The Nation Newspaper

Tag: Federalism

  • Fragile councils groaning under lopsided federalism

    Fragile councils groaning under lopsided federalism

    The local government system is at crossroads. Since the restoration of civil rule in 1999, it has been at the centre of acrimony between the federal and state governments. The 1999 Constitution is not clear on its status within the lopsided federal structure. There are 774 councils listed in the constitution. Their functions are critical to the welfare of the local areas. But, many of them are not living up to expectation as vehicles for effective grassroots democracy and development because they are handicapped by certain constraints which have retarded their growth. Is local government a third tier? Apart from the lack of consensus on the status of the local government, there is no unified system. In some states, the elected council enjoys a three year-tenure. In others, chairmen and councillors are elected to serve for two years. In few states, they enjoy a renewable tenure of four year tenure. Today, 17 of 36 states of the federation have refused to conduct council elections. Also, the debate for council autonomy has polarised the polity. The local government is a creation of the state government, but both federal and state governments flex muscles over the power of financial control. Can the local government be repositioned for effective service delivery at the grassroots? Deputy Editor EMMANUEL OLADESU revisits its importance, prospects, constraints and critical areas requiring additional reforms.

    Local government system is in a fix in Nigeria. It is the closest to the grassroots. But, in terms of service delivery, it has not sufficiently lived up to its billings as the beacon of hope for rural dwellers. Although local governments are created for the purpose of easy administration at the grassroots, many of them are always struggling to perform their statutory functions due to financial constraints. 

    As the appendage of the state government, the structure is under-developed. Not only are councils performing below expectation across board, its prospects as an autonomous unit of administration is slim.

    The debate on the fate of the supposedly third tier of government is on the front burner. Discusssions among scholars, elected council functionaries and employees  now focus on the public perception of councils, the role of the legislative arm of local goverment, financial control over councils, duality of control on local government, expectations from local governments, and local government autonomy. 

    There are puzzles: Why is the council underfunded? Why do state governments perceive the local government, not as a tier of government, but more or less an extension of the state ministries and departments at the local level? Why are structures for function performance weak at the council? Why is the impact of the local government not felt?

    In the last 70 years, councils have operated under various nomenclatures as rural governments, urban councils, local authorities, district councils, town councils, local governments, municipal councils or local council development areas. Either under the military regime or civilian dispensation, local governments have always been relegated to the background.

    A political scientist, Boniface Ayodele, described the local government as a victim of the lopsided federal arrangement. He recalled that while councils were grappling with challenges of growth in the First Republic under the regional arrangement, their challenges multiplied under the military rule, despite the reforms introduced by successive administrations. “The constitution has not specified that the council is a third tier, unlike what we have in India and other countries. Here, it appears that they are mere local agencies of the state administration for the purpose of interface with the countryside”, he said.

    Under the military regime, local governments were created by the Federal Government. In 1999, the existing 774 councils were listed in the constitution. Since then, it has been difficult for the state government to create additional councils. When new councils were created by the Lagos State Government through the instrumentality of the House of assembly, they were not listed in the constitution. The Supreme Court did not condemn the process. But, it pointed out that they were incohate.

    Currently, money is allocated to the councils by the Federal Government from the Federation Account. This is irksome to the states, which is vested with the power to create or dissolve the councils under the constitution. Former Deputy Senate President, Ike Ekweremadu, has called for the upgrading of the council into the third tier, based on the clamour for council autonomy by some stakeholders. But, pro-federalism crusaders opposed the suggestion, saying that only two tiers-a central government and states-which are coordinate with the central government as component units, constitute the making of a true federation.

    There was furore over the reduction of the tenure of the elected local government from three to two years by some governors. In some states, governors even indicated that they would appoint supervisors, advisers and other aides for new council chairmen. 

    The channels for disbursing council funds have also become a bone of contention. When money is allocated to the councils, it does not go directly to the councils. It is deposited in the State/Local Government Joint Accounts (JAC). At the JAC Committee meeting, the council is a junior partner. There are allegations by local government workers that governors indulge in diverting council allocation through controversial deductions. The illegal deduction compelled President Goodluck Jonathan to suggest the separation of the State and Local Government Accounts. But, the move was criticised by the governors and their commissioners.

    Ayodele, who teaches at Ekiti State University (EKSU), Ado-Ekiti,  described the modern local government system in Nigeria ss an engendered specie. Unlike the councils of pre-indrpendence and independence eras, local governments have grossly failed to generate employment. “It has not stemmed the rural/ urban migration by youths due to the absence of economic, social and recreational facilities. Also, the council has become an avenue for private accumulation by elected chairmen and councillors,” he said.

    According to the United Nation’s Office of Public Administration, local government is “a political sub-division of a nation or state, which is constituted by law and has substantial control of local affairs, including the powers to impose taxes or to exact labour for prescribed purposes. The governing body of such an entity is elected or otherwise locally selected.” 

    But, renowned political scientist Prof. Godwin Odenigwe, pointed out that this grassroots structure is only meaningful, if councild really become the closest unit to the people in the true sense of the word. He argued that governance at local level means “communities and towns organised to maintain laws and order, provide some limited range of social services and public amenities and encourage the cooperation and participation of the inhabitants in joint endeavours towards the improvement of their living”.

    The “1976 Guidelines for a reform of local government in Nigeria” defined local government as the “government at local level exercised through representative councils established by law to exercise specific powers within defined areas. These powers should give the council substantial control over affairs as well as the staff and institutional and financial powers to initiate and direct the provision of services and to determine and implement projects so as to complement the activities of the state and Federal Government in their areas and to ensure, through devolution of functions to these councils and through active participation of the people that local initiative and response to local needs and conditions are maximised” 

    Justifying the need for a viable local government, the former Chief of Staff, Supreme Headquarters, the late Major General Sheu Musa Yar’Adua, submitted that “if stability at the national level is to be guaranteed, a firm foundation for a rational government at the local level is imperative. “

    Many analysts have noted that local government can be a solution to the participation crisis. It means an increase in the structures of participation and responsibility. However, this argument may be reduced to the elite’s cravings for more access to power and state resources.

    The foundation of local government system in Nigeria was erected on the colonial policy of indirect rule by the British. Up came the Colonial Native Authorities in rudimentary forms from 1890s to 1930s. To rule the colonised tribes through the existing chiefs and community elders under the emerging system was cost-effective. The approach was very successful in the northern part of the country where subjects deferred to their Emirs and chiefs in an atmosphere of stratification, and class and caste system. In the West, it was partially successful because the rulers’ actions were moderated by age-long checks and balance procedures, which prevented the exercise of absolute power. In the East, it was almost a failure. It was difficult to identify the traditional authorities in the essentially traditional kingless society. Thus, chiefs-in-council was established in the 30s and 40s.

    However, a university don, Prof. Kunle Ajayi, pointed out that the Native Authorities encountered a number of problems. The size of each native authority was small and its closed-door recruitment policy and lean resources made it difficult for them to attract qualified staff. There was no evidence that the Native Authorities, including the Sole Native Authorities, Chief-In Council, Chief-and-Council and Federated Authorities, were democratic in nature. Thus, it was very difficult to evolve a common approach to local government development. Since the colonial masters appointed them, the participation of educated nationalists in those structures was delayed. Also, since they lacked trained staff, specialised functions, especially the provision of water supply and education, became difficult.

    However, between 1950 and 1955, the trend changed. Elected councils emerged in Lagos, Eastern and Western Regions. The East set the pace, followed by the West in 1952, with the promulgation of the Local Government Law, which introduced a tier structure of democratic government in the council composed of 25 per cent of traditional rulers. In those early days, when illiterate traditional rulers and young educated nationalists cohabited as councillors, misunderstanding brewed between the two classes. It was difficult to resolve these tensions. An example was the protracted crisis between the late Chief Bode Thomas, chairman of Oyo Divisional Council, and the Alaafin of Oyo, the late Alhaji Adeniran Adeyemi 1, a councillor  in  council, and the late Chief Obafemi Awolowo and the Akarigbo of Remoland, the late Oba Williams Adedoyin,  who were both councillors in the old Remo Council. 

