The Nation Newspaper

Tag: Confab

  • Why confab of ethnic nationalities is dangerous

    Why confab of ethnic nationalities is dangerous

    Last week, I concluded my three-part rebuttal of Professor Ben Nwabueze thesis that Northern unity is an obstacle to national unity, except for one of the several reasons he supported his thesis with. This reason, as he put it, was that “it is generally believed” the region’s “political, traditional and religious leaders” are the sponsors of Boko Haram’s insurgency “in pursuance of an agenda aimed at promoting northern domination and the supremacy of Islam in the affairs of Nigeria.”

    I said in my conclusion that of all the reasons he adduced in support of his thesis, this was the most absurd. I then promised to say why today and also to examine the misguided idea, of which he is a leading advocate, that a national conference of the country’s ethnic nationalities is the panacea for our retrogression as a nation.

    Before I do so, however, I should say again that I totally agree with the learned professor’s conclusion that “What should engage our concern and concerted effort is how to bridge the chasm resulting from the North-South Divide.” (Emphasis his).

    In reaching this conclusion he said there has never been “one pan-southern organisation to countervail those in the North” until the formation of the Southern Nigeria Peoples Assembly (SNPA) in July 2012. This is probably true. However, it is so only up to a point. What the professor forgot to add was that the absence of such an organisation was not for want of trying. Certainly, he could not have forgotten so soon the late Chief Chukwuemeka Ojukwu’s short-lived pursuit of his famous “hand shake across the Niger.”

    The professor could also not have forgotten so soon the famous First Southern Leadership Summit in Enugu in December 2005, apparently sponsored by Obasanjo’s presidency, whose primary objective was to denigrate the North. Not least of all, he could not have forgotten so soon how the South formed an alliance with the Middle-Belt which met regularly during President Obasanjo’s 2005 Constitutional Conference with the sole objective of isolating the so-called Core North.

    If all these efforts came to naught it was not because Northern unity was an obstacle. It was essentially because of bad faith among the promoters of Southern solidarity as Professor Itse Sagay, himself a member of the conference from Delta, said in several newspaper interviews at the end of the conference.

    Unity, as the Nwabueze admitted, cannot in itself be a bad thing. “The creation of a pan-southern organisation to match those in the North,” he said, “is perhaps not a bad thing in itself.” What he found worrisome, he said, was the adversarial motive of those seeking for a united southern front.

    The catch then is the motive, not the act, of unity in itself. Clearly then it amounts to double standards for the professor to say southern unity is not a bad thing in itself but northern unity is. The North may be accused of remaining united to retain power permanently but at least two facts belie such an accusation, namely (1) in one of the fairest, freest and most peaceful elections in the country in1993, the region voted solidly for a Southerner, Chief M. K. O. Abiola, as president and (2) virtually all the region’s leaders were agreed that, following the debacle of the inexplicable cancellation of that election by the military regime of General Ibrahim Babangida, the next president of the country must come from the South.

    All of which takes me to my contention that the idea of a conference of ethnic nationalities is misguided and a non-starter. Before then, however, let me explain why I said the professor’s accusation that the North sponsored Boko Haram insurgency in pursuit of the region’s hegemony and Muslim supremacy in the country is the most absurd of all the reasons he has against Northern unity. Clearly implied in this assertion is that Boko Haram is meant to undermine President Goodluck Jonathan, a southerner and a Christian.

    That this position is absurd is evident, first, from the fact that his sole evidence is the say-so of the president of the Kano State Chapter of Ohaneze, Chief Tobias Michael Idika, whom he quoted as saying in an interview in the Sunday Vanguard of August 4, 2013, “The culprits are politicians, religious leaders and traditional rulers from the North. As far as I am concerned, Boko Haram is the creation of bitter politics.”

    As a professor and a senior advocate of law, surely Nwabueze cannot deny the fact that a serious charge as that of sponsorship of mass murder requires a quality of proof higher than the mere say-so of anyone, more so someone obviously as aggrieved as an Ohaneze chieftain whose Igbo kindred have been victims of Boko Haram terror. This, I am sorry to say, is clearly shoddy scholarship.

    Secondly, Boko Haram predated Jonathan’s presidency on his own steam in 2011 by at least nine years. During most of that period the sect was completely non-violent. It became violent from 2009 only after its members had been systematically persecuted and killed by our security forces at the instance of the then Executive Governor of Borno State, its home base, Alhaji Modu Ali Sheriff, not because of their creed that Western education is sin, a creed widely regarded by most ordinary Muslims and their clerics alike as heretic, but because it became highly critical of what it said was the governor’s venality and anti-people policies and programmes.

    This systematic persecution and killings of its members climaxed in the July 2009 military raid of its headquarters which in turn led to the extrajudicial killing by the police of its leader, Muhammad Yusuf, his father-in-law, Baba Fugu, and Sheriff’s Commissioner of Religious Affairs, Buji Foi, both of them prominent members of the sect.

    The military raid in July 2009, ordered by Jonathan’s predecessor, Umaru Musa Yar’Adua, a Northerner and a Muslim, wiped out the sect. Or so we thought, until it returned with vengeance within a year after Yusuf’s deputy, Abubakar Shekau, who had been presumed killed in the raid, surfaced from nowhere to resume its insurgency.

    It is obvious from the way President Jonathan has surrendered himself to the military in his policy on tackling the Boko Harm insurgency that the lesson of the return of Boko Haram about a year after we all thought the sect was dead and buried, has not been learnt. The rejection of this lesson has led to widespread suspicions in the North that the authorities do not want to end the insurgency because ending it would make it difficult, if not impossible, to rig the 2015 elections in a region widely regarded as hostile to his stay in office. In other words, the professor’s accusation that Boko Haram is a political weapon cuts both ways.

    Finally, it is absurd for anyone to think, as Nwabueze obviously does, that a sect, whose creed is widely regarded as heretic by the mainstream religious and secular leaders of the North alike, will be their weapon of choice for propagating their faith; obviously, nothing can be more self-defeating than a position like Boko Haram’s which ridicules and tarnishes their faith.

    In any case it should be obvious by now from attempts on the lives of prominent traditional rulers in the North like the Shehu of Borno and the Emir of Kano and from the number of Muslims and their clerics killed or attacked by Boko Haram – a number which President Jonathan himself has acknowledged is more than the number of Christians killed – that even if anyone in the region ever sponsored the sect, those purported sponsors have since lost control over it.

    To return to our topic of today, i.e. the misguided idea that only a conference of ethnic nationalities, sovereign or otherwise, will solve our problems let me say that my reasons are simple and straightforward.

