43
MONDAY, APRIL 9, 2012
POLITICS THE NATION
E-mail:- politics@thenationonlineng.net
The call for a form of dialogue by the component units of Nigeria has become stronger in recent times, in the face of fresh challenges to the union. But, there is no consensus on the form. Should it be sovereign? Should it be plain conference? What should be the mode? Deputy Political Editor EMMANUEL OLADESU, who has followed the debate, reports.
What manner of national conference? A
CROSS the six geo-political zones, it appears that there are only a few dissenting voices on the need for a fresh conference to debate the future of Nigeria. However, there is a bone of contention. While a section of the stakeholders is rooting for a Sovereign National Conference (SNC), another section is limiting its clamour to the convocation of a National Conference. The two groups have not elaborated on the modalities for convoking the conference. They are silent on the number of ethnic nationalities expected to send representatives to the conference, the size of the delegates or how they would be selected, the finance, logistics, tenure and co-ordination. But at the end of the conference, stakeholders expect the fashioning out of a people’s constitution that is truly federal in nature and appeal. Among those calling for a Sovereign National Conference are men of the old order who had witnessed the derailment of the federal structure in the post-First Republic era. They include staunch Awoists and arrowheads of pro-democracy movement; Chief Ayo Adebanjo, Sir Olaniwun Ajayi, Dr. Femi Okurounmu, Senator Olabiyi Durojaye, Senator Ayo Fasanmi, Senator Bola Tinubu, Chief Bisi Akande, Chief Olusegun Osoba, Mr. Ayo Opadokun; Chief Arthur Nwankwo, Chief Olu Falae, Prof. Itse Sagay, Alhaji Balarabe Musa, Prof. Akin Oyebode, Dr. Tunji Abayomi, Mr. Femi Falana and Mr. Olisa Agbakoba. However, many compatriots who have endorsed the National Conference idea, instead of SNC, have insisted that, given the nature and current standing of Nigeria, it will be asking for too much to expect the government of the day, including the National Assembly, to surrender power to another sovereign assembly. The most strident voices among the patriotsin this camp in recent times is the former Commonwealth Secretary-General, Chief Emeka Anyaoku. Both groups have the same goal in mind, which is the restoration of true federalism. To the first group, nothing is sac-
•Sagay
•Anyaoku
rosanct about Nigeria. At a recent meeting of a pro-conference group, the National Consensus Group, held at Dr. Tunji Braithwaite’s residence, Ikoyi, Lagos, Prof. Oyebode said that “the unity of Nigeria is negotiable”, adding that it has been an artificial creation forcefully lumped together by the British without the agreement and consent of the people. “We can converge to discuss all the matters, including whether Nigeria should or should not remain as an entity”, he canvased. Anyaoku’s intervention may have been premised on the need to save Nigeria from disintegration, the same fear that Adebanjo has always allayed. Adebanjo said: “There is no alternative to SNC to discuss the problems of Nigeria and the basis for peaceful co-existence. A will say its own and B will say its own and if they agree on the terms, they continue together”. Anyaoku shared the main view of the pro-SNC agitators, saying: “To return to true federalism, we need a major restructuring of our current architecture of governance”, adding: “We should aim at getting the national conference to reach a consensus on devolving
•Musa
from the centre to the six federating units responsibility for such areas of governance as internal security, including the police, infrastructure, education, health and economic development. However, Anyaoku quickly added: “I must hasten to say that my support is for a national conference without the epithet of ‘sovereign’. This is because we already have in place an elected structure of governance that includes the Presidency, in which the citizens have, for the time being, vested the sovereignty that truly belongs to them”. His view again aligned with those pushing for SNC in the area of referendum. The former Commonwealth Secretary-General stressed that “in order to give it legitimacy and better chance of enduring, the outcome of the national conference must be submitted to a referendum of the population of the country”. President Goodluck Jonathan does not belong to any of the groups. While baring his mind to Bishop Bolanle Gbonigi’s group at Aso Rock, the seat of power recently, he ruled out the possibility
of entertaining the national question for as long as he is in charge, claiming that any threat to national sovereignty is not welcomed. The view, many believe, also tallies with that of the leadership of the National Assembly. Observes believe that bad governance, injustice and inept leadership, especially at the centre are tonics for the intensification of the demand for a national debate to iron out issues germane to stability and happiness of the diverse component units. At issue is the foisting of what Tinubu described as a “unitary empire” on a supposedly federal state. The slain Attorney- General and Minister of Justice, Chief Bola Ige, delved into the heart of the national question about two decades ago. He asked: “Do we still want to live together as a country?” If the answer is yes, he again asked: how? To him, a debate was actually necessary to deliberate on terms for unity among the component units that are coordinate with the central government. In 1947, Awolowo, in his book titled: Path to Nigeria’s Freedom, pointed out that only true