    Yet, historically, it was the glorious era of council administration. The elected councils were given a measure of autonomy in financial and personnel matters, and general administration. They had a wide range of functions, including primary education, health, police, and judiciary. 

    In the West, council prisons also existed. To enhance performance, they had the power to levy education and general rates. 

    In the North, the traditional rulers held sway for a longer period in the Native Authority, unlike in the South where the participation of educated citizens fostered pupilage in local administration. 

    But in both North and South, corruption was rampant. Modern politicians who served as councillors, including Alhaji Ahmadu Bello, Sardauna of Sokoto, and Alhaji Adegoke Adelabu, were even arraigned before authorities to render accounts as councillors and chairmen of councils.

    Between 1960 and 1975, local government was on the decline in power and responsibility. Attention had shifted to the federal, regional and state governments. In fact, local governments were reserved for failed House of Assembly and Representatives candidates in the sixties.

     In the West, the new Local Government Law of 1960 abolished the council’s power to levy education and general levies. The grants promised by the regional government was not fully paid. Between 1964 and 1974, local councils in the country lost a number of major functions. These include local government police and prisons. In the East, councils lost power of control over primary education. The outbreak of the civil war also affected the operation of the local government system in the East. 

    That was the situation until 1976 reforms which introduced the position of a ceremonial chairman working hollow along with the secretary, who was empowered as the chief executive. However, in 1989, presidential system was introduced at the local government, with the chairman becoming the chief executive presiding over an executive team of appointed supervisors on one hand and a team of electedccouncillors forming the legislative arm. Thus, there were checks and balances. The 2002 reforms undertaken by Obasanjo Administration more or less reinforced the 1976 input.

    However, while it is stipulated in the 1999 Constitution that democratically elected local governments are fully guaranteed, nearly half of the 774 local governments sharing allocations from the federal treasury are administered by caretaker bodies set up by governors. The governors’ second term ambition always shape the council polls as they often make sure that those elected as chairmen and councillors are lackeys who would coordinate their battle for second term at the grassroots.

    A sociologist, Prof. Peter Ekeh, has highlighted many challenges confronting the local government system. The State University of New York, Buffalo, United States lecturer said that they are designed to “serve as receptacles of their allotted share of the largesse from petroleum oil revenues distributed from the Federation Account.”

    He frowned at the shrinkage of official responsibilities and lack of service-delivery culture, unlike the earlier era. Their viability, sustainability and survival are also in doubt. Ekeh observed that most local governments would collapse, if they do not receive regular allocations from the central government. Apart from under-funding, other challenges include identity and role crisis, constitutional crisis, poor administration, lack of economic viability, and inept council bureaucracy. However, none of these challenges invalidate the justification for grassroots government.

    Former Secretary to Lagos State Government Olorunfunmi Basorun,  who had served as councillor in the old Ikorodu Council, described the local government as the den of the deadwood. He lamented that some council engineers are mere technical employees. Those who pose as council accountants are mere bookkeepers. “Officers are ill-trained and there is lack of expertise. The councils are poorly managed, poorly monitored and poorly assessed,” Basorun added. 

    However, he conceded that if they are positioned for effective performance, they can satisfy local yearnings. “The federal and state governments are distant levels of administration, aptly insensitive to local concerns and expectations. It is the council government the people can call their own because it is expected that they should have more access to it. But, today, the functions of the council are hijacked by the federal and state governments in the areas of primary education, refuse disposal and markets,” he stressed.

    Democracy, accountability and responsibility: 

    Local government scholars have evolved three approaches for the study of the local government system.

    The exponents of “Democracy and Accountability School of Local Government” perceive the local government system in its democratic character. To them, procedures in it should be open, transparent, verifiable, result-oriented and accountable. Local government is viewed as a training ground for political leaders. Thus, it is believed that career politicians can use the local government as a lever for acquiring political training and leadership qualities by first contesting as councillors at the local government area. That scope of apprenticeship may have been widened with the introduction of presidential system at the council level. 

    The implication is that councillors who have been exposed to the ‘know how’ of law making at the council level may proceed to the Houses of Assembly, Representatives and Senate. Lord James Bryce, who is a supporter of this school of thought, had this in mind when he remarked that “local government is that school of democracy and the best guarantee for its success is the practice of local self-government.”

    In the same vein, John Stuat Mill declared that local government is one of the free institutions which provide political education, especially the public education of citizens using the instrumentality of the council administration. This political education induces participation in the council affairs by people who are remote from the state and federal governments.

    Related to the democracy school of thought is the “Accountability and Control School of Thought”. When locals file out to cast their votes for the chairmen and councillors, they are participating in council affairs. It is thetefore, incumbent on the local electors to elect men of proven ability, intellect and competence. If they elect the right people, there will be development in the council. If they elect fraudsters, they suffer under-development. How to use the voting right effectively as a weapon of choice, change and rejection of leadership is the sole pre-occupation of this school of thought. It is a free choice with lots of implications for the citizens and the local polity. For example, if corrupt men and women are elected, they will drain the council treasury. Ajayi, who also teaches at EKSU, said: “If inexperienced people are elected, they will hinge their lack of performance on learning on the job. If competent people and men and women of honour and integrity are elected, they will deliver the dividends of democracy to the people”.

    The third is the “Responsibility School of Thought”. As a structure very close to the locality, local councils should serve as essential instrument for the performance of basic services, which could be best administered locally, based on the intimate knowledge of the needs, conditions and peculiarities of the areas concerned. Among these are chieftaincy, marriage, markets, local schools, primary health care and refuse disposal. 

    Owing to lack of expertise, working tools and enormity of the challenge, refuse disposal and construction of markets, have been taken over by some state governments.

    However, Prof. Ekeh attested to other specialised functions of the councils, which account for its peculiarity. These include sanitary inspection, town planning, water supply and market management by Town Councils, and local security, which is now prohibited by the constitution. 

    Before their derailment, old town and city councils performed these functions creditably and with minimum difficulties. “The personnel of such high profile town governments as Lagos Town Council rivaled that of the Central Government in the quality of employees they attracted. Thus, such giants in the history of Nigerian public service as Dr Ladipo Oluwole and Chief Adegbeji Salubi were employees of the Lagos Town Council in the 1930s and 1940s,” he recalled.

    The three schools provide a further linkage of ideas. The people elect, retain and fire councillors and chairmen, thereby giving expressions to the democratic character of the councils. The elected men and women perform clearly stated functions and they should be accountable. This makes them, to earn the respect of the local polity,  which may decide to send them to the state or federal level in furtherance of their services to the people.

    How are operative content be given to these linkages? 

    The democratic foundation of the councils in this dispensation is doubtful. Ayodele pointed out that councils have become working tools in the hands of ambitious political leaders. Since chairmanship and councillorship candidates run on the platforms of competing political parties for elections, there is the tendency to impose them on the councils. Thus, those invariably elected are the candidates of political barons and godfathers, and not essentially the candidates of the people. 

    As bastions of corruption, councils have often disappointed the people by their sheer ineptitude and lack of initiative. Council chairmen are usually overwhelmed by the resources at their disposal, although the funds are not enough, if they are development-conscious. To buttress this, a report by the Jide Jimoh House of Assembly Committee on Local Government Appropriation in Lagos State had harsh words for many council chairmen, who demonstrated lack of competence, to the detriment of the people they were elected to serve.

    Experts who have lamented the window-dressing approach to council administration stressed that the love of money, rather than the desire to serve, has been the motivation for jostling for chairmanship and councillorship seats at the councils. The poor quality of budgeting and project implementation by the councils attest to the poor standard of the councils across the country. Many chairmen and councillors lack the training to know these technicalities.