    First, all the figures of the number of ethnic groups in Nigeria are, at best, intelligent guesses. Once upon a time the figure was 250. About thirty years ago it rose to over 500. Recent estimates talk about over 600. Of these over 400 are said to be in the North.

    These numbers are intelligent guesses because they assume that ethnic groups are frozen in time and space. Nothing could be more inaccurate. As Professor Peter Ekeh, who, sadly, seems to have changed his position since the recent ascendancy of the Delta region in Nigerian politics, said in his 1980 inaugural lecture as a professor of History, the ethnic groups as we understand them today were not as they were before our colonisation by the Whites.

    “By 1820,” he said in that essay, “an Ekiti man would have been astounded if he were called a ‘Yoruba man’ whom he understood, if he were so knowledgeable, as a man from Oyo. In any case, an Ekiti man would probably need an interpreter in order to communicate effectively with a Yoruba man in 1820.”

    Even more recently the Ikwere, he said, “have rediscovered a new identity separate from the Ibo. Less than thirty years ago, the Urhobos and the Isokos were the same ethnic groups. In the early sixties, following the creation of the Middle West State, there was a separation between the two and so they are now two different groups.”

    President Jonathan himself is an epitome of this fluidity of our ethnic groups. There is widespread belief, not exactly discouraged by the man himself, that he is Ijaw. The fact is that he is not. Rather he is Ogbia, which is hardly known outside his Bayelsa home state.

    The numbers of ethnic groups we peddle are also mere guesses because they assume the dialects within each language are intelligible to each other. Again this is not true. Among the Nupe, my ethnic group, there are at least a dozen dialects such ad Bassa-Ngeh, Kakanda and Dibo, whose language, as someone from Bida, I do not understand. And what is true of Nupe is true of all the ethnic groups in the country, except perhaps the smallest ones.

    Clearly the composition of a national conference, sovereign or otherwise, would be highly problematic to say the least if it is based on ethnicity.

    Beyond this there is the more fundamental problem that no nation or society in the world has ever developed using its ethnic groups as the building blocks. On the contrary, it is only when a nation or society becomes cosmopolitan in its composition, with mutual accommodation of all the cross cutting ties of the religions, skills, and cultures, etc, by its various groups, that it becomes great. Variety, as the saying goes, is the spice of life.

    No segment of our country captures the variety of the religions, ethnic groups, etc, in our country today like our federal constituencies. So if we must go ahead with the national conference in these interesting times when we should be pre-occupied with more pressing issues like those of security and corruption, let us choose those to represent us on the basis of our federal constituencies, not ethnic groups.

  • ARIAN to hold confab

    Registered insurance agents will hold their conference on November 14.

    The President, Association of Registered Insurance Agent of Nigeria (ARIAN), Mr Kingsley Obuvie, who made this known in Lagos, said the meeting is aimed at consolidating on the increasing attention received in re-positioning the agent as a major stakeholder in the insurance industry.

    He assured that ARIAN is more determined to re-orientate and refocus the agents towards achieving deeper penetration and increase growth for the industry in Nigeria.

    He said this year’s conference with theme, ‘Growing the insurance agency business in Nigeria’ will be followed by the election of new executives and officers for the association along with its fourth national awards.

    The highpoint of the day, he said, will be the national awards and dinner ceremony when outstanding agents, notable personalities and insurance companies that have distinguished themselves by their performances and contributions to the development and growth of agency business in the country will be honoured.

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

  • Confab versus Leadership

    The issue of Confab is not new to Nigeria or Nigerians. Over time, we have been inundated with echoes, agitations and clarion calls for the convocation of a national discourse. Such an envisioned discourse has been tagged various names or given different nomenclatures – depending on the side of the aisle you position or find yourself. With the growing clamour, it has dawned on men and women of thought that the agitations have been on the pedestal of selfishness, parochial interest or ethnic egocentrism. Thus, it is becoming increasingly obvious that some people believe the Confab could provide an opportunity to settle some latent scores especially for some sections of the country or those Nigerians who have always felt cheated and therefore aggrieved in the leadership debacle and general distribution of the largesse that has accrued to the country especially, since the advent of the first oil-production at OLOBIRI, decades ago. This is however, without prejudice or discredit to the gains of competitiveness, self-help or independence, growth and regional development, of old. All told, the Confab euphoria is not about nationalism or development per se, rather, it is a rivalry or tussle on who “rules” next or whose turn should it be thereafter – based on some political intricacy or ethnic calculus.

    By extension, the objective of such a Confab is the evolution of a brand new Constitution that would potentially accommodate most of the yearnings of the people since the current 1999 Constitution as amended, is supposedly, a relic of military interventions in the polity. Paradoxically, a good number of the drafters then, have now joined hands in condemning the Constitution and currently in search of a brand new one. Rather than blame the operators of the rule book or barometer for governance, every Confab apologist seems to exploit the omissions or “commissions” in the Constitution, as if there is a perfect Constitution anywhere in the world.

    I am told, Sovereignty has a dual hue or composition – Popular and Legal.  The popular one resides in the people, who however, go to the polls to express themselves by electing their leaders or representatives who there from is given the Legal Sovereignty in trust. Meanwhile, the Constitution expressly states and insists that any act of irreverence by the holders of the Legal Sovereignty in the course of its exercise, is tractable and therefore the Legal Sovereignty is redeemable by the power of recall by the people lest, they have to wait for the next general elections for appropriate redress through the sanctity of the ballot. It is little wonder why there is a yawning divide amongst people regarding a Confab report – those who want the Confab document to be subjected to the whims and caprices of the National Assembly, in contradistinction to those who want a referendum to decide the way forward based on the same Confab document.

    To all intents and purposes, the National Assembly, being a beneficiary of the extant polity, would hardly succumb to the dictates of a Confab document since the legislators are after all, deemed to have been given the Legal Sovereignty by the people, at the instance of the most recent polls. The proponents of referendum, who are apparently averse to the status quo ante, are not pragmatic enough to observe that the two sovereigns are to a large extent mutually exclusive of each other, since they cannot operate concurrently in real time. However, they are collectively exhaustive in the end. Thus, any extant political administration has the constitutional power to initiate, arrange, convoke a Confab and examine the attendant document from which a referendum could be called for, if adjudged expedient or desirous.

