Requiem for Arewa’s Political Homogeneity

by Dominic Umosen

With particular emphasis, history acknowledges the overwhelming sense of misgivings by Northern political leaders for their serial indiscretions and misguided political decisions which began in 2011 when regional leaders met in Abuja and resolved to step up hostilities against President Goodluck Jonathan’s administration in demonstration of the region’s disaffection from loss of political power in the country. Initially, this uncharitable disposition was attributed to tantrums by an over-pampered child who may be hell-bent on ignoring the basic wisdom that wise folks do not betray the confidence of their traditional political allies; which is the exact political currency Arewa is repaying its traditional political allies in the South-South with.

Profound disappointment in the South-South regarding Arewa’s grand betrayal also triggered reverse outrage, with some hawks like former Niger-Delta militant, Alhaji Mujaheed Asari-Dokubo advocating that Niger-Delta aborigines should unilaterally expropriate crude oil as compensation for collateral damages visited on minority oil-producing nationalities in the region. Enraged by this ingratitude-based arrogance against the South-South on one hand and endless hostile exchanges with neighbouring minority nationalities in the North on the other, it was a matter of time before these hostile exchanges exerted irreversible stress on the fabric of homogeneity between Hausa/Fulanis and their neighbour minority nationalities, destroying it in the process and definitively erasing a famous socio-political attribute of the region.

For the first time since the amalgamation of defunct Northern Nigeria and the Southern Protectorate, individuals from that part of the country began to defend the interests of their distinct nationalities in the region, as opposed to a mythical one and indivisible aggregate Northern political interest which deviates from what used to be regarded as aggregate Arewa identity. However, the collapse of the Northern political identity has been most dramatic in Plateau State because there, inter-ethnic acrimony has made it impossible for the man who fought a civil war to keep Nigeria one – Gen Yakubu Gowon – to visit his  Pankshin home. The former head-of-state’s predicament posts a supreme irony. Indeed, Plateau has become the epicenter of a vicious inter-ethnic war in which the Hausa-Fulani are permanently locked in battle against minority ethnic nationalities in the savannah.

Part of reasons for the dramatic collapse of the mythical political homogeneity of the North is the fact that democracy invariably destroyed much of the unmerited privileges that the Hausa/Fulani-controlled military hitherto lavished on their kith and kin, including fiercely-arrogant itinerant herdsmen who seem blissfully ignorant of the fact that nomadic pastoralism is no longer fashionable the world over. Because it is no longer possible to indulge or lavish excuses for the over-exuberance of armed herdsmen, well-coordinated clashes between them and farming communities have triggered consistently bloody exchanges, with farmers becoming more determined to protect their farmlands from ravages by rampaging livestock which should ideally be sequestered in ranches as done in every civilised society.

The reluctance by government to restrict livestock to designated ranches was developed during military rule.  The institution developed and perfected this reluctance to do what is right because doing so might inconvenience the owner of a consignment of livestock who may have been in some sort of cahoots with the local garrison commander, hence untouchable. The frequency of such practices has been drastically curtailed under this dispensation where the fear of insurgents have imposed a new vigilance on security agencies, inspiring more farmers in traumatized and exasperated communities to resist encroachments on their farmlands by livestock and herdsmen who are often unbelievably well-armed, enough to complicate the scope of their menace as well as ensuing exchanges with these invaded communities.

Indeed, the frequency of such violent exchanges between herdsmen and farmers has triggered countless clashes in several communities across the country. Across Benue, Bauchi, Plateau, Imo, Ogun, Ekiti and many other states, tales of clashes between roaming bands of herdsmen and farmers are routine. Beyond the loss of innocent lives involved and the provocative nonchalance of herdsmen who refuse to distinguish between farmlands and fallow bush, Nigerians are sufficiently exasperated by the reluctance of government to enforce the universal norm which specifies that nomadic pastoralism is outdated and that anyone seeking to engage in large-scale livestock farming should make provision for ranches to eliminate the likelihood of recurring friction between herdsmen and farming communities.

When the articulate Middle Belt Forum, the umbrella group for minority nationalities in the North-Central Zone, issued a threat to reciprocate attacks on their communities by itinerant Fulani herdsmen, the justification for this unprecedented threat of retaliations was provided by frequently-bloody attacks on these communities by Fulani herdsmen who have acquired a greater capacity for menace and are better armed than soldiers. Testimony to this increasing sophistication in the menace posed by Fulani herdsmen is the enabling circumstance surrounding the killing of the former Senate Health Services Committee Chairman, Dr Fulani Dantong by some Fulani herdsmen who invaded a grieving Berom village in Barkin Ladi Local Government Area in Plateau State. According to eye-witnesses, soldiers attached to the Joint Task Force advised the grieving villagers to flee allegedly because the invaders arrived better-armed than themselves.