fedealism was the answer. It was an understatement. Governor Hugh Clifford, who took over from Lord Fredrick Lugard as governor of Nigeria was alarmed by the sheer fusion of the vast plural society. In his reckoning, the fundamental elements of plurality, including diverse languages, customs, traditions, and religions, would harbour the ultimate potentials of shaping their reactions and perceptions of the socio-economic and political milieu. As the country was on the lane to independence, the reality stared the first set of indigenous leaders in the face. Dr Nnamdi Azikiwe, during the protracted constitutional conferences had said to the late Sardauna of Sokoto, Sir Ahmadu Bello: “Let us forget our differences”. But Bello disagreed, saying: “We must understand our differences”. At independence, Nigeria stood on a tripod -West, East and North. Each developed at its pace, relying on God-given resources. The founding fathers of Nigeria settled for federalism and regionalism, with the advantage of healthy competition that went with the options. Later, the military dismantled the federal structure. The early strain manifested in the three years of avoidable civil war. When states and local governments were created in response to the elite’s scramble for power and relevance, the distribution by the military was lopsided, thereby engendering bitterness. The military nationalised the regions’ assets and formula for equitable, just and fair distribution of the commonwealth. The principles of derivation, need and national interest were turned upside down and the goose that lays the golden eggs was inflicted with the burden of neglect and denial, prompting violent protests in the Niger Delta. Gone also were the community and state police, which made security accessible in the earlier saner era. Up came the Land Use Act, the emasculation of the state and local governments, hijack of value added tax, and full concentration of power in the tiny federal appa•Continued on page 44
‘Constitution review should address national questions’
T
• Ngige
WO issues are agitating Chris Ngige, medical doctor-turned politician who once presided over the affairs of Anambra State for 34 months. The first is the constitution review, which he believed should be carried out in a manner that would make it address the fundamental questions critical to national stability and peaceful coexistence. The second is putting together a coalition of progressive forces to dislodge the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) from power in 2015. “We are concerned by the boasting that PDP will rule Nigeria for 60 years. Their luck will not carry them too far. They were lucky the last time because opposition parties failed to come together. At the next general elections, PDP will not be that lucky”, the senator told reporters in Lagos. The difficulty of presenting a common front by the scattered opposition parties is worrisome to the Action Congress of Nigeria
By Emmanuel Oladesu Deputy Political Editor
(ACN) chieftain. “We could not come together because partners in the alliance; Atiku Abubakar and Muhammadu Buhari; are strange bedfellows. I, Tinubu and Ikimi represented ACN. Useni, Anga represented ANPP then. We had Abubakar Audu, Bafarawa, Bukar Abba Ibrahim. Later, the whole thing fizzled out. We were at the point of logo and name. We toiled with the idea of ACP, ACN. But other undercurrents led to division and the alliance was shelved”, Ngige added. Indeed, ego was the main issue. This was at work when former Sokoto State Governor Attahiru Bafarawa, who came up with his presidential ambition, crashed and left the fold. But former Vice President Atiku Abubakar also repudiated ACN and retraced his steps to PDP. Buhari, Ngige recalled, also
formed the Congress for Progressive Change (CPC) while the talks were on. In the senator’s view, not only did personal ambition deepen the division, it was also evident that only few politicians could withstand the burden of being excluded from government. He therefore, commended the people of Southwest for their resilience in this regard. “Only the people of Southwest are used to being in opposition. They have progressive leaders who believe in the welfare of the masses”, he stressed. Past disappointments notwithstanding, Ngige emphasised that the 2015 race would present another golden opportunity for the opposition to unite. “We have started. We have set up committees to discuss with other partners. I and Ikimi are parts of the Contact Committees; Achike Udenwa is also making contact in the East. We are optimistic •Continued on page 44