Nigerians are yet to agree on how to restructure the country. The disagreement is overheating the polity. Assistant Editor LEKE SALAUDEEN examines why some Nigerians are kicking against restructuring.
The clamour for restructuring has polarised the country. Regions in the south believe in it, but they have different views of what it is all about. To the Ibos in the Southeast, restructuring will guarantee confederation in the constitution; the Yorubas in the Southwest want a restructuring that would take the country back to regionalism; while the Southsouth is pushing for resource control. While the positions of regions in the south are not irreconcilable, that of the three regions in the north is a different ballgame. The debate has pitched the south against the north, which is indifferent to restructuring in any form.
Eminent leaders from the south believe what can save the country from disintegration is restructuring. They are of the view that the unity of Nigeria and harmonious co-existence of the various ethnic nationalities will be strengthened by fiscal federalism and restructuring of the polity.
In making a case for restructuring, Ijaw leader Chief Edwin Clark said: “Nigeria is very sick today, because the Nigeria which our founding fathers like Chief Obafemi Awolowo, Dr Nnamdi Azikiwe and Sir Ahmadu Bello bequeathed to us is no longer what we have. At independence, we had a constitution that said there would be three regions; no one is superior to the other.”
To the former Secretary-General of the Commonwealth, Chief Emeka Anyaoku, the disintegration of Nigeria is imminent and the immediate solution is restructuring. Similarly, Afenifere chieftain Ayo Adebanjo is spitting fire that Nigeria will break up, unless zones are allowed to control their resources.
But, the pan-northern socio-cultural group, the Arewa Consultative Forum (ACF), has rejected the call for restructuring, saying what the country needs at the moment is competent leadership at all levels. The ACF spokesman, Alhaji Mohammed Ibrahim, said heeding the call for restructuring would weaken the centre. He said Nigerians fought for the unity and that it is not possible for the north to support anything that would cause disunity.
Vocal northern politician Dr Junaid Muhammed said eminent citizens pushing for restructuring are trying to blackmail Nigerians into an unclear and bogus system of government. The Second Republic lawmaker posited that none of those calling for the restructuring of Nigeria had been able to give a clear cut definition of what they meant.
He added: “Until somebody can tell me what this restructuring is all about, I won’t be convinced about the call. These agitators of restructuring like Clark, Ayo Adebanjo, John Nwodo and others have not actually told us what will be restructured and how it will be done. That was how we were told that without Sovereign National Conference (SNC) Nigeria will collapse.”
However, Anyaoku insists on restructuring, saying there is need for true federalism, with the existing six geo-political zones as the federating units. He criticised the present structure of federalism “where virtually all the component states are not self-sustaining and are dependent on hand-outs from the Federal Government, because they are unable to pay the salaries of their civil servants and the agreed minimum wage”.
He said: “Its dependence on the Federal Government and the fierce struggle between its diverse groups to capture power at the centre in order to control the national resources that have been responsible for the country’s present instability and the emergence of centrifugal forces.
“I believe that our country cannot wait much longer to reclaim the halcyon days of the First Republic, when it witnessed faster national development through a substantial viability and self-sustaining economic activities in the existing four regions at the time.”
It is the view of analysts that different ethnic groups should agree on how to go about restructuring the country. They argued that different positions taken by the protagonists of restructuring have brought confusion into the polity. They also cautioned against hard stance position and violent posturing of those calling for restructuring, because it is capable of sending wrong signals to the opposing side.
Legal luminary Malam Yusuf Ali (SAN), said the call for restructuring has brought more confusion into polity. He said Nigerians must agree on what they want to restructure, rather than different zones or ethnic groups defining restructuring the way it suits them.
Ali said restructuring meants different things to different ethnic groups or zones. For instance, the Yoruba definition of restructuring is regionalism and fiscal federalism and that the perception of Igbos on restructuring is confederation, while the Southsouth is gunning for economic self-determination through restructuring. He added: “Until there is agreement among the ethnic groups in the country on how to restructure Nigeria, we will not make progress; we will be over heating the polity. Let’s agree on basic issues and stop creating confusion.”
The senior lawyer admitted that there are problems that must be addressed, if Nigerians must live together as subjects of one nation. He said: “If we abolished the settler and indigene dichotomy and ensure equitable distribution of amenities, Nigeria will not mind if the father is president and the son is vice president. An Ibo man won’t care if a Yoruba man is president for life, provided he is not denied of basic things of life. He added that it is lack of faith that is causing suspicion among the ethnic groups.