The greater bulk of ammunition that triggered the collapse of the fabled political homogeneity of the North was provided by animosity triggered by these violent clashes between herdsmen and farmers in the savannah. The traditional indifference of a typical herdsman to a farmland and a bush provoked former Chief of General Staff, late Maj-Gen. Tunde Idiagbon to threaten to gun down any Fulani herdsman that encroached on his farm in Ilorin.  Indeed, anger by minority nationalities in the North against the predominant Hausa/Fulani invariably became proportionate to the frequency of attacks on their communities and the destruction of the properties by indiscriminating herdsmen and their rampaging flocks.

Other tear-jerking legacies of feudalism like the almajiri phenomenon further intensified the disintegration of the region’s fabled political homogeneity. It is an enduring testimony to the prevailing culture of political mischief that despite the fact that salvation was graciously engineered for these human eye-sores from outside the region, efforts to rehabilitate them by President Jonathan were vigorously resisted by selfish regional leaders like Gov Babangida Aliyu of Niger State who argue that the sorry lifestyle projected by these human dregs is a worthy and befitting cultural heritage. Yet Aliyu sends his wards to the best schools abroad and lavishes his teenagers with toys almajiris can only dream about.

This sensational hypocrisy by self-serving political leaders in the region contributed significantly to undermine and eventually trigger collapse of the region’s fabled political homogeneity. It also explains why it was possible for an unimaginative governor to spend two-terms in Yobe to acquire choice limousines and exquisite palaces for traditional rulers and after climbing on the crest of prevalent ignorance to senatorial relevance, he gyrated on the axle of mischief to blame President Jonathan for endemic poverty in the North-East. It is unfortunate that instead of holding leaders like these to account for the travesty they represent, some misguided people are holding others to ransom in the name of insurgency which further exacerbates erosion of political homogeneity of a milieu that has been torn apart by internal contradictions.

The views expressed above are solely that of the writer and not necessarily that of Omojuwa.com or its associates.

http://omojuwa.com/2014/01/requiem-for-arewas-political-homogeneity-dominik-umosen/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Omojuwacom+%28OMOJUWA.COM%29

NATIONAL CONFERENCE: REPRESENTATION NONSENSE

                                                          Okorounmu presenting his committee's report to Jonathan 

In my personal submission to the Presidential Advisory Committee (PAC) on President Jonathan’s proposed National Conference, I did say that the issue of representation to the Conference would most likely pose the greatest challenge to the proposal. A THISDAY report on this matter has heightened my fears in this regard.

On 23 December 2013, a THISDAY report written by Olusegun Adeniyi and James Sowole under the heading, PRESIDENTIAL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDS 545 DELEGATES, contained “snippets” obtained by THISDAY from the Okorounmu Committee recommendations to Mr. President. All the agitators for a National Conference would have been shocked at the disclosures contained in the Report.  They may have to abruptly end their celebration of having achieved success in convincing the Federal Government to grant them their request to convene a National Conference. Their euphoria may have come to a screeching halt. Those who doggedly fought for a National Conference might have just had it approved and then taken away from them by the Federal Government.

THISDAY’s “snippets”, which are yet to be confirmed leakages from the PAC Report, claim as follows:

1.       That only 545 delegates may attend the Conference after all.

2.       That the 545 delegates would be made up as follows:

(a) 1 elected delegate from each of Nigeria’s 360 Federal Constituencies-360

(b) Special interest groups and Federal Government nominees  -185

                                                                                                                                Total -545

3.       That the 185 delegates representing special interest groups and Fed Govt appointees shall be comprised of the following:

A. Government Nominees (43 delegates):

                (a) 1 delegate nominated by each State Govt               -               36

                (b) 1 delegate nominated by the FCT                              -               1

                (c) 2 delegates from each arm of Fed. Govt.