    Whilst the National Assembly cannot make or write a Constitution, she could alter or amend a subsisting one to a large extent beyond which she is empowered to call for a referendum that could lead to the making of a new Constitution – presumably agreeable to a good majority of the populace. However, our antecedent regarding Confab issues as in many other development areas is “res ipsa loquitur” – the matter speaks for itself. Our various governments understandably, have been flagrantly insincere to the bidding of a Confab – including other existential areas and this lacuna has elicited an epoch of incredulity – leaving a cumulus of suspicion, distrust, skepticism, unreliability and deception at the doorsteps of Aso Rock. And since government is a continuum, the current administration is therefore not exempted from the morass of insensitivity and impunity, over time. Indeed, the current administration, through all manner of unrepentant raisons d’état, has had and still having her fair share of the revolving and unremitting irreverence to the sensibilities of those who willingly obliged or surrendered Legal Sovereignty in trust.

    A glimpse or cursory look at existing records – regarding committee approach to national issues, indicates flagrant disrespect to the honorable and revered committee appointees whose erstwhile reports and honest recommendations have been resigned to the heap of dysfunctional statistics. Swept under the “impregnable carpet” at ASO Rock are reports of UWAIS, DANJUMA, RIBADU and ORASANYE – depicting a tiny few in the pile. Thus, those crying foul of deception or distraction in respect of this current attempt at resuming the Confab recurrent decimal, are not without their justification.

    Truly, it is virtually sacrosanct save a revolution, to do away with or underrate the powers of an existing National Assembly or government based on a convoked Confab or its attendant document. Meanwhile, evidence abound that the casualty of any revolution (presumably bloody) goes beyond the instant immeasurable carnage and egregious destruction or deprivation of the very resources the revolution was meant to protect, in the first place. Each revolution invariably mortgages the life and times of a nation including those of unborn generations, as a revolution culminates in utter confusion and instability, whilst growth and sustainable development become a mirage, if the country survives.

    Any in-depth search for the main cause of a clamour for a Confab or new Constitution or the most authentic resource and catalyst for ethnic disturbances or even religious upheavals, would throw up “FAILURE of LEADERSHIP” as the root, trunk and branch for such agitations. Whilst it is true that human beings are invariably forward looking with the view to expanding their horizon and bringing about self-progress using all forms of methods, it is equally incontrovertible that they also relish the opportunity of easy paths or reassuring roadmaps to fortune, comfort and freedom. Thus, the Nigerian citizenry would prefer the path of least resistance towards achieving their goals as opposed to confrontational or revolutionary means or ways that could be tortuous, devious, antisocial, irreverent and sometimes illegal. Incidentally, the popular and well-acknowledged sanctuary that is most available to provide such paths of least resistance is the government of the people by the people for the people – the government of the day.

    Political pundits relish and extol democracy as the best form of government currently known to man, the world over – regardless of the concomitant gerrymandering or filibustering, it obliges. It is therefore no gainsaying the fact that good governance as epitomized by benevolent, visionary, insightful and purposeful leadership is the sine qua non of growth and sustainable development in a developing nation as Nigeria. After all, the 1999 Constitution as amended, unambiguously states and insists that the primary purpose of government is to provide security and welfare for her teeming population – enshrined in Chapter 2, Section 14, subsection 2(b): Fundamentals Objectives and Directive Principles of State Policy. Thus, if government provides and also seen or adjudged as providing the enabling environment through the provisioning and enhancement of infrastructure (power, water, transportation), health and education, it would be easier for the citizenry to benefit wholesomely and irretrievably from learning, commerce, business and general welfare.

    The sprawling effects of such a sincere and committed disposition of government to her nationals would improve the general wellbeing, stimulate wealth creation, sensitize economic emancipation and enhance growth and sustainable development. As the workforce would continually and numerically soar based on general growth – while keeping all major economic indices in check, idleness, truancy, crime and criminology would be at controllable low ebbs – with the cooperation of a disciplined and savvy judiciary. Thus, poverty, misemployment, underemployment and unemployment – adjudged as the raison d’etre for breaches of law and order, civil disobedience and all manner of unremitting but avoidable agitations would subside, as more people would be happy, gainfully employed, committed, and focused on self-development at the very least. At that point, issues of ethnic demagoguery or religious bigotry would be reduced, as a growing number of people would be genuinely engaged in creating wealth for themselves and summarily for the country. A resounding byproduct of such a commitment by the government is a gradual increase in patriotism with obeisance to rule of law by the people – invariably guided by the much or less each individual or group derives or benefits from government’s benevolence.

    So, the case for the convocation of any Confab albeit, not irrelevant, is definitely not a front-burner issue that would quickly transform or launch Nigeria into limelight or levitate to her rightful place in the comity of nations. Rather, the quest for diligent, forthright, dogged, committed, knowledgeable and visionary leadership is primus-inter-pares and it is crucial to our survival now and forever. And the leadership odyssey is NOW as time is running out.

    Dr Bello, a former MD of NITEL, lives in Abuja.

  • Confab excitements

    No doubt about it: Col. Tony Nyiam (rtd), member of the Presidential Advisory Committee on National Dialogue/Conference, which former senator, Dr. Femi Okurounmu chairs, ought to fall on his sword, for his October 29 spat with Edo Governor, Adams Oshiomhole.

    This is, of course, without prejudice to the rightness or wrongness of his motive; or the nobility or otherwise of his action.

    By that public spat, Col. Nyiam badly compromised the position of his committee. His passion – unfortunately – got the better of him, thereby reinforcing cynicism in some quarters (not by any means received wisdom, but widespread enough) that the Okurounmu committee could be a Jonathan presidential dummy, working towards a preconceived answer. This is despite its official mandate of no “no go” area.

    The colonel’s outburst gifted the committee the intolerant toga – intolerant to any view outside the approved official lines. The potent blackmail that Nyiam tried to shut up a sitting governor in public, aside from the legalistic fuel that he tried to abrogate an elected governor’s democratic right to contribute to national discourse, paints him as an anti-democracy demon of sorts, to be shunned, lampooned and excoriated by all!

    Nothing he will say, it appears, would ever mitigate that dire sentence.

    That is why the colonel should step down: to save the honour of the committee, recharge its credibility that it is no Jonathan’s poodle and perhaps take the wind off the sail of the confab’s opponents.

    Still, the colonel’s sacrifice, because of the political incorrectness of his action, does not necessarily equate public good, in the all-important issue of a national conference.

    Sovereign or no, the conference is to restructure Nigeria, from its present destination of self-destruction, to a country that gives its longsuffering citizens development and prosperity, en route to morphing into a nation, from a mere geographical expression of mutually antagonistic nationalities.

    On the Nigerian crisis, Col. Nyiam is no neophyte. In the grand anarchy of the military era when the most audacious brute was king, he was linked to the Gideon Orkar coup. The putschists not only claimed they had overthrown the extant power bully, they also claimed to have excised some northern parts of the country from the Federal Republic!