    Read ALso: Lagos introduces new transport programme as commissioner seeks support

    While on tour of the Lagos councils, following his assumption of office in 2007, Lagos State Governor Babatunde Fashola (SAN), was confronted by the rot in many council areas. Frowning at the ineptitude, he suggested some targets, which he said the chairmen should aspire to meet so that they could deliver dividends of democracy to the people.

    Many have argued that the internalisation of service-delivery orientation could prepare council operators for higher tasks at state and federal levels. This is why local government is viewed as a training ground for political leaders. A career politician is expected to use the lowest tier, or the third tier, as a lever for acquiring political training and leadership qualities by first contesting as councillors.

    In this regard, Lagos councils have served as training grounds for future leaders at regional, state and federal levels. They include Chief Rotimi Williams, former Attorney-General and Minister of Justice in the defunct Western Region, Prince Tajudeen Olusi, former Federal lawmaker,, the late Chief Mumuni Adio Badmus, former Lagos State Commissioner for Local Government and Chieftaincy Affairs, Chief Ganiyu Dawodu, Chief Enoch Ajiboso, Chief Lanre Rasaq, Dr Tola Kasali, Hon. Toyin Hamzat, Hon. Sesan Olanrewaju, Senator Adekunle Muse, Jide Jimoh, Senator Yemi Adaramodu, Senator Muniru Muse, and Senator Ganiyu Solomon. 

    In the earlier dispensation, the late Awolowo, Ahmadu Bello, AdekunlexAjasin, Chief Bode Thomas, Mazi Nbonu Ojike, Alhaji Adegoke Adelabu, and Alhaji Shetima Ali Mongonu began their elective political careers as councillors. That was the bright side of the earlier councils.

    Ayodele believes that as  elected agencies of the people, councils must be accountable to the people, who must continue to wield control over their functionaries. If corrupt men and women are not elected as chairmen and councillors, many corrupt politicians would be prevented from climbing the hierarchy of government at state and federal levels.

    Constitutional functions:

    However, the hands of the state governors have been heavy on the councils.

    The governors always postpone local government elections. Since the law says there should be elected councils, it is illegal to postpone it or refuse to hold it on time. Also, since it is the governor that will constitute the local government electoral commission, council elections are held in an atmosphere of minimal electoral reforms, making the opposition parties to be edged out of the local electoral process.

    The first step in decentralisation of power, for the pupose of reaching out to the rural areas and connecting the countryside with the state and federal government, is through the local government system.

    Since the localities differ across the diverse country, the peculiarities come to the fore through the sheer performance of those critical local functions dictated by local interest.

    In this regard, five important factors cannot be compromised.

    First, for local government to bring itself nearer to the people, the people must have input into the policy formulation and decision – making process at all times, either directly or through their representatives in the local legislature.

    Second, local government reflects the character of self-government when indigenes and residents participate directly its administration, composition of functionaries, and general staffing.

    Third, wider participation of the people in the affairs of the council should foster a sense of belonging.

    Fourth, local government should encourage initiatives and development of leadership potentials from the grassroots. To that extent, it can become a training ground for future state and national leaders.

    Fifth, local government can serve as a link or channel of communication between local communities and central authorities.

    The functions of local governments are not statutorily delegated by either the state or federal governments. However, there are instances where states and federal governments can collabotarate with councils in solving some probles facing some communities.

    The functions of local government as spelt out in Section 7(5) of the constitution is as follows:

    • Consideration and making of recommendations to the state commission on economic planning or any similar body on economic development of the state, particularly sin so far as the area of authority of the council and of the state are affected;

    • Collection of rates, radio and television licenses;

    • Establishment and maintenance of cemeteries, burial grounds and homes for the destitudes;

    • Licensing of bicycles, trucks (other than mechanically propelled trucks), canoes, wheel barrows and carts;

    • Establishment, maintenance and regulation of markets, motor parks and public conveniences;

    • Construction and maintenance of roads, streets, drains, and public highways, parks, open spaces, or such public facilities as may be prescribed from time to time by the House of Assembly of a state;

    • Naming of roads and streets and numbering of houses;

    • Provision and maintenance of public conveniences and refuse disposal;

    • Registration of births, deaths and marriages;

    • Assessment of privately-owned houses or tenements for the purpose of levying such rates as may be prescribed by the House of Assembly of a state, and

    • Control and regulation of out-door advertising and hoarding, movement and keeping of pets of all dispensations, shops and kiosks, restaurants and other places for sale of food to the public and laundries.

    In addition, local governments are also expected to work hand in hand on the provision and maintenance of primary education, development of agriculture and natural resources and provision and maintenance of health services.

    Instead of performing these functions, many local government chairmen nowadays neglect them and engage in dubious empowerment programmes to cover up their non-performance of these constitutional roles.

    Federal-state-council conflicts:

    Questions have however, been raised about the economic viability of the councils. This is debatable. Some local governments in the urban centres have capacity to generate substantial internally generated revenue that can assist them in the discharge of their developmental functions. In the same vein, there are councils in remotest parts of the country with little or nothing to fall back to, except the federal allocation.

    Nigeria is a federal state. According to Prof. K. C. Wheare, federalism connotes “the method of dividing powers so that “general” and “regional” governments are each, within a sphere, co-ordinate and independent”. This universally accepted proposition presupposes that, in federalism, only two centres of authority; the central and state governments, are recognised. Therefore, labeling the council as another tier of government is contentious. 

    However, it must be assumed that the abuse of the powers of control over the councils by the state and federal government compelled the agitation for an increased autonomy for councils.

    Crisis between state and local governments permeate the inter-governmental relationship. Across the federation, between 2007 and now council chairmen and governors have been at loggerheads over illegal deduction of council funds by the states, with governors threatening to sack chairmen who raised serious objection. For example, former Ekiti Central local government chairman, Hon. Taye Fasubaa, cried out that he was being victimised for objecting to the diversion of council funds and illegal deductions by the governor. In 2012, when President Jonathan suggested that the Joint State/Council Account (JAC) should be abrogated and local governments should receive its allocations directly from the federal purse without recourse to the governors, the suggestion did not go down well with the governors.

    In recent times, chairmen whose name had appeared in the black book of the governors forfeited their offices through the dissolution of the councils, in active connivance with the Houses of Assembly.

    In Ibarapa local government, former Governor Rashidi Ladoja delayed the swearing-in of the Alliance for Democracy (AD) council chairman, who defeated the candidate of his party, the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), at the poll. In fact, in some states in the Southeast, Southsouth, Southwest, and Northcentral, governors have resisted attempts to hold council elections, to the consternation of anxious aspirants.

    Local governments are also oppressed by the Federal Government. This suppression preceded the current democratic dispensation. In consonance with its centrist approach, the Abacha Administration dazed the country when it appointed a minister of local government.

    The 1999 Constitution, which is the legacy of Abdulsalami Administration, also created friction between the federal and state governments over the control of the local governments. The Federal Government insisted that states lacked the power to create more councils, claiming that all the councils have already been listed in the constitution. Former Katsina State Governor Umaru Yar’Adua, who later became President of Nigeria, had to retrace his steps by cancelling the newly created councils in the state, out of fear that the Federal Government would move against his government. 

    Actually, the power to create councils in Section 8(3) is vested in the House of Assembly. But Section 8(6) gives the power to ratify the creation and list newly created councils to the National Assembly. Many are clamouring for the review of the constitution to clear this area of friction.

    In Lagos State, Tinubu Administration created additional 37 local councils. Despite the fact that they were created by legitimate state authorities, the Federal Government disagreed. The allocations due to the pre-existing 20 local governments were seized by the Obasanjo Administration. Also, the Senate refused to list the new councils in the constitution, despite the referendum that gave nod to their creation.

