Preamble:
My position on Sovereign National Conference, true federalism, resource control, and semi-autonomy for the component states within the Nigerian Federation has evolved over the years. That evolution is in consonance with the opinion of Professor Wole Soyinka and few other progressives who have openly canvassed for a certain degree of autonomy for the component states within the "geographical expression" called Nigeria. Given the degree of our cultural, political, and religious differences, semi-autonomy is the right approach to ensuring stability and sustainable progress nation-wide. Also, the complexities inherent in the governance of Nigeria as a single sovereign-nation, as we have seen and experienced over the years, make distorted federalism (the unitary format) unattractive. Today, the Federal Government is becoming larger in size, scope, and responsibilities. At the same time, it cannot police and protect our wealth and riches under its command. In addition, it lacks the ability and the strategic wherewithal to manage and apply the wealth and the riches equitably for sustainable use and benefit of all. Thus, making the need for decentralization of power and authorities from the over-bloated central government to the component units and regional councils a compelling consideration.
This piece is neither a demand for disintegration nor an endorsement of the call for the disintegration of Nigeria, as we often hear from some individuals. Disintegration, to say the least, is unrealistic. That is my position. It is too extreme and too dangerous to execute, given the tenacity of the economic relationship between the different regions and the social integration that has existed between the various ethnic groups and tribes for centuries. Therefore, the best approach is true federalism or a confederation option or confederacy, similar to what obtains in Canada. Thus enabling the component states or regions to assume a semi-autonomous status and develop at their own pace culturally and politically, and at the same time, relieving the central government of some of its enormous power and responsibilities. We should also not lose sight of the mayhem and ethnic cleansing that heralded the civil war, and that is the main reason for a negotiated belonging. I am totally against any measure that would exacerbate ethnic hatred and bloodshed. Let's start with decentralization, or at least, the decongestion of our federal system.
The Relationship between Unitary System, Federal System, and Loose Federalism or Confederation of States.
A Federal system of governments involves the delegation of power between the central government, the federating states, and local councils. The ability of the component states to manage their own resources, raise revenues, participate in the ratification of the national constitution, make laws, provide security, and regulate for the general well-being of the citizens within their geographical and political boundaries are some of the fundamental elements of a Federal system of governments. A Federal system is midway between a Unitary system (where the central governments delegate power and authority to the states and local governments) and a Confederacy system (where the component states command a large degree of autonomy and are more powerful or as powerful as the central government). In a Confederacy arrangement, the central government only exercises the power and authority reserved for it or delegated to it by the component states. In other words, the component states dominate the central governments and operate as a semi-independent nation-state. Canada and Switzerland are some of the few countries were Confederacy is presently in operation.
Constitutionally, Nigeria is a Federal system, but in reality, we operate a Unitary system of government. Today, the component states in the federation cannot fend for themselves and cannot survive on their own, without the monthly allocations from the central governments. The Thirty-Six States in the federation are like local councils - a true replica of a Unitary model - where the center is more powerful than the whole. That was never the intention of our Founding Fathers.
In sum, Nigeria, without any iota of doubt, is becoming too large and too complex for the leadership at the national level to manage and govern effectively as one independent whole. The decentralization of certain responsibilities of the central government to the regional governments will make for efficiency, and no doubt, curtail the massive scale of corruption, embezzlement, and prodigious squandering of our riches prevalent at the national level.
Resource Control / Moving Forward.
My position on Sovereign National Conference, true federalism, resource control, and semi-autonomy for the component states within the Nigerian Federation has evolved over the years. That evolution is in consonance with the opinion of Professor Wole Soyinka and few other progressives who have openly canvassed for a certain degree of autonomy for the component states within the "geographical expression" called Nigeria. Given the degree of our cultural, political, and religious differences, semi-autonomy is the right approach to ensuring stability and sustainable progress nation-wide. Also, the complexities inherent in the governance of Nigeria as a single sovereign-nation, as we have seen and experienced over the years, make distorted federalism (the unitary format) unattractive. Today, the Federal Government is becoming larger in size, scope, and responsibilities. At the same time, it cannot police and protect our wealth and riches under its command. In addition, it lacks the ability and the strategic wherewithal to manage and apply the wealth and the riches equitably for sustainable use and benefit of all. Thus, making the need for decentralization of power and authorities from the over-bloated central government to the component units and regional councils a compelling consideration.