    What provocation could have driven that lunatic attempt? Those caught paid with their lives. But the survivors would appear to have continued living with the bile of the dead.

    Besides, the tragic annulment of the 12 June 1993 presidential election and the even more tragic death, in detention, of MKO Abiola, winner of that election, further fuelled the open secret that Nigeria was indeed in the vice-grip of hegemonists.

    That, with post-1999 Obasanjo era power rascality, including the Jonathan Presidency’s craving for a lawless presidency (witness events in Rivers State), which borders on creeping fascism, has snowballed into the clear lack of unanimity on retaining Nigeria as presently structured.

    The result is a pre-anarchy season of anomie that now beclouds the country. That urgently suggests some national dialogue to fix things.

    The big question: can you trust President Goodluck Jonathan on this one? Ripples would not wager for Jonathan. He may well be playing games. But others have put their faith in him, claiming he means well. Yet, others are ambivalent, deciding to play along, thinking the perilous objective situations on ground would force his hands, whatever his original motives, to do good by the republic.

    Ironically, that would appear where the likes of Nyiam come in. From the ill-fated passion of the military era, Col. Nyiam has articulated his thoughts, on the Nigerian question, in his book: True Federal Democracy or Awaiting Implosion? An Aide-Memoire for Makers of the Nigerian Constitution.

    A citizen that has gone through the rigour of putting pen to paper on the Nigerian question, after the miscarriage of the Orkar coup and its tragedies, would appear ardently committed to the restructuring school, against the establishment school that baits open catastrophe, by hoping to take their chances on Nigeria’s extant structure.

    Indeed, apart from Senator Okurounmu (at least going by his pre-2003 stance as an SNC purist) and Prof. Ben Nwabueze (who excused himself from the committee on health grounds), Col. Nyiam would appear the only other known member that clearly belongs to the pro-change lobby.

    That would appear the full tragedy of the colonel’s emotional blunder. In his spat with Governor Oshiomhole, and his looming sacrifice (self or forced), the sovereign national conference movement would appear fated to lose a key ally. That might prove even more devastating for the country, for Nigeria as presently constituted would appear a journey to nowhere.

    That brings into the fray the Oshiomhole intervention. Did the governor have a right to air his views? No doubt. Did Nyiam have a right to obstruct him in any way, even if the governor, in his view, was playing to the gallery? Definitely not.

    Does the governor have a right to overplay his own opinion, even after the visiting committee had listened to him, for 40 minutes, as Nyiam claimed, in his office? No law says he shouldn’t, though decorum demands the governor also cedes space for other opinions.

    But one thing is sure: if there was a time limit for contributions, then the governor ought to have stuck to that time limit. If he did not, then the governor erred. In a republic, every citizen should subject themselves to rules: and a governor or president is first a citizen, before his catapult to high office. But all that is in the realm of controversy!

    What is well and truly amazing is the manifest illogicality of the argument of Organised Labour (first put across by Isa Aremu, NLC vice president and also amplified by Oshiomhole at the confab Edo town hall meeting) that the Nigerian question is settled. It is not.

    Comrade Oshiomhole feels “Nigerian” because he was “Kaduna boy”, who made good over there, even if he was from Edo. His view should be applauded and respected. But to dub as “tribalists”, other citizens with diametrically opposed experiences, is plain conceit with nary any logical merit.

    Bola Ige (of blessed memory) was another Kaduna Boy (his childhood biography), his Esa-Oke folks teased as “Gambari”, because he could not even at first, speak his native Yoruba tongue. Yet, he scurried down South because he found he couldn’t enjoy educational privileges other “Kaduna boys” were enjoying!

    In any case, if “Kaduna boys” had all morphed into “Kaduna men” and lived happily ever after, why didn’t the comrade governor consider running as Kaduna governor? So long for the annoying sweeping finality of Organised Labour’s argument!

    Nigeria needs restructuring to earn a rebirth. Jonathan may or may not be sincere. But that does not eliminate that notorious fact; or that the Nigerian state is at its weakest in history for change. This is the time to remould – or die.

    It is imperative this toxic structure be done away with, whoever takes over by 2015.

  • Confab: PDP chieftains want able representation

    Confab: PDP chieftains want able representation

    Chieftains of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) in Lagos State on Friday advised the Senator Femi Okurounmu -led Confab Advisory Committee on the mode of selection of persons to the proposed national dialogue.

    The politicians, who are also members of the Crystal Group, one of the prominent caucuses of the PDP in Lagos State, spoke during the public hearing of the committee at the National Institute of International Affairs (NIIA) last Friday.

    Leader of the group and former gubernatorial candidate in the state, Chief Mrs. Remi Adiukwu-Bakare, said the committee must see to it that only trusted and credible people are allowed to be part of the conference.

    Adiukwu-Bakare, who said the proposed conference will discuss salient issues that will help the continued existence and growth of the country, urged Nigerians to take advantage of the national dialogue by selecting only credible people to represent then and canvass their views at the conference.

    “For us at the Crystal Group, the conference offers an opportunity for us all to discuss Nigeria. By discussing Nigeria, I mean that it should be a platform to examine all the things that make us a country and see how we can further strengthen such ties.

    “This is why we said the committee must see to it that only trusted and credible people are allowed to be part of the conference.

    “Based on our expectation that the conference will discuss salient issues that will help the continued existence and growth of the country, we urge Nigerians to take advantage of the national dialogue by selecting only credible people to represent then and canvass their views at the conference.

    “This is one of our positions not just as chieftains and members of the PDP in Lagos State, but also as stakeholders, residents and indigenes of the state. It is also based on our nationalities as Nigerians,” she said.

  • Ohanaeze to meet governors on confab

    APEX Igbo socio-cultural organisation, Ohanaeze Ndigbo, is expected to present its stand on the National Conference to South East governors today.

    The South East governors are expected to meet with their South South counterparts in Enugu.

    Although the agenda of today’s meeting of the governors was not disclosed, a source hinted that it is not unconnected with the forthcoming National Conference.

    The two zones are expected to present a common and harmonised stand at the various sittings of the pre-confab panel slated for in October 28 and 29 in the South East.

    At the end of the highest decision making organ of the Ohanaeze yesterday, the Irobi, no communique was read.

    But the deputy secretary general of the organisation, Chief Isaac Wonwu, who briefed reporters, said the Imino appraised the proposed National Conference as it affected Ndigbo.

    He said although the meeting was inconclusive, the stand of Ndigbo will be made public on Monday.

    A committee, he said, was set up towards proper articulation of Ohanaeze proposals.