                       (Presidency 2, Judiciary 2, Legislature 2)                 -               6

                                                                Sub-Total                              -               43

                B. Women (41 delegates):

                (a) 1 woman nominated from each State                      -               36

                (b) 1 woman nominated by the FCT                                -               1

                (c) 4 women nominated by the Fed. Govt.                     -               4

                                                                Sub-Total                              -               41

                C. Youth (42 delegates):

                (a) 1 youth nominated by each State                              -               36

                (b) 2 youths nominated by the FCT                                  -               2

                (c) 4 youths nominated by the Fed. Govt.                      -               4

                                                                Sub-Total                              -               42

                D. Traditional Rulers (37 delegates):

                (a) 1 nominated by each State                                         -               36

                (b) 1 by the FCT                                                                  -               1

                                                                Sub-Total                              -               37

                E. Professional Bodies & Faith-based Organisations (10 delegates):

                (a) Professional bodies                                                       -               4

                (b) Christian faith                                                                 -               2

                (c) Islamic faith                                                                   -               2

                (d) Traditionalists                                                                -               2

                                                                Sub-Total                              -               10

                F. Other Delegates (6 delegates):

                (a) Armed Forces & Police                                 -               4

                (b) Diaspora delegates (2)                  -               Male       -               1

                                                                                -               Female   -               1

                                                                Sub-Total                              -               6

                Grand Total                                          -               -               -               179

Thus, 6 delegates have not been accounted for (185 – 179 = 6). The reporters said they disclosed snippets only. We should therefore give them the benefit of the doubt, overlook the missing 6 delegates for now, and allow a small margin for errors.

The following deductions can be made from the above figures:

1.       That the ethnic nationalities that canvassed for the Conference might have been totally overlooked by Sen. Okorounmu’s Committee. They have been declared irrelevant to the process. I thought we were going to have a National Conference of Ethnic Nationalities. But alas, it’s not to be.

2.       That only 545 delegates will be representing Nigeria's over 160 million people at such an important and crucial conference is far too small a representation in my opinion. Many of us were expecting between 1,000 and 2,000 delegates at the conference. Some people even recommended 5,000 delegates.

3.       That 360 delegates (66%) to the Conference will emerge by election along Federal Constituency lines. The delineation, distribution and allocation of Federal Constituencies is one of the most obnoxious and oppressive tools that the Military boys bequeathed us. They are so unequally distributed round the country that one wonders the criteria that they used. For example, while the SE Zone has just 43 Federal Constituencies, the NW Zone has a whopping 92. All the 3 southern Zones have a total of 169 Federal Constituencies while the 3 Northern Zones have 191 including the FCT. This is one of the political structures that the Conference will seek to correct. Federal Constituencies should therefore not form the basis for the emergence of 66% of the Conference delegates at all. The Hausa and Fulani and Muslims of Nigeria are going to be greatly advantaged if Fed Constituencies are used while the NC Zone and southern minorities are going to be highly disadvantaged. For equity and fairness, each of the six geo-political zones should produce an equal number of delegates based on Senatorial Districts.  

4.       To worsen matters, INEC, a government agency that has consistently conducted flawed elections, may just be mandated to organise the elections of the first 360 so-called delegates. Or will the elections be left to the ethnic nationalities to organise? Not a chance.

5.       Another recommendation gleaned by the reporters is that the elections will be according to universal adult suffrage. In other words, it means all adult Nigerians will have the right to vote. Does this mean that INEC’s register of voters will not be required? But we do not yet have a citizens’ identity system in Nigeria. Our identity card schemes are all in the pipeline. How will we be sure that those voting are Nigerians?

6.       That the remaining 185 delegates (34%) will all be Federal/State/FCT Government nominees is totally unacceptable to the ordinary people of Nigeria. Jonathan had better think twice before accepting such nonsense. This is the worst tool inserted in the recommendations by the Okorounmu Committee. It is a deliberate design to hand over the Conference to the dictates, whims and caprices of the Federal and States Governments, and by extension, to the ruling Political Party.  

7.       From the number of delegates to be ‘elected’ or ‘nominated’ by the Federal and States Governments, it is obvious that Government plans to hi-jack the Conference and ensure its wishes are passed as the Conference resolutions. Nigeria's burning issues may not be properly addressed and may continue to burn us. This arrangement will make a mockery of the spirit behind the agitation for a national dialogue.

8.       That 185 of the Conference delegates (34%) will emerge by nomination. This will enable Government to influence the process and government stooges, apologists and 'yes' men will emerge as the Conference delegates. If the other 66% of delegates will emerge via INEC-organized elections, Government influence is feared. Will there be Tribunals to hear complaints of rigging and other untoward practices at the elections? At the end of the ‘election’ and ‘nomination’ processes, State and Federal Governments would have effectively produced all 545 of the Conference delegates, that is, 100% of them. The proposed Conference couldn’t be referred to as a National Conference anymore, but a Conference of the Government by the Government and for the Government.

I can foresee the Ethnic Nationalities who fought hard for a National Conference protesting this method of representation and even boycotting the conference altogether. Should they take this course of action, I will personally side with them.