    In fact, in a memo to the late President Umaru Yar’Adua, who had earlier directed that the withheld allocations should be released, the Federal Ministry of Justice advised him to terminate the newly created councils, saying that they were undermining the judiciary and challenging the authority of the Federal Government. 

    Irked by the incessant harassment, House of Representatives member, James Faleke, former chairman of one of the councils not listed; Ojodu Local Council Development Area (LCDA); said: “The victimisation of Lagos councils by the Federal Government undermines the right of Lagosians to development.”

    Crisis of control:

    The distant Federal Government has been battling the states for political and financial control of the councils. The former Federal Attorney-General, Mallam Abubakar Malami, once fired a ‘query’ to Oyo State Governor Seyi Makinde, asking him to explain why disciplinary action should not be taken again his government for the dissolution of ‘elected’ councils.

    The Attorney-General of the Federation alluded to a subsisting judgment by the Supreme Court that governors lack the constitutional power to dissolve elected councils.

    The states are resisting the Federal Government’s move to curtail their power of control over councils, saying that the ‘Central’ Government is over-stepping its bounds.

    To state authorities, local governments are extension of states created for the ease of administration at the grassroots. It is an understatement. The power for the creation of councils is vested in the House of Assembly, which is expected to pass a bill to law in that regard. The power is being curtailed now because of the refusal of the National Assembly to amend the constitution to permit the listing of newly created councils.

    Armed with the constitution, Oyo State Attorney-General  Prof. Oyelowo Oyewo fired back at the minister. In his response to the curious query, he explained that “it is the Law of the State Government that is to ensure the existence of the system of democraticaly elected Local Government by providing for the establishment, structure, composition, finance and functions of such  councils, and not a Federal Law or Act.”

    The professor said it is not clear under what Act of the National Assembly the Minister of Justice was acting in writing his memo.

    Oyewo alluded to the principle of federalism. He said the 1999 Constitution has established a federal system of government whereby the state government is not under the command of the Federal Governmeny; neither is the country in the military era when the Federal Military Government could give a binding order to the state government by mere proclamation and at will

    Battle for autonomy:

    In many states, the fledgling councils, motivated by pro-autonomy crusaders, are at loggerheads with governors. Local government personnel, led by the National Union of Local Government Employees, (NULGE) and Association of Local Government Chairmen (ALGON), also want councils to lean on the power-loaded Federal Government for imaginary liberation from perceived oppression by state governments. Local government employees are agitating for council autonomy, or freedom, as if the state is a replica of the colonial master.

    To NULGE and ALGON, there is justification for the quest for financial autonomy. 

    In the past, local councils were entitled to 10 percent of state’s internally generated revenue. Also, Basorun recalled that “under the Jakande administration in Lagos State, local governments executed some local projects which were statutory funded by the state government.”

    But what is in vogue now is the diversion of council funds by state governments across states. According to the Bureau of Statistics and Office of Accountant of the Federation, N15.5 million was transferred to states on behalf of 774 councils between 2007 and 2019. But, NULGE alleged that the bulk of the allocations were diverted in the last 12 years with impunity. The Joint Accounts Allocation Committee created by Section 162 (6,7and 8) of the 1999 Constitution, is usually mismanaged. 

    Few months ago, Ijebu East Council Chairman, Wale Adedayo, cried out that the diversion of allocation to his council by Ogun State government has rendered it into an ineffective unit of administration. Promptly, he was isolated and impeached by his councillors. Also, Omotunde Fajuyi, former chairman of Ado local government in Ekiti State alleged that the highest allocation sent to her council was N5.5 million monthly, despite signing for N100 million. 

    Lending credence to this, former President Muhammadu Buhari had decried the emasculation of the local council. He said:”If the monies from the Federal Government to state governments is N100 million,  N50 million will be sent to the council chairman with a letter that he will sign that he received N100 million. 

    Irked by that corrupt tendency, the Nigerian Financial Intelligence Unit (NFIU) issued a warning to the governors to desist. But, the Nigerian Governors’s Forum (NGF), then led by former Zamfara State Governor Abdulaziz Yari, kicked, saying that NFIU had stepped beyond its boundary and flouted the “federal” constitution of 1999. 

    To Ayodele, “the military had used council creation to play politics through its lopsided distribution across regions, with financial implications.” He said since money comes from the centre, states with larger number of councils are in advantageous positions to benefit more. 

    The political scientist said the battle for council autonomy cannot be easily won, adding that states, and not local governments, are federating units or component units of the federation. “If you remove the local governments from the states, what remains? The states are no more. The local government cannot be a federating unit.”

    He also distinguished between political control of the councils by states and semblance of financial control by the Federal Government. Ayodele clarified that the theoretical financial control wielded by the Federal Government is limited to fund provision or occasional withholding of allocation, which is largely unpopular, whereas the state can exercise political control of creating councils and power of discipline over erring council chairmen through the House of Assembly. 

    Reiterating that council autonomy is absolutely impossible within the current framework of the Nigerian constitution, he said:” Local government system is constitutionally provided for,  but it negates the spirit of true federalism as local govt cannot be a federating unit in the kind of federation we operate. Local government is first and foremost part of a constituting region,  or state.”

    He added: “On funding: local government is also statutorily provided for in the constitution. But it’s autonomy has been eroded by the state government. Can it be right for the state government to erode the financial autonomy?  The Nigerian constitution is very confusing as to the financial autonomy of the local government. On the sentimental question of whether it is right or wrong, the answer may may be yes and no.”

    Towards effective service delivery:

    How have the existing councils fared nationwide? Have they justified the people’s confidence? In Lagos, the House of Assembly members were still inundated with complaints during the town hall meetings that many chairmen showcased cosmetic achievements.

    One of the bane of the councils is the bloated bureaucracy. Many experts think that the councils should trim down so that the money spent on maintaining gigantic structures could be deployed to capital expenditure. For example, it has been pointed out that the ‘council cabinet’ is too large and burdensome. Council chairmen maintain extensive political structures. They appoint too numerous supervisory councillors, special advisers, special assistants and personal assistants like the president and governors, making the recurrent expenditure to soar. This is at the expense of capital expenditure. 

    There is also the need for reforms in other areas of council administration, particularly in making sure that the trio of chairman, council manager and treasurer are closely monitored to prevent outright embezzlement and misappropriation of funds. 

    To improve efficient service delivery, stakeholders have offered some suggestions. 

    Basorun suggested that local governments should localise administration by implementing a formula for conducting need analysis through the involvement of Community Development Associations/ Committees.

    Chairmen and council should hold Town Hall meetings regularly to collate input into the local policy formulation and implementation. 

    Procedure for public accountability should be created and strengthened in the local government. 

    House of Representatives member Ademorin Kuye,  a former Somolu Council Chairman, said the House of Assembly should closely monitor the financial activities of the councils to reduce corruption. Also, there is need to maintain small political bureaucracy to avoid an upsurge in recurrent expenditure. 

    The Ministry of Local Government and Chieftaincy Affairs should evolve mechanism for proper monitoring and evaluation of council developmental projects.

    Basorun said leadership recruitment at the council level should be looked into. He supported the idea that retired men and women of integrity should serve as part-time councillors and supervisors, instead of young men who are in a hurry to make money. 

    Some experts have also suggested that the Code of Conduct Bureau should vet the material acquisition of council functionaries, based on their prior financial status as reflected in their asset declaration forms.

    The Community Development Committees (CDCs) have roles to play in council leadership recruitment. They should resist attempts to impose councillorship and chairmanship candidates on their wards,and councils by godfathers and other external forces who are estranged from the aspirations of the particular council. 

    “All these suggestions mean that reform of the local government system is an unfinished business. There is need for more reforms,” Ayodele  said.