    “We have a responsibility as a group. We also want to ensure that we properly consult wide and also get across to the respective governors and take a proper position,” Wonwu insisted.

     

  • Confab: The politics of committee membership

    As the newly inaugurated National Conference Planning Committee settles down to chart the course of the proposed conference, Assistant Editor, Dare Odufowokan, unveils their socio-political leanings

    With Monday’s inauguration of the National Conference Planning Committee by President Goodluck Jonathan, stakeholders remained divided over the membership of the committee saddled with preparing the ground for the eventual convention of a national dialogue to discuss the future of the country.

    Is anything really wrong with the composition of the committee? Are there merits in the arguments for and against the committee membership? A look at the personalities and background of the members of the committee may help answer these questions.

    Senator Femi Okurounmu – Jonathan’s political ally

    Senator Femi Okurounmu, an Egba man from Abeokuta, was elected Senator for the Ogun Central Constituency of Ogun State, at the start of Nigeria’s 4th Republic, on the platform of the Alliance for Democracy (AD). He was in the National Assembly from May 29, 1999 to May 29, 2003.

    Before then, he had served as commissioner in the state’s ministry of works. At the Senate, Okurounmu was appointed to committees on Commerce and Economic Affairs where he was deputy to Senator David Mark.

    He ran for reelection in 2003, but was defeated by Alhaji Ibikunle Amosun then of the People’s Democratic Party (PDP). Afterwards, he became the Secretary-General of the Yoruba socio-political group, Afenifere.

    In January 2009, he caused a stir in the politics of the South-West region with a statement that Afenifere membership was open to all, regardless of political party affiliation, as long as they believe in the Afenifere and Awoist credo. Some political analysts still believe the statement was made for the purpose of allowing the return of some conservative politicians into the fold of the pan-Yoruba organisation.

    Okurounmu’s progressive credentials also came under scrutiny in January 2010 as the Baba Ijo (father of the congregation) of St. Paul’s Anglican Church, Sodubi, Abeokuta, he allegedly led a revolt of some of the church elders against the presiding Priest.

    Aggrieved youths, acting in support of the Priest and calling Okurounmu a conservative, who along with some elders have been opposing positive changes in the parish, sealed off the church gates to prevent worshipers from attending the Sunday service, threatening to lynch Okurounmu if he dares show his face. It took the timely intervention of the police to prevent the situation from becoming violent.

    And in 2011, during the run up to the presidential election, Okurounmu led other chieftains of his party, the Democratic Peoples Alliance (DPA) to announce the endorsement of President Goodluck Jonathan of the PDP as their presidential candidate.

    Ever since, he has remained a close political ally of the president and Senators David Mark and Anyim Pius Anyim, the Secretary to the Government of the Federation (SGF).

    Professor George Obiozor – Imo PDP leader

    Born August 15, 1942, Obiozor, who is from Imo State, has served as an Ambassador in the PDP government since the return to democracy in 1999. A product of the Institute of African Studies and Albert Schweitzer College, he graduated from the University of Puget Sound in 1969, and from Columbia University with a Ph.D. in International Affairs.

    He was Director-General of the Nigerian Institute of International Affairs. He was the High Commissioner to Cyprus. He was also the Nigerian Ambassador to Israel, from 1999 to 2003. He was the Nigerian Ambassador to the United States, from 2004 to 2008.

    In his native Imo State, he is regarded as one of the leaders of the PDP. He is an ally of former Governor Ikedi Ohakim and has participated in all recent activities aimed at returning the party to the Government House, come 2015. There are also insinuations that he is eying a senatorial seat in the state.

    Senator Khairat Abdulrazaq-Gwadabe – PDP returnee

    A former Senator for the Abuja Federal Capital Territory constituency in 1999 on the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) platform, she held office from May 1999 to May 2003.

    Born in Ilorin, Kwara State in April 1962, she studied law at the University of Lagos and became a legal practitioner. Her Senate election in 1999 was her first venture into politics. After taking her seat in the Senate, she was appointed to committees on the Environment, Health, Women Affairs (chairman), Federal Character, Tourism and Culture and Federal Capital Territory.

    In January 2003, after losing her bid for a return ticket to the Senate on the PDP platform, she announced that she was moving to the All Nigeria People’s Party (ANPP).

    She is married to Colonel Lawan Gwadabe, former military governor of Niger State. Senator Abdulrazak-Gwadabe was the Chairman of the Senators Forum, a body of former and serving senators.

    In 2011, she returned to the PDP and was one of the champions of President Goodluck Jonathan’s re-election bid. She has remained in the good books of the Presidency ever since.

    Mallam Buhari Bello – PDP appointee

    He was the former Executive Secretary to the National Human Rights Commission. . He served in that capacity for a period of about seven years. He was born in Birnin-Kebbi, Kebbi State and studied Law at Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria and the Nigerian Law School, Lagos. He was at various times Assistant Director, Public Prosecutions, Ministry of Justice, Sokoto State and Director of Legal Services, National Electoral Commission (NEC).

    After his removal from the NHRC by former President Obasanjo, he became an appointee of the PDP when he accepted the job of Special Assistant to the Attorney-General of the Federation.

    Mallam Buhari Bello was a member and later leader of the Nigerian delegation to the United Nations, and was elected Vice-President of the Diplomatic and Plenipotentiary Conference for the Establishment of the International Criminal Court in Rome, Italy and was also elected Chairman of the Coordinating Committee of the African National Human Rights Institutions as well as a member of the Credentials and Accreditation sub-committee of the International Committee of the National Human Rights Institution, UN, Geneva.

    He was honoured with the prestigious member of the Order of the Federal Republic OFR in December 2003, Dr Kwame Nkurumah Outstanding Merit Award and membership of the National Institute MNI, 2007.

    Comrade Tony I. Uranta – President Jonathan’s friend

    He calls himself an independent Civic and Social Organisation professional. Uranta is a graduate of the University of Ibadan. A Niger Delta-born rights activist, he leaves no one in doubt about his closeness and friendship with the Jonathans.

    He is from the same Bayelsa State as the President and many say he has unhindered access to the Villa. He is the Executive Secretary of Nigerian Summit Group (NSG) and Chairman of Izon Ikemi, an Ijaw group.

    Alhaji Dauda Birma – Bamanga Tukur’s age-long ally

    He is the Sarkin Gabas of Adamawa and a long time political ally of PDP’s National Chairman, Alhaji Bamanga Tukur. Their political friendship dated back to the politics of the old Gongola State.

    A former presidential aspirant on the platform of the ANPP, Birma is now a prominent chieftain of the PDP in Adamawa State with access to both Tukur and Jonathan.