My advice to President Jonathan is that, if these ‘snippets’ are actually true recommendations of the PAC, he should reject them. Let him personally go through all the submissions of Nigerians to the PAC and, I am certain, he would discover that the preponderance of opinion is that the Conference delegates emerge on the basis of tribes. The truth is that ethnology (tribe), geography (land) and religion (faith) are the three most dearly held identities by Nigerians far above nationalistic feelings. Don’t ask me why. I simply know that this is a fact. If we pretend that it is not so, we only fool ourselves. May be up to 90% of submissions to the PAC were from tribal groups. To suggest that Nigerians should drop their ethnology (tribe) or their land geography (land) or their religion (faith) would be foolhardiness. Every Nigerian, from Mr. President to the homeless destitute, holds tenaciously to these three, above everything else. Make the geo-political Zones Governments (the federating units) and Nigerians would be most pleased. That is, we should restructure in order to achieve fiscal federalism in place of the false political federation we claim to have.

I am also aware that many Nigerians who submitted memos to the PAC recommended that Government, politicians, political parties, legislators and government appointees should not participate in the conference directly. These listed persons and groups are already in governance and so would vote to maintain the status quo and their positions of lordship. Why should they dismantle the system that they are feeding fat on? After all, the Conference agitators want to change that socio-political system, which they perceive a being full of impunity, inequality, oppression, injustice and hopelessness for majority of the populace. After all, the Conference resolutions will still go back to Government - first to the President, then to the National Assembly before they can be enacted into law. Why is Government afraid of a fair and transparent ‘People’s Conference’?

May be the Conference sceptics have a point after all. Opponents of the Conference suddenly became its advocates without clear reason. Could they have cooked up a game plan to hi-jack the entire process, buy cheap popularity in the process and yet mange to recycle themselves in office? I don’t think Nigerians can be so easily hoodwinked.

May be this is why, as reported by Adeniyi and Sowole, the SGF, Pius Anyim Pius, blocked the attempt by Chief Solomon Asemota to submit a minority report. Asemota might have seen the nonsensical recommendations of his colleagues, decided not to resign but continue participate, so that he may be able to submit a ‘One-man Minority Report’ on D-day. Unfortunately, he was check-mated at the last minute by the SGF.

Asemota should not give up the fight for a true National Conference of Ethnic Nationalities by Ethnic nationalities and for Ethnic nationalities. He should go back to his group, the Patriots, which is chaired by constitutional expert, Prof. Ben Nwabueze, and re-strategize. I expect and urge their group and others like the Ohanaeze, Afenifere, Arewa Youth Forum and the various Middle Belt movements to spearhead protests against any representation nonsense offered by Government.

SOLDIERS ON TRIAL FOR COMPLICITY IN BOKO HARAM & JOS CRISIS

Some soldiers are to face death penalty while others will go to jail for their alleged links to Boko Haram. The soldiers affected are one lieutenant, one warrant officer and 16 others. The General Court Martial has been trying them since July 1 of this year.

Their offences range from communicating with Boko Haram members, cowardly behaviour, murder and manslaughter. They were being tried by the Three Armoured Division as the case fell within its Area of Responsibility (AOR).

A source from the military said that those soldiers who were sentenced to death actually deserved the sentence because "for serving soldiers who swore to defend the territorial integrity of Nigeria and Nigerians therein to be found conniving with the enemies of Nigeria (Boko Haram) is a treasonable offence which attracts capital punishment.

"The Boko Haram members do not hide their sinister agenda. They want to destabilise the country. Everybody knows that. For soldiers to now secretly work with them at the expense of the country is treasonable. And it is so treated."

The Deputy Director, Army Public Relations of the Division, Col. Texas Chukwu, stated that he was preparing a formal speech in this regard, and that this might be made public. The 18 accused soldiers are drawn from the 3rd Armoured Division, Joint Task Force (JTF), otherwise known as Operation Restore Order from Maiduguri and Special Task Force (STF) known as Operation Safe Haven, from Plateau state.

PRESIDENT JONATHAN MAY CONVENE A SOVEREIGN NATIONAL CONFERERENCE

Top of Form

THERE are indications that President Goodluck Jonathan may soon consider the option of a national sovereign national conference to douse political tension ahead 2015 presidential elections.

   A group of political leaders from the South East and South South geopolitical zones were said to have prevailed on the President to wield it as master stroke that would put a stop to the crisis within the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and the current political instability.

    The group, made up of hardcore supporters of the President, said immediate convocation of a Sovereign National Conference among the 389 ethnic nationalities, would douse the tension in the polity and cause combatants in the political arena to pause and think as all component groups in the country take advantage of the platform, where the basis of Nigeria’s existence will be “fully discussed and agreed.”

