called for urgent governmental action.
The communiqué was signed by CBCN President Most Rev. Lucius Iwejuru Ugorji and Secretary Most Rev. Donatus A. Ogun.
“The Agreement looks innocuous and attractive on the surface, but underneath it is carefully blended with post-modern secularistic ideologies that significantly undermine the moral, cultural, and religious beliefs of Nigerian citizens,” the Bishops warned.
They expressed worry that Nigerian authorities might not fully grasp the implications of the nuanced language within the document, which they claim threatens national sovereignty and values.
“We, the Catholic Bishops of Nigeria, as watchmen and guides, deeply committed to the sound moral, religious, and cultural growth of our dear country, hereby clearly highlight what the Samoa Document portends for the future of Nigeria and Nigerians and call on our government to, as a matter of urgency, propose an amendment of the Agreement or withdraw from it,” the CBCN urged.
The Bishops examined the legal ramifications of the Samoa Agreement, emphasizing that in international law, signing a treaty indicates a state’s intention to be bound by it and supports its principles and goals.
“Given the secrecy surrounding Nigeria’s signing of the Samoa Agreement, it is unclear whether the signature was tendered subject to Ratification, Acceptance, or Approval,” they stated.
The CBCN raised concerns over the agreement’s implications, particularly its prolific references to gender approaches and Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights, which they argue could undermine Nigerian values.
“The Samoa Agreement essentially gives international law status to Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity, Comprehensive Sexuality Education, and Abortion through its prolific reference to Gender approaches and the phrase Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights,” the Bishops pointed out.
The lack of a glossary or definitions section in the treaty poses potential problems for its implementation and evaluation, according to the CBCN.
They noted that signing a treaty creates an obligation to refrain from acts that would undermine its object and purpose, citing the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.
“Under article 98.3 of the Samoa Agreement, Nigeria, by signing it, bound itself to recognize the validity of any measure taken to implement the Agreement after the date of its entry into force,” they explained.
This, they argued, undermines Nigeria’s historical position as a persistent objector to certain international policies.
The Bishops were particularly concerned about the agreement’s numerous references to gender equality and mainstreaming, noting, “There are over 110 genders that would claim a stake in the term gender equality.”
Addressing the implications of joint positions with the European Union in international fora, the CBCN remarked, “Provisions that mandate joint positions will make it difficult for Nigerian diplomats and negotiators to distinguish themselves in thought and representation.”
To address these concerns, the CBCN called on the Nigerian government to propose amendments to the Samoa Agreement, ensuring that no obligations regarding sexual orientation, gender identity, comprehensive sexuality education, abortion, contraception, legalization of prostitution, same-sex marriage, or sexual rights for children are included.
“If Nigeria takes the lead in calling for Amendments to the Samoa Agreement and its protocols, other states in the African Caribbean and Pacific regions may more likely follow suit.
If accepted, this Amendment will go a long way in preventing SRHR from becoming international through an economic partnership agreement,” the CBCN stated.
They concluded by suggesting that Nigeria should withdraw from the agreement if the proposed amendments are not accepted by the EU, citing South Africa’s precedent of withdrawing from the Cotonou Agreement in 2023.