    Few months ago, he led a delegation of the Northern Elders Forum (NEF) to endorse the re-election bid of President Jonathan during a visit to the PDP national headquarters. His action was widely criticised by leaders of the northern geo-political zones.

    Dr. Mairo Ahmed Amshi – Active PDP member

    Her name may not ring a bell in national politics, but Hajia Mairo, a close associate of current Minister of State for Finance, Dr. Yerima Lawal Ngama, is an active member of the ruling PDP in her native Yobe State.

    A regular delegate to all national activities of the PDP, Amshi is one of the leading figures in the pro-Jonathan faction of the party in Yobe State. Unconfirmed sources even have it that she has served on the board of some federal parastatals on the strength of her membership of the ruling party.

    Timothy Adudu – Another PDP returnee

    A former Senator of the Federal Republic, elected in 2003 to represent Plateau North Senatorial District on the platform of the PDP, Adudu was in the National Assembly for only one term as he refused to seek re-election in 2007.

    Shortly after leaving the senate, he dumped the PDP and teamed up with the ANPP, saying PDP lacks what it takes to take Nigeria to the promised land.

    But recently, he returned to the PDP, amidst objections by the Plateau chapter of the party. His ability to bypass the state chapter in his return to the party, according to sources, is because of his closeness to some people in the presidency.

    Dr. Akilu Idabawa – former PDP National Youth leader

    Indabawa is from Kano State and was Special Adviser to Governor Musa Rabiu Kwakwanso between 1999 and 2003 as well as the party’s Director of Campaign during the 2003 governorship election in the state.

    Between 2003 and 2006, he worked in Abuja as an aide to the Minister of Defence. Later that year, he emerged as the National Youth Leader of the PDP. He later fell out with Kwakwanso and joined President Jonathan’s camp.

    He became Special Adviser to Jonathan, who was then the Vice President and later Senior Special Adviser on Political Matters to the President following the death of late President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua.

    He is the leader of the pro-Jonathan faction of the PDP in Kano State today.

    Colonel Tony Nyiam – A pro-Jonathan Campaigner

    Known for his involvement in the April 1990 military coup, Nyiam hails from Cross Rivers State. He holds a Master of Arts degree in Strategic Studies and International Security from the University of Aberdeen.

    Though he has been in the forefront of the call for a peoples’ conference to discuss the future of the country, he has also not hidded his support and admiration for President Goodluck Jonathan.

    His support for the President, according to some of his statements, may be borne out of his pro-South-South sentiment, which he is not also known to hide. A highly respected public commentator, Nyiam wants issues like the federal character system, census, North-South divide, etc to be discussed at the conference.

    Professor Funke Adebayo – A new name on the bloc

    The University don is obviously new to Nigerian politics and governance. Currently lecturing at the Ladoke Akintola University of Technology Ogbomoso, Oyo State, (LAUTECH), she is from Oyo State.

    It is still unclear how the relatively politically unknown don made the list of the committee members but pundits say she is definitely not somebody to be ignored by both the people and the government as she may spring surprises in the course of her current assignment.

    Abubakar Siddique Mohammed – University don and social critic

    A 1977 graduate of Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, Nigeria, he holds a BSc and MSc degrees in Political Science from the university. He also holds an MSc in Energy Economics and Policy from the University of Grenoble, France and a PhD in Socio-Economics of Development from the Ecole Des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales, Paris, France.

    An avowed critic of former President Olusegun Obasanjo, he authored a book titled, “The lust for power and its tragic consequences” during the fierce debate over an alleged third term plot by the retired General.

    He is a specialist in Nigerian Government and Politics and major trends in world politics. He is the Director of Centre for Democratic Research and Training (CEDDERT).

    He has served in various federal government committees in recent times. One of such is President Jonathan’s committee that looked at the possibility of reviewing the tenures of governors and the president.

  • Thorny road to a national conference

    Thorny road to a national conference

    YESTERDAY, President Goodluck Jonathan inaugurated the 13-man committee to work out the modalities for a National conference.The President’s volte face on the issue came as a surprise to many, especially he had last year said there was no need for such talks. The National Assembly, he argued then, could handle such matters since the lawmakers were the people’s representatives.

    Jonathan’s change of position has generated mixed.Critics doubt the government’s sincerity. Others arugue that President should be given chance.

    Champions of National Conference believe that the issues of national question can only be addressed through a conference that involves all the ethnic nationalities that make up Nigeria. But what are those issues? Are there issues that are sacred? How should delegates be selected for the conference and what other options are available for the nation?

    Lawyers believe that all issues, including the unity of the nation, should be thrown open for discussion by elected delegates who will represent their various ethnic nationalities and who must have constituent powers.They suggested that delegates to the conference must not be politicians, since those with political affiliations will only serve their selfish interests.

    The lawyers advised that issues, such as resource control, development, concentration of power and the structure of government must also be addressed.

    They said a situation whereby the government will embargo certain issues cannot work, as only the masses can discuss their similarities and differences and decide if they want to remain as one indivisible nation or go their separate ways.

    Modalities for a new constitution that will be subject to a referendum after the conference and accepted by the people must be part of the agenda, in order to introduce a people’s constitution, said the lawyers.

    Those who spoke on the issue include former Edo State Attorney- General, Chief Charles Uwensuyi-Edosomwan, SAN; former Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) President, Chief Wole Olanipekun (SAN); Chair, NBA Section on Legal Practice, Mrs. Funke Adekoya (SAN); Chairman, NBA Ikeja branch, Monday Ubani; constitutional lawyer Dr. Fred Agbaje as well as Lagos-based lawyers, Ikechuwku Ikeji and Daniel Onwe.

    The national question, Mrs. Adekoya said, comprises answers to what nationhood means to the people and the terms of nationhood.

    Her words: ‘‘What does ‘nationhood’ mean and are we a nation? If yes, what are the attributes of our nationhood that need reviewing? If no, why not? What does it require for the political entity known as Nigeria to become a ‘nation’? Do we want to be a nation? If yes, what does it take to become a nation? On what terms can ‘nationhood’ be achieved?’’

    To Ikeji, reasons that make it imperative for the country to remain indivisible must be discussed. He said the essence of coming together as an entity, which was not discussed and agreed upon by the different nationalities that make up the country during amalgamation, must be looked into.

    ‘‘Why were we called Nigeria in the first place and in whose interest? If it is in our own interest, were we involved in the original arrangement to join together as one? If we agree to be one, under what terms and conditions? Unitary, federal, loose federal or confederal terms?

    ‘‘To what extent should we hand over our resources to the centre and to what extent shall the same resources be returned to us? Is there any person or any people known originally as Nigerians or was it a creation of convenience?’’ he queried.