   They are also advising the President that, in case his convoying a SNC makes it difficult for him to run for second term in 2015, he should work to hand over to a President from either the Middle Belt (North Central) or the South East geopolitical zone.

   The memo, which is receiving “serious considerations” from President Jonathan, also said the SNC is needed to put a stop to the “blackmail and balkanisation” of the PDP, and give the President “the needed Plan B and C whereby he would shame his critics and stop the domination of Presidential politics by any group or region.”

    Presidency sources in the know of the “strong memo to the President” canvases that President Jonathan should “think seriously of convoking Sovereign National Conference in which he will be the one to midwife it. It will bring out a “We, the people...” constitution, which would be an answer to the agitations of Nigerians for a forum to decide on how they want to live. After the SNC, if he contests and wins, he will be a national hero.”

   The group, however, said the move would be the best way to strengthen and deepen Nigerianism. “This makes sense because the South East has not produced a Nigerian President. They have always been denied this opportunity. Only recently, they were allowed to get the office of the Chief of Army Staff and leadership of key Ministries, Departments and Agencies (MDAs).

   “For the minorities of the Middle Belt, they have always succeeded in keeping Nigeria one. If the office of the President is aimed at satisfying the North, it should be to the Middle Belt minorities and not go to those who have not only produced dictators and a civilian President.”

     Though President Jonathan is yet to give his reply to the contents of the memo “sent by some of his loyal supporters”, he is studying it and would soon give his decision to them.

    Jonathan has said that while he does not oppose a SNC, he feels that because of constitutional issues, it is better for the nation to have a national dialogue. But the new push, which is quickly gaining converts within his administration, is a direct move to permanently change the political history of the nation.

    On Thursday, August 30, 2013, President Jonathan affirmed the belief of his administration in the rights of the nation’s constituent parts to come together to discuss how they will continue to live in peace and unity.

    The President told a delegation of The Patriots, which submitted a memorandum, which, among others, demanded the convocation of a sovereign national conference to discuss Nigeria’s future, that the issue of Nigerians coming together to discuss their future should not be out of place.

    He admitted that there have been discussions within his government on how to create an acceptable and workable platform for a national dialogue that will reinforce the ties that bind the country’s many ethnic nationalities and ensure that Nigeria’s immense diversity continues to be a source of strength and greatness.

    According to Jonathan, “the limitation we have is that the Constitution appears to have given that responsibility to the National Assembly. I have also been discussing the matter with the leadership of the National Assembly. We want a situation where everyone will key into the process and agree on the way forward.”

    Leader of The Patriots, Prof Nwabueze stated that the sovereign national conference should be convened before 2015 elections because the 1999 Constitution was not prepared by the people but a schedule to Decree 24.

    Calling for a new constitution derived from the people, the renowned constitutional lawyer noted: “We have done our own research and we have in this country 389 ethnic nationalities. We need to bring these nationalities around a conference table to discuss how we are going to live together as one country – in peace, in stability, in security – as one country with the aim of achieving national unity. But as of today, we are not a nation yet. We are a state. This conference should be convened as a matter of priority as soon as possible, in any event before the 2015 general elections.”

    On the position of the National Assembly that there is no need for a sovereign conference since there is an elected National Assembly in place, Nwabueze said: “It is important that what the National Assembly is putting forward is their powers under sections 8&9, which is to alter the Constitution. Power to alter is not as important as the power to abolish what you are altering and to replace it completely. It must be directly from the people and that is the position of, at least, 85 per cent of the countries of the world.

   “If you read Section 1(1) of the Decree these are all preambles to that decree and the 1999 Constitution that you are talking about, it is a schedule to Decree 24. Repeal the decree and the constitution will disappear and you enact a brand new constitution, which would derive its authorities from the people. That was done in 1963 when we adopted the Republican Constitution to replace the Independence Constitution. That 1960 Constitution was also a schedule to British Order-In -Council just as the 1999 Constitution, is a schedule to the Decree 24.” 

THE GUARDIAN

PROCEDURE FOR DRAFTING AN ENTIRELY NEW CONSTITUTION

The current Senate has, on its own, proposed an amendment to Section 9 of our Constitution which deals with the ‘Mode of altering provisions of the Constitution’. The Senators are proposing to add several sub-sections to this section which will effectively give the National Assembly the powers to draft and enact an entirely new constitution for Nigeria. This proposal has never been subjected to a debate in a plenary session of any of the two NASS chambers nor at a public hearing.

The 49-Member Senate Committee on the Review of the 1999 Constitution introduced this proposal as the very first item on their list of proposed amendments for deliberation. On page 11 of their report to the Senate, the Committee wrote:

“The Committee feels there is the need to make an elaborate provision in Section 9 of the Constitution for a procedure to bring an entirely new Constitution into being. This is predicated on the belief that the incremental approach to constitutional amendment may not be sustainable in the long run. The need may arise in the future for a whole new document.”