This piece is neither a demand for disintegration nor an endorsement of the call for the disintegration of Nigeria, as we often hear from some individuals. Disintegration, to say the least, is unrealistic. That is my position. It is too extreme and too dangerous to execute, given the tenacity of the economic relationship between the different regions and the social integration that has existed between the various ethnic groups and tribes for centuries. Therefore, the best approach is true federalism or a confederation option or confederacy, similar to what obtains in Canada. Thus enabling the component states or regions to assume a semi-autonomous status and develop at their own pace culturally and politically, and at the same time, relieving the central government of some of its enormous power and responsibilities. We should also not lose sight of the mayhem and ethnic cleansing that heralded the civil war, and that is the main reason for a negotiated belonging. I am totally against any measure that would exacerbate ethnic hatred and bloodshed. Let's start with decentralization, or at least, the decongestion of our federal system.
The Relationship between Unitary System, Federal System, and Loose Federalism or Confederation of States.
A Federal system of governments involves the delegation of power between the central government, the federating states, and local councils. The ability of the component states to manage their own resources, raise revenues, participate in the ratification of the national constitution, make laws, provide security, and regulate for the general well-being of the citizens within their geographical and political boundaries are some of the fundamental elements of a Federal system of governments. A Federal system is midway between a Unitary system (where the central governments delegate power and authority to the states and local governments) and a Confederacy system (where the component states command a large degree of autonomy and are more powerful or as powerful as the central government). In a Confederacy arrangement, the central government only exercises the power and authority reserved for it or delegated to it by the component states. In other words, the component states dominate the central governments and operate as a semi-independent nation-state. Canada and Switzerland are some of the few countries were Confederacy is presently in operation.
Constitutionally, Nigeria is a Federal system, but in reality, we operate a Unitary system of government. Today, the component states in the federation cannot fend for themselves and cannot survive on their own, without the monthly allocations from the central governments. The Thirty-Six States in the federation are like local councils - a true replica of a Unitary model - where the center is more powerful than the whole. That was never the intention of our Founding Fathers.
Resource Control / Moving Forward.
With the evolution of true federalism or semi-autonomous status for the federating states as envisaged by our Founding Fathers, coupled with the decentralization of power at the center, the struggle for the control of Aso Rock would diminish drastically. In other words, if we decentralize the power and the resources under the control of Aso Rock; create the right incentives for the federating states within the union to manage their own people and the natural resources within their geographical boundaries, the animosity wrecking our political system, and the "do or die" approach that encapsulates pursuit of power at the federal level would ebb significantly. It is that simple.
Furthermore, given that crude oil is the mainstay of our economy, it will be disingenuous on our part to demand or suggest that the oil-producing states assume exclusive control and ownership of the mineral resources in their respective states at this stage. That would be economically suicidal, especially in some parts of the country where there is 100% reliance on the federal government for subsistence. As at now, where natural resources deposit does exist, the federating states do not have the means to successfully commence their exploration and exploitation at a commercial scale. It requires massive capital infusion, efficient labor force, and planning.
Therefore, we suggest that the oil-producing states take in equal share - 50/50 - of the Onshore Mineral deposits in their respective states with the federal government. The same standard should apply as well in other states in the federation where there are substantial deposits of mineral resources at a commercial level. On the other hand, Offshore Mineral deposits within a certain limit of our Economic Exclusion Zone or Continental Shelf should be under the exclusive control and ownership of the federal government - that part of Nigerian territorial water, which should not belong to the coastal state.
On State Police.
We were the first to kick against the establishment of State Police when the idea was first mooted after the Governor's meeting in Port Harcourt about seven months ago. I had my doubt. But with the advent of semi-autonomy status for the component units in the union, the idea of State Police is a welcome development. Our fear then was that it would lead to a dictatorship of the State Governors. Then, we recommended three units for the Police Force – Mobile Police, Highway Patrol, and the Regular Police. Our recommendation was that the old Highway Police Unit be resuscitated and merged with Federal Road Safety Corps, while the Mobile Police Unit is transformed into a SWAT TEAM as it is the case in developed countries. I am glad that the IGP did reintroduce the Highway Patrol Unit a few months ago with new armor trucks to police our Federal Highways. And that was a welcome development.
Please see an excerpt from “Divine Wisdom: Changing the World in Six Months” posted on June 9, 2012.
"With the evolution of true federalism (semi-autonomy for the federating states), State Police would be a welcome development. In that case, Mobile Police (the new SWAT TEAM) and Highway Patrol (Federal Trouper) should remain under the exclusive control of the Federal Government. I repeat, Highway Patrol should be re-introduced and merged with Federal Road Safety Commission to be known as Federal Trooper to manage Federal Institutions, Foreign offices and Institutions, and Federal Highways, while Mobile Police should be transformed into a SWAT TEAM for rapid response assignment nation-wide. But the regular Police should be under the control and command of State Government.” That was our recommendation on June 9, 2012, and we stand by it. IGP has introduced Highway Patrol and we are most delighted.