  • Good for federalism

    That the Lagos and Ogun state governments have applied to take over the management of the Lagos-Ota-Abeokuta Expressway, the Ikorodu-Sagamu Road and the Ijebu Ode-Epe Road, has thrilled not a few. It is even more cheery that the Federal Government has, in principle, agreed to the hand-over.

    There is something fundamentally awry with the present structure of road ownership and maintenance. The idea of “federal roads” in states ought to be urgently revisited. The ultimate goal would be the full federalisation of roads. If that happens, every state would take total control of every road in its territory.

    But going with that will need fiscal tinkering: to move matching cash to states for their new road responsibilities, away from the soggy Federal Government purse. Still, that is in the short run. In the long run of full re-federalisation (or to use the popular term, “restructuring”), the states that milk their resources and just pay the central government its share in taxes and royalties, will fully budget for the construction and maintenance of these roads, without any Federal Government involvement. That would be the ultimate.

    But to the present Lagos-Ogun proposal. Dapo Abiodun, governor of Ogun State, speaking at his investiture as honorary patron of the Abeokuta Club, explained the joint Lagos-Ogun take-over bid of, for instance, the Lagos-Ota-Abeokuta Road. He said the last contract for that road’s reconstruction was in 2001. A N26 billion debt reportedly still hangs on the road. Yet, N1 billion is voted to maintain the road every year.

    Given the math therefore, by dwindling resources across the board, it’s almost sure the road won’t be completed. Hence, he further explained, the Public sector-Private sector-Participation (PPP) decision, by which the two states would permit private sector players to rebuild the roads and toll them to recoup their investment.

    Across the board, this would appear a very good decision. It is good the Federal Government has also given approval to embrace the move. The other two roads, the Ikorodu-Sagamu Road and the Ijebu Ode-Epe Road, which passes by Imagbon and Isiwo in Ogun State and links up with Mojoda in Lagos, were very vital – and busy – inter-state roads, before they were all abandoned for the Lagos-Ibadan Expressway. Even then, the poor maintenance of the Lagos-Ibadan Expressway, and its eventual decay, before its current reconstruction, made sure all these four roads practically collapsed.

    Rehabilitating these other three roads, therefore, makes a lot of sense, if the new-look Lagos-Ibadan Expressway, expected to be delivered by December 2020, is to last. If other state governors nationwide could embrace such strategic thinking on roads within their jurisdiction, fuelled by the best practices of regional cooperation and integration, the country would be far better off for it. Good thinking, it goes without saying, by the two governments.

    Still, the tolling aspect must be approached rather carefully, aside from the governments giving out more details. Does it mean the roads would be tolled for a period to enable the investors recoup their investment? Or would they be permanently tolled, for maintenance and maybe future reconstruction and expansion? All these details should be in the public space.

    Still, a final word: we wonder if this arrangement would have been possible, if the applying states come from a different party that controls the Federal Government. The answer is probably no – and that is where Nigerian politics trumps development or even common sense. That amounts to net regression, in the people’s welfare, instead of progress, the very reason for politics and governance.

    Let this, therefore, be the beginning of a convention in which mutual growth, progress and development prevail over temporary political gains. That would not only deepen governance, it would also deepen democracy, development and prosperity.

  • 1966 coup and demise of federalism

    The coup of January 15, 1966 marked the demise of federalism. Major-General Thomas Aguiyi-Ironsi, who emerged as the military Head of State following the failed coup, dismantled the federal structure and foisted the unitary system on the beleaguered country. Fifty-three years after, Nigeria is still agitating for its restoration. Group Political Editor EMMANUEL OLADESU examines the genesis of the lopsided federal structure and the intense clamour for restructuring.

    FIFTY-three years after, the mistakes of the January 15, 1966 coup is still haunting Nigeria. The country is yet to fully recover from the military misadventure. The fall of the First Republic marked the demise of federalism. The question is: when will the federal principle be restored?

    It was a day of disaster and bitterness. Not only were Prime Minister Abubakar Tafawa Balewa, Minister of Finance Fetus Okotie-Eboh and Premiers Ahmadu Bello (Northern Region) and Ladoke Akintola (Western Region) killed, senior military officers — Brig. Ademoyega Ademulegun and his wife, Brigadier Zachariya Maimalari, Lt-Col. Yakubu Pam, Lt-Col. Abogo Largema, Col. Kur Mohammed, and Lt-Col. Unegbe, and Col. Ralph Sodeinde — were killed by the mutineers, led by the late Major Kaduna Nzeogwu. The coup opened a floodgate of coups and illegal seizure of governments until the restoration of civil rule in 1999.

    However, having aborted the first coup, the General Officer Commanding (GOC) the Armed Forces, Major-General Thomas Aguiyi-Ironsi appropriated its gains by seizing power at gunpoint from the Council of Ministers left behind by the slain Prime Minister. Since he was not prepared for the sudden challenges of self-imposed leadership, the military Head of State wobbled on in his cluelessness and lack of vision. His singular act of abrogating the federal principle and foisting of the unitary system created the mess that has not been cleared more than five decades after.

    The coup divided the fragile nation-state that was still struggling to find its feet in the comity of nations, barely six years after independence. Contrary to the plan of the five majors, not all the targets were hit. Those who survived were from a particular section of the country. The ceremonial president, Dr. Nnamdi Azikiwe, was on medical vacation abroad. The Igbo premiers of the defunct Midwest and Eastern regions, the late Chiefs Denis Osadebey and Michael Okpara, were spared by coup plotters. While the West bore the tragedy with philosophical calmness, the North perceived the tribulation as a deliberate attempt by Igbos to achieve political superiority through bloodletting. Obviously, that perception was the baseline for the retaliatory coup of July 29, 1999, which later claimed the lives of Ironsi and his host, Lt-Col. Adekunle Fajuyi, military governor of the defunct Western State.

    The renewed clamour for decentralisation, devolution and restructuring provokes a memory the tragic diversion from the federal principle, which was the bond of unity in diversity at independence. The mutiny of 1966 was a turning point. “This date marked the effective explosion of the military on the Nigerians political arena,” noted Isawa Elaigwu, Professor of Political Science, in his book: ‘Gowon: Biography of a soldier-statesman. But, military rule produced more devastating effects later. “It led to bureaucratic centralism,” said Bisi Akande, a former Osun State governor, who added: “General Olusegun Obasanjo’s military regime (1976 to 1979) amended Decrees No 13 of 1970 and No 9 of 1971 and thus began the unfortunate transfer of the states’ residual functions to the Central Government.”

    Since Ironsi was naturally slow in decision making, the eclipse of the federal structure was gradual. He enacted Decree Number 1, 1966, which suspended the fundamental democratic structures. But, despite the termination of the legislature and the executive, the autonomy of the states were not totally tampered with. The regional military governors still had the power to make law for the law and good order of their respective regions. The only requirement was that, in making laws, the governors — Lt.Col Hassan Katsina (North), Fajuyi (West), Lt.-Col. David Ejoor (Midwest) and Lt-Col. Chukwuemeka Odimegwu-Ojukwu (East) — were mandated to consult with the Federal Military Government. That mandatory consultation did not exist during the civilian rule.

    But, Ironsi latter opted for increased centralisation and dictatorship, which for 29 years, were sustained by successive military interlopers and marauders. Unfortunately, he also died on the altar of crass opportunism, ineptitude, shallow experience, and lack of political skill.

    His death sparked off a row among senior officers over succession and political control. His deputy, Brigadier Babafemi Ogundipe, could not succeed him as Northern soldiers, decked in the garb of ethnicity, disobeyed his orders. He was upstaged by Army Chief Col. Yakubu Gowon, to the consternation of Eastern Region Military Governor Odimegwu-Ojukwu, who while protesting the abnormality, plunged the anxious country into a three-year old civil war.