The Committee therefore proposed the insertion of 14 new sub-sections to the current Constitution that provision as follows:

1.      That for the purpose of altering the provisions in the 1999 Constitution, the President’s assent shall not be required;

2.      That the NASS may propose a new Constitution for the Federation;

3.      That the new constitution shall come into effect in the manner stipulated in 4 to 14 below;

4.      That there shall be a Senate and House of Reps committee to be known as Joint Constitution Drafting Committee (JCDC);

5.      That the JCDC shall consist of 2 members from each State (one each from the Senate and House of Reps) and 2 members representing the FCT (one from the Senate and one from the House of Reps);

6.      That the Senate President and House of Reps Speaker shall appoint the JCDC chairman.

7.      That the JCDC shall produce a draft Constitution and submit same to the Senate President and the Speaker of the House of Reps.

8.      That the Draft Constitution shall be presented to both Houses of the NASS within 3 months as receipt of the JCDC Report.

9.      That if approved by 2/3 of the members of both Houses of the NASS, the Report shall be forwarded to all 36 State Houses of Assembly

10.   That State Assemblies shall vote on each section of the Draft Constitution, requiring just a simple majority to pass each section, while 2/3 of the State Assemblies shall be required to pass a section for it to make it into the proposed Constitution.

11.   When State Assemblies return the Draft Constitution, the Clerk of the NASS shall ensure that State Assemblies have complied with the provisions of this section.

12.   That the Clerk of the NASS shall then circulate the Draft Constitution to each member of the NASS and also forward copies to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).

13.   That the INEC shall, within 6 months, conduct a referendum for the approval or otherwise of the Draft Constitution.

14.   That if the Draft Constitution receives a simple majority of votes cast in 2/3 of the States of the Federation, it shall come into force as the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

This proposed amendment to the current Constitution throws up many issues that would require very careful study. It also throws up many questions that would need answers before a decision is taken whether the amendment should be allowed or not.

Firstly, the Senate constitution review committee did not give a convincing reason for seeking empowerment for the NASS to draft and enact entirely new constitutions for the country. The portion of their report quoted said the need for the NASS to be so empowered is hinged on “the incremental approach to constitutional amendment which may not be sustainable in the long run.” I find this argument hollow, shallow and unconvincing.

Secondly, the NASS would like to grant itself powers to both draft and enact new Constitution. It may be in order for enact the document, but should they also draft it? Why should the drafting not be left for a separate committee that more broadly represents the people? The powers of drafting and enacting a new Constitution should not be vested in the same body. The legislators were elected to make laws primarily. The mandate given to them by the people cannot be construed to include the people’s sovereignty to make draft a fundamental governing document like a Constitution. Also, 2 legislators per State is far too small a representation for our huge population and diversity of opinion, culture, geography, religion and aspirations. 

Thirdly, the Senate proposed to dispense of a presidential assent to the new Constitution while they granted themselves the prerogative of drafting the document, debating on it and approving it. If they were sincere, they would have also removed the need for the NASS to tamper with the draft, provided such a draft emanated from the people. This point proves that they cannot be the drafters of any new Constitution. Even after State Assemblies have passed new provisions, the NASS wishes to arrogate to itself powers to still decide if what the State Assemblies have done is acceptable to them or not. Then the final document could not be said to be a Constitution which the people of Nigeria have decided to give themselves.

Fourthly, the popular practise the world over is for constitutional drafting to be done by representatives of the people elected purely for that purpose. However, in the proposed amendment, the NASS wishes to usurp the people’s powers to give themselves a Constitution.

Fifthly, the requirement of a simple majority as proposed for section by section State Assembly debates is unheard of in the process of Constitution drafting. The minimum requirement the world over tends to be 60% and above. The simple majority requirement as proposed is a ploy to ensure that State Assemblies very easily pass whatever the NASS has done. For example, a sizeable of opposition to a section of up to 59% will still not be able to quash the NASS proposals.

In conclusion, Nigerians are urged to oppose the proposed amendment that will empower the NASS to draft and enact new Constitutions for Nigeria. The acceptable amendment should be one that recommends the election of hundreds of representatives to constitute an independent constitutional drafting committee. The acceptable amendment should also specify that the NASS shall not tamper with the resulting draft Constitution but enact it.    