Civil right activist Comrade Mashood Erubami agreed that restructuring has been misconstrued by some interest groups. He said the current clamour for restructuring is timely, but not good in context. He said: “It is good that it is coming at a time the National Assembly is embarking on constitutional amendments. It is however not good in context, because it is being mistaken for secession which is not the same as restructuring.”
Erubami explained that the objective of restructuring is change, because the brand of federalism being practised by Nigeria has not been favourable to the federating units. He said to restructure the obvious unitary system being currently practised, instead of federalism, is a step in the right direction.
He said: “There are subjective and objective material reasons for the increasing clamour in recent times for genuine restructuring, which may continue unless justice, which is the basis for the call, is demonstrated in the management and distribution of national resources among the component parts of the country.
“However, those who are making the call in recent times are unserious and self centred. They are just waking up to the call as a means to achieving self-determination and secession, not necessarily because they are interested in truly restructuring Nigeria.”
A political scientist, Dr Friday Ibok, argued that without restructuring, there will be no peace. He said the 2014 National Conference has set the template for restructuring and that its resolutions, if implemented, will douse the various agitations that is threatening the peace and unity of the country.
Ibok noted that the conference recommended devolution of powers to the states; establishment of state police, rotational presidency between the north and the south and among the six geo-political zones; the creation of 19 additional states with the Southeast getting four more states
He regretted that the conference failed to address the issue of derivation and resource control, which is one of the issues fuelling the agitation for restructuring. He said the contentious issue had been settled by the 1960 Independence and 1963 Republican constitutions, because the two constitutions specifically provided that the federating units should control their economic activities and finances, by keeping 50 per cent of all revenues and contributing the remaining 50 per cent to the Federation Account.
He said: “The constitutions stated that 30 per cent should be shared among the regions, leaving 20 per cent to the Federal Government.
“But, the law was changed in 1969 by the military administration when the crude oil from the Niger Delta became the mainstay of the economy. The change was effected by military fiat. The Southsouth is clamouring for a return to a true fiscal federalism as was the case when cocoa, rubber, groundnut and cotton were the mainstay of the economy. Their demand is based on principle of equity, justice and fairness.”
A Kaduna-based lawyer, Mahmoud Haroun, believes those behind the campaign for restructuring are those who lost out in the last general elections. He said they are seeking political relevance ahead of 2019. He said restructuring is the buzz word of a section of the elite that feels that it has been shut out of government, particularly at the federal level.
Haroun said, to the frustrated politicians, restructuring means regional autonomy or resource control. He added: “The driving force is that if they cannot be accommodated at the federal level, they should be in-charge at the regional level. They say the centre or Federal Government is too powerful and that the way out is to return the ownership of the resources to states or geo-political zones, which may then pay taxes to run the government at the centre.
“Former Vice President Atiku Abubakar has latched on to the so-called restructuring debate; he has positioned himself as the lead discussant. Apparently, the ongoing debate on restructuring needs a strong advocate in the north and Atiku fits the bill. Atiku needs the restructuring debate, to keep himself busy on the way to another shot at the Nigerian Presidency. Too much politics has crept into the restructuring debate such that it has now become a tool in the hands of those who have lost in the current order and want to distract President Muhammadu Buhari”
Erubami is of the view that what binds the poor people in the north, east and west together is hunger and abject poverty. He said what can liberate the poor is for them to identify their common enemies and replace them with compassionate, courageous, committed and responsible leadership. He added: “Right now there is nothing different, the same old, unserious self-centred lots are clamouring for restructuring that cannot be said to represent true mandate of the masses.”
Anyaoku advised that most of the powers currently concentrated at the centre in the presidential system be devolved to the regions to enable each region develops at its own pace. He blames the problems of Nigeria on military intervention that imposed unitary system of government, as against federalism that allows the regions to control their resources and pay tax to the Federal Government.
He said: “The leadership of the centre should remain less powerful and less attractive as it was at the beginning of our independence. Nigeria should be restructured into a federation of six regions, based on the existing six geo-political zones. The new structure should retain the existing states as development areas but that the governance paraphernalia of governors, state assemblies, civil service and judiciary should be removed.”
He observed that one of the main challenges that would come with the new system would be that of revenue allocation and suggested that resources should be divided into man-made resources produced by the citizens and God-given-that is minerals both liquid and solid. He said the revenue from God-given resources should be allocated with the Federal Government receiving something between 20 and 23 per cent.