     

    Issues for determination

    To Olanipekun, there should be a level playing field for Nigerians to debate and discuss.

    He said: ‘‘Let us discuss Nigeria, let us debate Nigeria. Let us formulate a social contract for ourselves. Let us have consensus in some areas, and where we cannot, let us respect our differences. We say we are one Nigeria and overnight, 40 students were killed, 40 innocent students, they were slaughtered and all we can say is, “oh, we are sorry! Sorry for what?’’

    Uwensuyi-Edosomwan said sacred areas should not be encouraged.

    ‘‘There must not also be any sacred no-go areas and everything that form an issue for any part or peoples of this country must be on the table, having been jumbled together without their consent by a selfish colonial power solely for its own reasons and ends for a hundred years.

    ‘‘A hundred years of mutual suspicion, pain, constant bloodshed, open and unabashed thievery of the hapless patrimony by imposed ‘leaders’ and little development; it would be disingenuous for anyone to argue that the time is not now for the variegated Nigerian peoples to sit down and renegotiate their coexistence or otherwise under or outside the present geography. If we do not do it now, my prayer is that we would not be forced to do it by cataclysmic events, whose foreboding signs seem to be aplenty,’’ he said.

    To Mrs. Adekoya, nothing is too sacred for discussion.

    ‘‘If the consensus is that we are not a nation and the terms upon which nationhood can be forged cannot be agreed, then terms of dissolution must be discussed, otherwise we open the doors to civil strife and unrest. In my view, the ‘national question’ involves agreeing how we can reach unity while acknowledging our diversity,’’ she noted.

    Ikeji said the agenda should include the modalities of preparing a new constitution even if the contents are the same with the present one as long as the people have their stamp on it.

    ‘‘It should also include the modalities for a national referendum preceded by an intense mass enlightenment campaign on the issues resolved and decisions reached, which are subject of the referendum.

    ‘‘Another aspect that should be covered by the agenda is developmental issues. There is, no doubt, that development in Nigeria needs urgent intervention without which political settlement will make little or no difference. The regions of Nigeria have common developmental traits, which need to be explored by the conference.

    ‘‘Data today in Nigeria is aggregated usually on the national level and as such, it is usually difficult to locate exactly the peculiar development issues surrounding each state in Nigeria. If you get data according to states, it will be expensive and cumbersome but if you bring states with common development trends together in data, you save money and you get helpful data.

    ‘‘The point here is that we need to disaggregate data in Nigeria, we need to take another look at our regions or zones, may be begin the journey to regionalism. This is an issue that should be tabled before the conference and exhaustively discussed.

    ‘‘It will amount to deceiving ourselves like the ostrich if we fail or refuse to address every relevant issue that affects Nigeria. Justice is at the heart of every societal arrangement without which there can be no peace.

    ‘‘We do not need the peace of the graveyard and restricting the discussions can only put more fire to the problems of Nigeria. It is better that Nigeria remains one but we have to put the terms on the table so that every distinct group shows respect to the other, without any sense of marginalisation.

    ‘‘No one is a Nigerian. What you have are Yorubas, Hausa, Igbo, Efik etc. Battle has always been how to turn these individual ethnic groupings into one collective whole to be known as Nigeria. That is one of the most difficult tasks of nation building and few countries have succeeded in this regard.

    ‘‘Therefore, one premise to proceed from in setting the agenda for the conference is to keep Nigeria as one. However, where issues that arise from the honest discussions at the conference cannot be amicably resolved, then the natural question to ask is whether we can still remain as one without compromises.

    ‘‘The conference should find out how best we can remain united with all forms and semblance of injustice addressed so that the end result is win-win. There is no need to put a restriction on issues to be discussed but an agenda can be drawn up around which the discussions can revolve.

    ‘‘We must all be open and honest in the discussions at the national conference with the caveat that the outcomes shall be implemented by the government of the day. Where implementation cannot be achieved, then there is no need for the conference in the first place.”

    Onwe said the first item on the agenda should be the unity of the country. ‘‘If we shy away from that, then we are living in falsehood. It is falsehood that fears interrogation. Truth is strengthened by interrogation.

    ‘‘In the light of the growing incidence of disaffection across the nation, it is high time we asked and sincerely answered the fundamental question – Do we really need and want to remain as one nation? It is our answer to the said question that would determine what the subsequent questions would be. If the answer is in the affirmative, then, we shall be asking how we can remain together.

    ‘‘That is when we can start discussing other issues. We would need to discuss the formula for sharing our common wealth between the political leaders and the ordinary citizens.

    A situation where we have to struggle to pay minimum wage of N18, 000 to the ordinary citizen, while political leaders are paid in millions of naira calls for question.

    ‘‘There is also the need to equalise the opportunities of the disadvantaged groups, such as persons with disabilities who have been sidelined from the scheme of affairs in the nation for a very long time now.

    ‘‘Other issues should be resource control, state police, and devolution of powers, indigenisation and several others,’’ he said.

    How delegates should emerge Edosomwan said for the dialogue to make realistic sense while also becoming of real forward-moving significance to Nigerians, it must have constituent powers.

    ‘‘For this to happen, real and not sham elections must be the only way delegates are to be sent to the Dialogue Assembly. Voting ways that reflect peoples and necessarily our dodgy demographic stats ought to be the way resolutions are reached,’’ he said.

    Adekoya suggested that delegates to the conference should emerge from the diverse groups that make up Nigeria. She said ethnic representation should be the basis, together with other identified groups such as women, the student population and the labour force.

    The various professional groups should be included in the talk. Whatever is agreed on at the proposed conference should be subjected to a referendum which modalities should be spelt out by the enactment of the national assembly, said Ubani.

    To Agbaje, those to represent the various ethnic groups must not be politicians and the committee must avoid politicians as much as possible. He said the committee should work with civil society groups and NGOs who must enjoy the support of Nigerians.

    ‘‘The committee must be honest enough to allow credible Nigerians come on board. They must select and work with people who are grounded with the principle of constitutionalism, who enjoy the support of Nigerians.

    ‘‘They should be Nigerians that actually know the problem the ordinary masses are facing, else, they will be beating round the bush,’’ he said.

    “Delegates to the conference may emerge by adopting a zonal representation approach where ethnic nationalities are given slots,” said Ikeji. According to him, the process is very simple and requires articulation on the part of the facilitators.

    Onwe suggested that the conference should be decentralised to allow everybody an opportunity to be heard. He said it should not be a situation where some elites would converge at Abuja and purport to be thinking and speaking for the rest of the masses.