    The crisis of federalism preceded Ironsi’s ascension to power. He only came to compound it. According to J.S Mill’s law of federal stability, “a federation is morbid, if one part is bigger than the sum of the other parts.” In the view of Dr. Gbade Ojo, a political scientist, Nigeria mirrored the absurdity because in terms of land mass, the North had 71 per cent, East 8.3 per cent and West 8.5 per cent. That led to the fear of domination by the entire South. Thus, among certain objections raised about the federal structure were size and lack of equilibrium, despite the fact that the “federal adjustment” between 1960 and 1966 was obviously in the direction of “further differentiation and autonomy”, based on the psychological fears of political and economic domination among ethnic nationalities.

    Although the proponent of federalism, Prof. K.C. Wheare, had argued that in a federal state, it is undesirable that one or two units should not be so powerful that they can overrule the others and bend the will of the Federal Government to themselves, The Northern Region was more powerful in Nigeria than other regions. The awful picture of the lopsided federal structure reflected the Northern numerical superiority, accounting for 53 per cent of the population by 1963 Census, as compared to the East’s 22.3 per cent, the West’s 18.4 per  cent, the Midwest’s 4.6 per cent and Lagos’ 1,2 per cent. The fear of domination and marginalisation was accentuated by the stiff competition for power at the centre.

    However, the fear was mitigated by a sense of autonomy, due to power devolution. The Central Government, then and now, has remained a distant government remote from the grassroots. In the days of Balewa, Bello, Akintola, Okpara and Osadebey, there was the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. But, each of the regions also had its separate constitution and sphere of influence, which were never trampled upon by the federal authority. Regional governments were not uniform because the regions were different in terms of culture, language, aspiration, resources and development. The priorities of the regions and the approaches for goal attainment were different. Each region developed according to its pace, based on its natural endowment. There was a healthy competition in an atmosphere of ‘true’ federalism.

    The derivation principle, which is the major bone of contention in fiscal federalism, was enshrined in the 1960 Constitution, and later, 1963 Republican Constitution. A pro-restructuring crusader, Ethelbert Okere, noted that the clause rekindled hope about equity, until it was totally abrogated by Ironsi’s successor, Gowon, through the enactment of Decree 51, which later became the Petroleum Act (1990).

    The gains of the dispensation were wiped out by the thoughtless Unification Decree introduced by Ironsi. Although he was not the architect of the coup, led by Nzeogwu, he became the major beneficiary of the plot that had adorned an ethnic colouration. The national emergency required the deployment of mental capacity and political subtlety. The military leader, as noted by Elaigwu, was deficient in the two traits. Ironsi failed to punish the mutineers, thereby restoring discipline in the military and appeasing the affected regions for the murder of their military and political leaders. He was also insensitive to the public mood, thereby making it appear that he was dancing to the tune of those who perceived the coup as a revolutionary act.

    The Commander-In-Chief embarked on the radical reforms of the federal-regional relations. The result was the greater centralization of power through unitarism. He set up the Nwokedi Commission to make proposals for the unification of the civil service, a move that infuriated the North. The regions were not represented fully; two regional representatives who sat with the sole commissioner had no input into the final report. Before the exercise, regional civil service was operated in a way that made it to respond to regional peculiarities and need for development. Also, Ironsi begun the implementation of his unitary agenda without waiting for the report of the Constitutional Review Study Group headed by the late Chief Rotimi Williams, which he had earlier set up.

    On May 24, 1966, Ironsi announced Decree No 34, 1966, which made Nigeria a unitary state.” Ironsi said: “Nigeria shall on the 24th May, 1966 cease to be a federation and shall accordingly as from that day be a republic by the name of the Republic of Nigeria, consisting of the whole territory, which immediately before that day was comprised in a federation.

    He added: “As from the appointed day, all officers of the services of the Republic in a civil capacity shall be officers in a single service to be known as the National Public Service, and accordingly, all persons who immediately before that day were members of the public services of the federation or of the public service of a region shall on that day become members of the National Public Service.”

    The polity was caught unaware by the sudden radical change. Federalism has been abolished. Also, the former regions ceased to exist. The country was regrouped into a number of territorial areas. The new nomenclature was the province. To replace the Federal Military Government was a National Military Government. There were no prior consultations with leaders of opinion. In sowing the seeds of discord and political violence, Ironsi and his advisers, who were of the same tribe with him, ensured that the new decree was not extensively discussed at the Supreme Military Council and the Federal Executive Council, although they carried the military governors along.

    The Head of State explained the motivation for imposing a unitary structure.  He said the unification decree was intended to remove the last vestiges of intense regionalism of the recent past and to produce that coercion in the government structure, which is so necessary in achieving and maintaining the paramount objective of the National Military Government and national unity.

    To the political class, the move was retrogressive. They thought that reason would still prevail because they were confident that Williams’ Study Group would not endorse the practice of unitary system. The military Head of State alluded to the panel’s work, saying that the decree he had introduced was to be a transitional measure and without prejudice to the “constitutional and administrative arrangements to be embodied in the new constitution in accordance with the wishes of the people of Nigeria”.

    Dissecting Ironsi’s style, many historians believe that he was ill-prepared for the great task. He was an emergency leader without a vision for running a plural society. Reflecting on the coup in his book, ‘A combatant in Government,’ former Oyo State Military Governor David Jemibewon suggested that “the inevitability of the collapse of the Ironsi regime can readily be appreciated; for the Majors who planned and executed the coup in the end neither assumed responsibility for the running of the government nor had a say in the appointment of Major-General Ironsi to the headship of the military government that came into being through their action.”

    The North was still aggrieved by the death of Balewa and Premier Ahmadu Bello. The emirs raised an eyebrow. Northerners perceived the unification of the civil service as the most annoying aspect of the decree. The ill-fated National Military Government maintained that it could not maintain five governments and separate civil services, because it was not a civilian government. In fact, the West, like the North, felt threatened. On May 27, 1966, riots broke out in the North. Many Igbos were killed. Ironsi could not nip the crisis in the bud, owing to the apparent fragility of the military in an atmosphere of ethnic suspicion. The Commander-In-Chief compounded the grave situation when he approved military promotions. Out of 21 officers that were promoted, 18 were Igbos.  He also shunned the agitation for state creation, especially for minority groups, thereby losing their confidence. For example, the suggestion for creation of a Middle-Belt State was contrary to the long-term plan of Ironsi’s advisers whose aim was to unify the country and not to create further regions with their wasteful duplication of ministries and another independent civil service that would discriminate against Igbos.

    Elaigwu, who faulted the timing of the unpopular political engineering, said: “Political engineering demands the ability to know the environment well, to feel the political temperament of the system, and to know the limits to which decisions can be taken without threatening the basic consensual values which bind the society together.”

    By June 1966, the discontent in the Army had grown beyond proportions. The detained coup plotters were still in jail. But, they were still on the pay roll. That was infuriating to many Northern military officers who wanted to avenge the death of slain Northern political and military leaders. A tribunal headed by Col. Nwawo was set up to try the plotters, but the dates of trial were being postponed. The fallen officers were not accorded ceremonial burial befitting men of honour.

    The Army ceased to be a united institution. Rumours of coups filled the air. It was during the period of national anxiety that Ironsi embarked on the tour of the regions to douse the tension he had aggravated. He did not return alive. At Ibadan, Northern forces, led by Major Yakubu Danjuma and Lt. Walbe, murdered the Head of State and his host, Fajuyi.

    Successive military governments built on Ironsi’s legacies. Although states were created, their creation did not reflect the clamour for federalism. The Federal Military Government moved swiftly to seize the states’ assets without consultation and compensation. The police administration was centralized and the central government acquired more powers under the Exclusive List. This further decimated the powers of the state and local governments in the Concurrent and Residual lists. The revenue allocationis skewed, making states to go cap in hand to Abuja, the seat of power, to beg for allocations.