James Pam, 04 September, 2013

Jamespam2004@yahoo.com     

   

ABOLISHING REGIONAL GOVERNMENTS WAS A MISTAKE

“Scrapping of local government councils is not the issue, Nigeria should go back to the regional system of government where six regions should be the federating units.” Alhaji Balarabe Musa. 

In a nation-wide broadcast on 24 May, 1966, Gen. J. T. U. Aguiyi-Ironsi, Chairman, Supreme Military Council, announced the abolishment of the then existing three Regional Governments of Southern Region, Eastern Region and Northern Region through the promulgation of Military Decree No. 5. By the same Decree, the prefix ‘Federal’ in the name of our country was dispensed of. Our country’s name became simply the “Republic of Nigeria”. In the words of the General, the old Provinces become the administrative units for governance. He concluded his speech by saying, “The provisions of the Decree are intended to remove the last vestiges of the intense regionalism of the recent past, and to produce the cohesion in the governmental structure which is so necessary in achieving and maintaining the paramount objective of the National Military Government, and indeed, every true Nigerian, namely, national unity.”

Gowon ended the reign of the Provinces when he created 12 States in May 1967. The country has since gone through several Military Decrees and Acts of different Parliaments which have given us our present structure of 36 State Governments, the Federal Capital Territory FCT and 774 Local Governments.

I was born a few years before our Independence and have grown knowing nothing else but intense rivalry between all Nigerians on three fronts, namely, ethnicity, regionalism and religion. My observation tells me that that rivalry continues to intensify by the day.

In the 1980s we did not object to our States of NYSC posting. We simply went there and made the best of the one year national service. Today, requests for redeployment are the order of the day for reasons of religious or ethnic or geographical dislike. Today, my children cannot pick up jobs in the companies I worked in the 80s for reasons of religious, ethnic and geographical incompatibility. Neighborhoods in which I had bosom friends and could enter and have a good meal are today ‘no-go’ areas for me because I am no more welcome there and because I am concerned for my personal security. Friends I could trust with my family before, I can no longer trust even to deliver a common letter to them. I, therefore, cannot find the justification in Gen. Ironsi’s optimism in “cohesion in governmental structure” or “national unity” and therefore I have remained an unrepentant regionalist.  

Today, Christians are migrating out of the north-eastern parts of the country due to direct and open physical attacks on them. Fulani herdsmen are having too many clashes with their host communities all over Nigeria. The settler/indigene syndrome has resulted in deadly clashes in many parts of Nigeria. The National Assembly is currently considering the removal of all references to ethnicity in our Constitution. One of the contentious political issues in the ruling Party, the Peoples’ Democratic Party, is the rotation of the presidency between the regions of the country.

For any Government in Nigeria, whether Federal, State or Local, to pass a law that installs any religion as the official religion is a constitutional violation. Yet twelve State Governments in Nigeria have done just that in blatant violation of our Constitution with no one challenging them in Court. Government sponsorship of religious pilgrimages is as unconstitutional as the enthronement of State religion, yet all Nigerian States are engaged in this act. Part II, Section 10 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria states categorically and without equivocation that, “The Government of the Federation or of a State shall not adopt any religion as State religion.” States that have passed Shariah Laws have violated this section and also Section 38 - Right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion, Sub-sections (1), (2), (3) & (4), and Section 42 - Right to freedom from discrimination, Sub-sections (1), (a) & (b).

My readers should not get me wrong. I am not about to advocate for the balkanisation of Nigeria into several sovereign States. To the contrary, I want us to avoid that by all means. Unfortunately, many of our actions and utterances suggest that we prefer disintegration while preaching unity with our lips. Breaking up into several countries like Yugoslavia did is not desirable. Nigeria should remain one country but with an internal governmental arrangement that recognizes our natural cleavages and capitalizes on them for foster peace and rapid development. Refusing to give these natural phenomena recognition and our pretense that we shall somehow surmount them someday baffles me.

A true federal structure for us is one with a few, say 6 or 8, fairly autonomous regional governments. Greater regional resource control, pursuit of developmental objectives as dictated by natural regional needs and the creation of opportunities for the exploitation of naturally endowed capacities should go along with this suggested structure. This is the panacea for optimum and sustainable economic growth as opposed to the current monthly sharing of revenue from one wasting asset - petroleum. This suggestion will guarantee self-determination, which is an instinctive desire of all human beings. Demands for the convocation of a ‘Sovereign National Conference’ by Prof. Wole Soyinka and many others, the demand for true federalism and the devolution of powers by Prof. Ben Magbueze, Chief Emeka Anyoku and many others give credence to my suggestions.

Recent write ups by many eloquent Nigerians have helped to re-enforce my belief in the concept of regionalism as the best governmental structure for Nigeria. I will make reference to some of them.