On State Police.
We were the first to kick against the establishment of State Police when the idea was first mooted after the Governor's meeting in Port Harcourt about seven months ago. I had my doubt. But with the advent of semi-autonomy status for the component units in the union, the idea of State Police is a welcome development. Our fear then was that it would lead to a dictatorship of the State Governors. Then, we recommended three units for the Police Force – Mobile Police, Highway Patrol, and the Regular Police. Our recommendation was that the old Highway Police Unit be resuscitated and merged with Federal Road Safety Corps, while the Mobile Police Unit is transformed into a SWAT TEAM as it is the case in developed countries. I am glad that the IGP did reintroduce the Highway Patrol Unit a few months ago with new armor trucks to police our Federal Highways. And that was a welcome development.
Please see an excerpt from “Divine Wisdom: Changing the World in Six Months” posted on June 9, 2012.
"With the evolution of true federalism (semi-autonomy for the federating states), State Police would be a welcome development. In that case, Mobile Police (the new SWAT TEAM) and Highway Patrol (Federal Trouper) should remain under the exclusive control of the Federal Government. I repeat, Highway Patrol should be re-introduced and merged with Federal Road Safety Commission to be known as Federal Trooper to manage Federal Institutions, Foreign offices and Institutions, and Federal Highways, while Mobile Police should be transformed into a SWAT TEAM for rapid response assignment nation-wide. But the regular Police should be under the control and command of State Government.” That was our recommendation on June 9, 2012, and we stand by it. IGP has introduced Highway Patrol and we are most delighted.
SOVEREIGN NATIONAL CONFERENCE VS LEADERSHIP DEFICIT
Over the years, I have deliberately excused myself from the call for SNC, because I still believe that leadership, as well as, corruption epidemic are the major problems confronting Nigeria as a nation-state. My other fear is that when SNC is eventually convened, the same old political careerists who debased and wrecked this great nation would have control over the selection of potential delegates to the conference. And thirdly, the people making the call do not have a clear message - no one is discussing why we should have SNC. There is no existing coherent strategy for its actualization.
Historically, the idea for an SNC was originally conceived by the progressives and social activists (not political careerists) in order to wrest power from the over-bloated and underperforming power clique at the center headed by the Military. As it is today, the demand has been unduly politicized to the extent that any mention of SNC is perceived as a call for the disintegration of Nigeria. And that is a misconception that must be corrected fast.
In addition, SNC has no visible leadership at the moment. What is going on behind the scene is basically power play – political careerists, presently left out of power and influence, have resorted to agitating for SNC, making it a north versus south affair. They hijacked it and transformed it into a struggle for power between it and the often reviled northern power elite groups. That is an insider war that southern progressives and social activists must first win - taking the demand out of the reach and control of politicians.
SNC, as originally created is not an exercise in vain. But it has to be refined and given a new meaning to sync with realities on the ground. There are fundamental national issues that need to be addressed - Nigerian secular nature (take religion out of our Federal Government), free education at all level nationwide, population (graduation rate and school enrollment do not support result from the Northern region), regional autonomy (States should be given the right to exercise substantial control over their resources), the un-education of greater majority of northern children by successive northern administrators (the need to probe, and where appropriate, rectify the massive abuse of educational grants to educational institutions in the Northern Region, and finally, land ownership and division of offshore mineral deposit between the coastal states and the central government (a permanent solution is required to ensure where federal government should exercise absolute right over mineral deposits in our territorial water, without sharing ownership right with the coastal states), finally, the three dominant tribes (Ndigbo, Yoruba, and Hausa/Fulani), should remember that Federal Character was never intended to protect the MAJORITY tribes. It was meant to prevent them from suffocating and alienating the MINORITY tribes from the scheme of things at the federal level. In other words, a federal character is not about sharing power and positions among Ibo, Yoruba, and Hausa/Fulani, but to ensure that such power and positions that come with it are also extended to the minority tribes.
As for the apostles of SNC, it is not enough to give a one-liner argument, stating that you need a Sovereign National Conference, without actually saying why you need it. We had enough of the noise about the mistake of 1914 and the amalgamation brouhaha. Be substantive. Take a cue from conservative Northern Governors; they don't debate issues they consider sacrosanct or germane to their political, cultural, and religious interests with anyone outside of the geographical north. For instance, the promulgation of Sharia Law or the introduction of Native Police in most parts of the northern region was never a subject of a national referendum. It doesn't matter whether it benefits the generality of northern residents, provided that the ruling class is safe and secured in their hold on power.