    Reactions to centralisation have sparked off protests and agitations, especially in the Niger Delta by militants, in the West by Afenifere, and the National Democratic Coalition (NADECO). Although civil rule was restored in 1999, it has not terminated the unitary system. Two national conferences (2004 and 2014) were held in Abuja, their vital recommendations did not see the light of the day. Recently, the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) set up a committee to look at the prospects of federalism. No action has followed, except the proposed theoretical decentralization of police funding.

    To many Nigerians, ‘true’ federalism us non-negotiable. “Except we restructure our county, we can’t have competition among the zones. If we don’t do that, we might just be seeking for disunity of our country,” said Ike Nwachukwu, retired soldier and former Minister of External Affairs.

    To Bishop Mathew Kukah, scholar and cleric, restructuring is a constitutional matter. Therefore, he said the National Assembly should make it a priority.

    An activist, Annko Briggss, said restructuring will allow for political autonomy and grant 100 per cent ownership and control of the oil resources in the Niger Delta by the people of the region.

    Echoing her, Yinka Odumakin, Afenifere chieftain, said: “There is need to restructure the country and make Nigeria go back to the true practice of federalism where the mineral resources that about in all stateswould be free from the Exclusive List. “

    Arthur Nwankwo, Peoples Trust (PT) vice presidential candidate said: “Restructuring of Nigeria has no alternative. It is the only road to its survival.”

    NADECO leader Ndubusi Kanu, a retired soldier, urged Nigeria to return to the road that led it to independence in 1960. “So long as it remains a unitarised centre, so long shall we continue facing forward and moving backwards,” he concluded.

     

     

  • Buhari not against true federalism, says Campaign Organisation 

    President Muhammadu Buhari is not opposed to restructuring of the country to reflect true federalism, it was learnt yesterday.

    This position was contained in a document entitled: “Buhari/Osinbajo 2019 – A Basic Guide – The Campaign Manual in Brief” circulated during the Next Level 2019 Buhari/Osinbajo presentation at the old Banquet Hall of the State House, Abuja.

    The Muhammadu Buhari Campaign Organisation (MBCO) was presenting facts as against what it describes as fiction about Buhari’s administration not believing in restructuring.

    “The President has never indicated he would oppose any move by the National Assembly to carry out constitutional amendments to fully reflect true federalism,” it stated.

    It also claimed that President Buhari was not “cunning” and “deceitful” like some other candidate, apparently referring to the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) presidential candidate, former Vice President Atiku Abubakar.

    The document reads: “The President himself is not a cunning and deceitful character like some other candidate, who knows he does not have the powers to single-handedly restructure the country through constitutional amendments and would engage in giving a time-frame within which the country would be restructured.”

    Atiku had recently promised to restructure the country within six months of assuming office as President.

    Towards restructuring the country, the document recalled that the All Progressives Congress (APC) in 2017 set up a committee headed by Kaduna State Governor Nasir el-Rufai, which submitted a report with far reaching recommendations.

    It also pointed out that Vice President Yemi Osinbajo, in all his public outings throughout the years, has advocated restructuring and true federalism.

    The document also devoted a section to the 16 years “misrule” of the PDP and Atiku’s alleged corrupt practices.

    It gave reasons why Nigerians sent PDP packing in 2015 and how nothing has changed, and listed some of the allegations against former President Olusegun Obasanjo and former Vice President Atiku Abubakar.

    The document reads: “As President and Vice President, President Obasanjo and Alhaji Atiku Abubakar granted themselves university licences and were building their universities whilst ASUU was on strike severally at that period.

    “In the same vein, Alhaji Atiku Abubakar co-founded Intels in 1982 in clear breach of the code of conduct for public officers.”

    The document also highlighted the sins of PDP to include political assassinations/unresolved murders,  executive lawlessness, electoral malpractices,  illegal seizure of Lagos funds, disastrous privatisation programme.

    It also denied allegations that President Buhari was condoning corruption and spearheading a one-sided anti-graft war.

    The document also denied allegation that President Buhari does not abide by the rule of law or disobeying court orders.

    It also said that Buhari’s actions or inactions could not have caused the farmers/herders crises as it preceded his administration.

  • True federalism panacea to Nigeria’s security challenges – Lawmaker

    True federalism panacea to Nigeria’s security challenges – Lawmaker

    The Deputy Majority Leader of the Lagos State House of Assembly, Mr Olumuyiwa Jimoh, on Monday said that entrenchment of true federalism would address the nation’s security and other challenges.

    Jimoh, representing Apapa Constituency II at the Assembly, told the newsmen in Lagos that the current system had not made effective and efficient security possible.

    According to him, security of the nation can only improve if the federating states are empowered through devolution of powers.

    “As we see new acts of bombing, kidnapping especially in the North East, this shows everything is not well and we must not pretend as if things are all right.

    “So, we need to intensify efforts in improving our security by entrenching true federalism. We must address our federalism. In true federalism, states are being empowered.

    “The present federalism is affecting our security because there is no adequate security that can be provided for the people by the central government alone.

    “The entire Nigeria Police Force is not up to 200, 000 and we have 36 states. The population of Lagos alone is about 22 million, how can people be well policed?” the lawmaker asked.

    READ ALSO: Does true federalism guarantee true democracy?

    According to him, the Boko Haram problem, which should be a local one for the police to handle, has become a matter for the army and the air force who are supposed to defend the country against foreign invasion.

    Jimoh urged the federal government to beef up security on the nation’s waters, to check illegal entry into the country.

    The lawmaker, who noted that there had been major robbery incidents through the waterways, said it was unfortunate that the FG and Lagos State were in court on who controls the waterways.

    On the role of citizens in security, the lawmaker said they had a duty to provide information to the police and other agencies.

    “As citizens too, we have not been able to do our responsibility in the area of providing intelligence information as and when due to the security agents.

    “An average individual in the western world, when he sees something strange or new, alerts the police and other security agents so that before it gets out of hand, the security agents are on top of it.

    “But this does not happen here,” he said.

    Jimoh urged government across levels to focus on education, employment and youth development to tackle the growing rate of insecurity. NAN

  • Lagos language law: giving federalism a soul

    If Nigeria’s most cosmopolitan state can see the wisdom in encouraging children to learn in their mother tongue, other Yoruba states have no reason not to borrow a leaf from the Lagos State government.

    Today’s piece is dedicated to the memory of Akinwumi Isola, a man of high knowledge and culture who devoted a great deal of his intellectual energy to promotion of learning that takes advantage of the role of mother tongue and other languages in the acquisition of knowledge in a modern world that has provided so much to facilitate bilingual and multilingual education in a multicultural world.
    Every two weeks, one of the world’s languages disappears, along with the human history and cultural heritage that accompany it….A language is far more than a means of communication; it is the very condition of our humanity. Our values, our beliefs and our identity are embedded within it….It is through language that we transmit our experiences, our traditions and our knowledge. The diversity of languages reflects the incontestable wealth of our imaginations and ways of life.—UNESCO Director-General Audrey Azouulay at the 2018 Mother Language Day: Mother Language Day with the theme “Linguistic Diversity and Multilingualism Count for Sustainable Development.”

    The recent signing of the Lagos State Yoruba Language Preservation and Promotion Law (LSYLPPL) calls for congratulations to both the legislature and the governor of the state. The law has been long in coming but it is gratifying that it has come before self-imposed cultural anomie comes to the state because of the erosion of cultural values and identity in a state that has become a laboratory for multicultural literacy in the country. Lagos State is one state that has sacrificed so much of its resources and identity for the unity of Nigeria, having served first as a political capital of the country and ever since as the country’s commercial and cultural capital. Enacting a law that can sustain the state’s identity, improve cognitive development of its youth, create a pedagogy that nurtures innovativeness while also developing a huge cultural economy in the state is a welcome development.