     

    The way forward

    Adekoya insisted that the way forward is for the people to sit and decide how to accommodate their differences or say good-bye.

    ‘‘I do not see any other way forward for Nigeria. We must sit at a table and discuss how we can accommodate our differences.

    ‘‘Once the delegates all realise and accept that it is possible for Nigeria to either go the way of

    Czechoslovakia, which existed from October 1918 until its peaceful dissolution on January 1, 1993, when it transited into the two countries (now known as the Czech Republic and Slovakia), or take the Yugoslavia route [Bosnia, Serbia and Montenegro and Kosovo] they should be able to take the decisions which are in the best interest of the groups they represent.

    ‘‘I hope and pray that there will be no dismemberment and I believe this is the view of the vast majority of Nigerians; we only need to discuss and agree the terms of our union,’’ she said.

    For Ubani, the best way forward is a Sovereign National Conference (SNC), where the issue of oneness shall be discussed and agreed upon.

    ‘‘The conference must discuss the issue of staying together as the first major issue. If we agree to stay together, then the next issue to agree on is terms and conditions of staying together. That will be in form of giving ourselves a constitution that is from the people.

    ‘‘The constitution drawn by the people will be subject to a referendum before it becomes the peoples’ constitution. We urge national assembly to enact a law that will formalise the conference which will involve various ethnic groupings that make up Nigeria,’’ Ubani said.

    Ikeji said the conference should be allowed to flow naturally and the compromises reached subject to a national referendum, the result of which shall form the fulcrum of a new constitution, which itself should also be subject to a referendum. He further said the people must have an overriding imprimatur on the emergent constitution else, the exercise may end up in futility.

    He said there must be consensual and deliberated gravitation from the ethnic units to the national centre.

    ‘‘We lost our way right from 1914 when instead of asking that Nigerians discuss whether or not we should come together to be the same country, our nationalists were only concentrating on political independence and power, with due respect to them.

    ‘‘It will be fool-hardy to deny that Nigeria has ethnic nationalities and the appropriate process of building a nation out of such a diverse expression is to gravitate deliberately and consensually from the ethnic units to the national centre.

    ‘‘Trying to gravitate from the national centre to the ethnic units can only continue to put us in the present quagmire we are expressing as a nation. It just cannot work that way as it means building a nation from the top to the bottom, a contradiction in terms.

    ‘‘There has to be deliberate consensus by individuals to live together as one and that, in my view, is what the national conference should aim to achieve. It means going back to pre-1914 era of how we lived, metaphorically.

    ‘‘It also involves making the people deliberate stakeholders in the Nigerian grundnorm. The present constitution, as we all know, is a decree masquerading as a constitution,’’ Ikeji added.

     

  • People’s confab

    People’s confab

    •Senate’s support for a national conference is welcome, but it must be held in accordance with the People’s Will

     

    THE conditional support given by Senate President David Mark to the call for a national conference where the Nigerian people would come together to review the state of the union and come up with a Peoples Constitution is welcome. Coming so soon after Senator Mark had dismissed the demand at the National Conference of the Nigerian Bar Association in Calabar, it is an indication that the ruling elite may be getting converted to the view that the fundamental problems of the country could no longer be swept under the carpet. They need to be discussed frankly in a conference where the basic working conditions of the country could be revisited.

    President Goodluck Jonathan had toed the same line while receiving a delegation of The Patriots who had consistently canvassed the option. He said the issue was being discussed within government and identified how to get the National Assembly to accommodate the call as the major obstacle.

    However, while we welcome the shift in the position of the heads of the Legislature and the Executive arm of government, it is our view that they are not in a position to dictate the powers to be conferred on the conference. We are miffed by the insistence of Senator Mark that the conference cannot be ‘sovereign’ since there is a sovereign government in place and the 1999 Constitution has vested all lawmaking power in the Legislature.

    This is a rehash of the position canvassed by former President Olusegun Obasanjo, that sovereignty resided in his government and he was unwilling to cede any portion of it to an ad hoc body. This could only have stemmed from a poor understanding of the working of democracy. Under the system, power is derived from the people. It is in realisation of this that the constitution lied in its preamble that “We, the people give ourselves this constitution.” It was neither subjected to a national debate where all legitimate constituent groups were invited, nor was it submitted to a national referendum for approval.

    It is in this light that we associate with the popular demand for a national conference with full constituent power. Sovereignty belongs to the Nigerian people and what government enjoys is delegated authority. This point has been eloquently made by eminent constitutional lawyers, including Professor Ben Nwabueze who leads The Patriots.

    The late Chief Gani Fawehinmi made the point in 2000 when he said: “The primary duty of the Sovereign National Conference is to address and find solutions to the key problems afflicting Nigeria since 1914 to date. The concern is to remove all obstacles which have prevented the country from establishing political justice, economic justice, social justice, cultural justice, religious justice, and to construct a new constitutional framework in terms of the system of government – structurally, politically, economically, socially, culturally and religiously.” This is an unassailable submission.

    The basis of the Nigerian union agreed by leaders of the various component regions just before independence was a federation where the federating units retained a large measure of autonomy. Each of the three regions complemented the federal constitution with its separate constitution that spelt out how it wished to be run within the powers conferred on it by the negotiated federal constitution.

    The incursion of the military to the political arena scuttled the federal structure and sowed the seeds of structural distortions and imperfection that have become the source of the perennial tension and instability in the land.

    It is time to review the development of Nigeria with a view to removing the factors that have impeded growth. A Sovereign National Conference has become inevitable. It is not subject to the whims of those who are adept at exploiting the subsisting system to their advantage. The Nigerian people deserve the best and should not be held down by a phantom belief that such a conference could lead to the country’s disintegration.

     

  • Nigeria hosts scout confab

    Nigeria will play host to the 10th Africa Regional Conference of the World Association of Girl Guides and Girl Scouts (WAGGGS), the largest voluntary movement dedicated to the development girls and young women in the world from 11-17 next week.

    The conference which opens at the Nigeria Union of Teachers (NUT) Pavillion in Agidingbi, Lagos, has as theme: “African Young Women: Soaring towards Excellence.”

    A statement from the WAGGGS however noted that the remaining activities including workshops, consultations, exhibition, elections of the Africa committee members, and others will hold at the Lagos Airport Hotel, Ikeja.

    Youth delegates for the conference are expected to arrive on Saturday for a Regional Youth Consultation on Sunday. The statement said the aim of the organisation is to empower girls to change the world.

    “With 10 million Girl Guides and Girl Scouts from 145 countries across the world, our mission is to enable girls and young women to develop their fullest potential as responsible citizens of the world.”