An article was recently written by Okey Ndibe and titled, “Lagos Deportations & the Crisis of Citizenship”. Okey Nidibe is a professor, novelist, essayist and political columnist who works at Trinity College, Hartford, Connecticut, USA. While commenting on the recent deportations of some Igbo people by the Lagos State Government from Lagos to their State of origin, he said the episode “has underlined the shakiness of the idea of one Nigeria.” He added that “a policy that forcibly removes undesirable citizens from their State of residency to their State of origin does grave violence to the concept of national unity... More than fifty years into our game of pretending we have a nation; ethnic identity pretty much trumps every other consideration. For many Nigerians, ethnicity is not merely a virtue, it is the sole virtue.” He captures exactly what I am saying – that we are, first and foremost, ethnic bigots before being compulsory Nigerians.

Section 41(1) of our Constitution provides that, “Every citizen of Nigeria is entitled to move freely throughout Nigeria and to reside in any part thereof....” Therefore, regarding the recent Lagos State deportations and all other earlier internal deportations, my conviction is that they were unconstitutional and criminal acts against the victims.

Another recent write up by Ayo Teriba was titled, “Confronting Inter-regional Disparities in Nigeria”. Ayo Teriba is a one-time Chief Economist and member of the Editorial Board of Thisday who is now the Chief Executive of Economic Associates. In his article, Teriba used statistical data on the natural endowments of the six geo-political zones of the country, their revenue generating capacity, their consumption patterns, their federally allocated funds and their populations to prove the grave error in our developmental plans. My reading of his writing is that he is saying Nigeria would be better governed and developed along regional lines. 

The third article I will refer to is written by a blogger, Adeola Aderounmu. In 2011 he posted, “Nigeria right from the onset is a political error and an occurrence facilitated by the selfish (and probably stupid) thinking of the colonial masters. How can people and ethnic groups that have nothing in common be formed into one country? Intelligence was deducted when such economic and political decisions were formulated. The stupidity of the creation of Nigeria would have been neutralized by a purposeful leadership. But what Nigeria got since 1960 has been a series of governments dominated by tribalism, nepotism and massive corruption... Nigeria remains one country just to serve the corrupt cabal... We should support a return to regional governments similar to what we had in those days.... It is time for each region to determine how it wants to run itself using its own economic, human and natural resources. It is time to take the power away from the centre. Let us return it to the regions where it will be possible to manage and even uproot corruption. It is absolutely useless to remain like this.” I couldn't have put it more aptly.

My fourth and last reference will be to Dr. Yusufu Turaki, Professor of Theology and Social Ethics, Jos ECWA Theological Seminary. In a paper titled, “Historical Roots of Crises and Conflicts in Nigeria with Reference to Northern Nigeria and Kaduna State”, he opines that ethnic nationalities and militants are not driven by national, political and economic principles, but by their own core values, which are usually at variance with national values. He contends that we have relied too much on social scientists to proffer solutions to political, economics, educational and religious problems to no avail. The evidence is that Nigeria is getting worse and deeper into the quagmire. He surmises that great nations of this world made it by making deliberate effort to define and transform their ethnography, geography, religion and culture to make it viable and conducive for development and transformation. Therefore, for us to develop and be transformed, we must address and transform our primary and primordial social factors, harness their potentials, tame their excesses and develop harmony, balance and unity in and out of them.

The arguments for the restoration of regional governments are strong, numerous and overwhelming. Regional governments are the best platform for the avoidance of disintegration and the promotion of rapid economic and social development. To go on the way we are now would be foolhardiness. Certainly, the rapid development envisaged will not be equal in all the Regions. But we shall share across regional boundaries as each Region specializes in areas they have comparative advantage. Our legislators will oppose such an arrangement not because they have better ideas but simply because they will be its first major casualties.

Regionalism and a unicameral system didn't fail us. We failed in its implementation. It is cost-effective and easy to operate, making it most appropriate for our present state of development. The Presidential system we adopted from the USA, with its huge Presidency and a bi-cameral parliament is a very wasteful over-duplication of administrative structures. Given our 36 States and 774 Local Governments, the canker-worms of ethnicity and religious bigotry can only be ferociously fed into maturity and implosion.

Whenever I hear the cliché, ‘Unity in diversity’ being used, I wonder if the speaker has thought of the meaning of these words and if he has seen any evidence of this in Nigeria. Let us stop saying things just to be politically right. Brazil, Malaysia Indonesia and others are supposed to be our peers in terms of developmental and social achievements, but we are lagging far behind them. Now is the time to act decisively.

James Pam, 26 August, 2013

jamespam2004@yahoo.com