As for the apostles of SNC, it is not enough to give a one-liner argument, stating that you need a Sovereign National Conference, without actually saying why you need it. We had enough of the noise about the mistake of 1914 and the amalgamation brouhaha. Be substantive. Take a cue from conservative Northern Governors; they don't debate issues they consider sacrosanct or germane to their political, cultural, and religious interests with anyone outside of the geographical north. For instance, the promulgation of Sharia Law or the introduction of Native Police in most parts of the northern region was never a subject of a national referendum. It doesn't matter whether it benefits the generality of northern residents, provided that the ruling class is safe and secured in their hold on power.
From all indications, SNC is for progressives to lose. The untold truth is that there is no progressive agenda, as we have a northern and conservative agenda, headed by the Arewa Consultative Group or Forum, and supported by the Northern Governor Association. What we have in the south is a collection of political interest groups masquerading as concerned citizens and activists, without a clear purpose and mandate. Also, there is no marriage of thoughts existing between SNC advocates, Southern Governors, and members of the National Assembly from the region.
That void must first be arrested for southern consensus and progressive agenda to evolve and given effect at the national level. The involvement of members of the National Assembly of southern heritage is sacrosanct to addressing the grievances underlying the demand for SNC.
Therefore, you must first identify those issues and grievances succinctly and articulate them unambiguously to develop a winnable argument and populist agenda. Finally, if you cannot articulate the issues, which in fact is true, set up a body to advise you on the subject similar to what the Northern Governors did a few months ago with respect to the PIB - Petroleum Industry Bill. You cannot continue talking about change if you cannot articulate the change or changes that you desire. Second step: Organize, organize, and organize. You don't have to wait for the President and the National Assembly to intervene and approve of your demand before you start the briefing process through summit and conferences. Third step: Know your audience, and present your argument in the English language that people can easily understand.
ANALYSIS
Therefore, you must first identify those issues and grievances succinctly and articulate them unambiguously to develop a winnable argument and populist agenda. Finally, if you cannot articulate the issues, which in fact is true, set up a body to advise you on the subject similar to what the Northern Governors did a few months ago with respect to the PIB - Petroleum Industry Bill. You cannot continue talking about change if you cannot articulate the change or changes that you desire. Second step: Organize, organize, and organize. You don't have to wait for the President and the National Assembly to intervene and approve of your demand before you start the briefing process through summit and conferences. Third step: Know your audience, and present your argument in the English language that people can easily understand.
ANALYSIS
The complexities inherent in the governance of Nigeria as a single sovereign-nation, as we have seen and experienced over the years, make distorted federalism expendable. Over the decades, it has been proven beyond doubt that the Federal Government cannot police and protect our wealth and riches. At the same time, it lacks the ability and the strategic wherewithal to manage and apply the wealth and the riches equitably for sustainable use and benefit for everyone. Therefore, there is no reasonable ground allowing the central government to remain in complete and perpetual control of the wealth and the riches of our great nation. Thus, making the call for decentralization of power from the over-bloated central government to the component units or regional councils a compelling consideration.
In a nutshell, the problems described here at the federal level have been with us for ages. It is the handiwork of the same political and business leaders with power and influence who dominate our political system and benefit immensely from the spineless federal government. It has become too monstrous and too complex for the leadership clique to manage. Therefore, we should, without equivocation, develop some mechanisms to take power back to the people. Let's start the discussion from there. You already have enough talking points from this article. It is not a northern issue or a southern issue. It is a national question. Let's meet and organize. SNC might not happen in your lifetime. If it does happen, Nigeria wins and it is fine with me.
Finally, for true federalism and decentralization to take hold and subsist in Nigeria, resource control and the introduction of State Police Command are the first steps. If the Federal Government cannot police and protect our people, our wealth, and at the same time lacks the ability and the wherewithal to manage and apply the wealth for sustainable ends and for the benefit of everyone, there is no excuse allowing it to exercise absolute control and authority over it. The problems described here at the federal level is not a recent development, it has been with us for ages. Presently, the federal government lacks the will and the wisdom to recoup our stolen wealth from the indicted thieves. In addition the, the federal government has become too monstrous and too complex for the present leadership clique to manage. Therefore, we should, without delay, devolve power back to the states and local councils. The option is very clear.
Alex Ehimhantie'Aiyo Aidaghese
Alex Ehimhantie'Aiyo Aidaghese
No comments:
Post a Comment
The Lord is my Shepherd; I shall not want.