    LSYLPPL has come to address many educational practices in the state that hitherto had been driven by misconceptions birthed and nurtured by parents under the influence of ungrounded theories about the role of mother tongue learning in academic achievement and confidence building of the child. Governments in a state comprising Yoruba-speaking Lagos Island, Badagry, Epe, Ikeja, and a huge population of people from other parts of Nigeria who have chosen to make Lagos State their home have responsibility to promote bilingual literacy. For long, governments in the state have had to focus on other pressing problems: making sure all children can attend school during the day rather than in the afternoon; providing adequate learning infrastructure for millions of children of school age; training and retraining of teachers; and increasing the number of schools in a city-state with a population estimated to be about 20 million. It is commendable that LSYLPPL has come at a time that physical infrastructure has stabilised in the state, after many years of positive intervention by various governments in the state.

    Lagosians have for too long condoned or ignored parents’ misconception that denying children   opportunity to use their mother tongue in school is a primitive thing that has no benefit. To many parents, restricting their children to use only English in school and at home is not only a sign of sophistication but also a means of preparing such children for a life of eminent success, which parents erroneously believe can be aborted if such children learn in their mother tongue. While private schools may get away with this untested theory that grew largely among illiterate parents and parents who are first-generation middle-class members in a social and economic context in which their academic credentials have given them noticeable social mobility, public education should not be encouraged to do so. What the new law has done is to de-program parents and guardians who have chosen the wrong route of educating a child in a post-colonial country like Nigeria. It is cheering that the new law has come to rescue children from problems of access, ease and quality of learning, general cognitive development, and academic achievement of children in Lagos State. This is the kind of law that should be emulated by other states across the federation.

    With signing of a law that encourages teaching and learning in mother tongue (L1) without any prejudice to acquiring simultaneously knowledge of and in L2 and L3 in multilingual and multicultural Nigerian federation, Lagos State government has another feather to its nest of problem solving governance. This is a good complement or reinforcement of the National Language Policy: ensuring that children acquire literacy in their mother tongue, one other Nigerian language in addition to English as the lingua franca. Such policy is in sync with language in education policy in communities that are multilingual: Canada, Belgium, Singapore, Switzerland, Nicaragua, Scotland, and many others. Nobody can thrive in the EU today without being bilingual. Bilingual or multilingual education in Hausa, Arabic, and English had existed in most of the states in the North since the amalgamation of Nigeria.

    Similarly, most of upper and middle-class people in the old Western Region and Lagos studied under the model of bilingual education. For example, most of the people  who have been stellar performers in knowledge-driven careers in the Yoruba region of Nigeria, like their counterparts in other regions: the father of Nigeria’s decolonization, Herbert Macaulay, top politicians like Obafemi Awolowo, Ladoke Akintola, top civil servants like Simeon Adebo, Tejumade Alakija, Nigeria’s only Nobel laureate, Wole Soyinka, and other stellar writers: Akinwumi Isola, Femi Osofisan, Niyi Osundare, Daniel Fagunwa, and top academics/vice chancellors like Hezekiah Oluwasanmi,  Ifedayo Oladapo, Ojetunji Aboyade, Oladipupo Akinkugbe, and all recipients of National Merit Awards in Western Nigeria, Sylvester Adegoke,  J.F.A. Ade-Ajayi, and many top achievers within and outside Nigeria, too numerous to mention in this short essay, are products of bilingual or multilingual education. The theory that it is when students do none of their learning in L1 that they can achieve is patently false. It is thus laudable that Lagos State government has chosen to take the bull by the horn.

    As expected, criticisms of the law have started to grow within the few days of the governor’s signing of the legislation and should be expected to grow further. As mordant as such criticisms may be, it is important for the state’s governor and legislature to rest assured that they have courageously thought outside the box of unplanned monolingual learning in a growing ethos of local and global multilingualism. Parents and guardians are certainly going to worry about the requirement for a Credit in Yoruba for admission to Lagos State’s higher education institutions. Such parents do not need to call for an end to the law because of this requirement. All they need to do is to appeal to the government to delay enforcement of that item for three years during which students currently in JSS3 can enrol for Immersion Yoruba course for the next three years, if their preference for tertiary education is for Lagos state institutions.

    With the Lagos State Yoruba Language Preservation and Promotion Law, the government of the state is a trailblazer for other states in Western Nigeria interested in saving their language, culture, values, and identity while connecting their learning to global civilization via English. The government of Lagos State should be proud of its prescience in respect of disappearance of languages every two weeks, acknowledged by the UNESCO a few days ago. It is also fitting that the law was ready for signing before the BBC took a bold step to make sure that at least three Nigerian languages: Hausa, Igbo, and Yoruba are promoted through such a global news network.

    Certainly, citizens who have gotten used to teaching and learning only in L2 need to make major adjustments, just like their children and wards who have been victims of such choice by their parents in the past. And the government of Lagos State ought to do its best to make the transition smooth for those currently experiencing a philosophy and practice of education that shouldn’t have occurred in any part of post-colonial Nigeria. If Nigeria’s most cosmopolitan state can see the wisdom in encouraging children to learn in their mother tongue, other Yoruba states have no reason not to borrow a leaf from the Lagos State government. Congratulations to the government of Lagos State.

    • Roposek@msn.com

     

  • Does true federalism guarantee true democracy?

    Does true federalism guarantee true democracy?

    For clarity and transparency, I should start with an explanation of the mindset that provokes the above question. Simply put, it is the mindset of an optimism that sees beyond the present fog of uncertainty which defines our national politics to a future that is as certain as death. The future I foresee is that of change from this quasi-unitary system to one that approximates a true federal republic. And I envisionthis change coming in the lifetime of this generation.

    There are good signs that we will get there. First, we have been there before, and we were witnesses to its successes and its failures. The mark of a genuine human intellect is to learn from failure and make necessary improvements for greater success. It is a defeatist mindset that gives up on a course with great potentials after only six years. That was what we did.

    Second, the failure of the present system has been demonstrated beyond reasonable doubt for every rational being. Since 1966, we have operated a governing system that has caused unprecedented political and economic instability on a regular basis. We blame the founding fathers for agreeing to a regional federal system that fueled ethnicism. Can anyone honestly suggest that this quasi-unitary system has gotten rid of ethnicism? Third, with recent developments, as discussed in this column last week, it appears that we have put on our thinking caps again and are getting back our senses.

    For the foregoing reasons, I am optimistic that we will get to the state of a true federal republic and this is the rationale for the question raised in the title of the column today. The assumption behind the question, “does true federalism guarantee true democracy?” is that true federalism is not an end in-itself. What does this mean? It simply means that in response to the assertion “It is good and helpful to have a true federal system of governance in a multi-national state”, one may reasonably ask “why?””What is good about it?”

    The question, “what is good about true federalism?” is reasonable and it deserves an adequate answer. One possible answer can be eked from a combination of the works of John Stuart Mill and Chief Obafemi Awolowo. In “On Representative Government”, Mill argues that every nationality, with a distinct language, culture, and a sense of belonging, has a right to self-government. Where this is not possible because of a forceful imposition by a colonial power, Awolowo argues in People’s Republic that federalism is the closest to self-government.

    Yet, as reasonable as both positions are, we could still ask the question “why?” Why is it the right of nationalities to have self-government? And why is still necessary to have a federal system where two or more nationalities cohabit? Other answers are possible: political stability, balanced development, etc. For each of these, we could still ask why it is so important. The ultimate answer beyond which we might not anticipate a reasonable question is that self-government promotes freedom and freedom is an inalienable right of human beings.

    Freedom is divinely ordained. As Rousseau surmised, human beings are born free. No one is born with chains around his or her neck. And human beings are born into communities which naturally nurture them to survive the helplessness of infancy and the dependency of adolescence until they come of age and their freedom is acknowledged and respected. When a young man comes of age, he is given a farm plot of his own. That is freedom.

    We also realize, however, that a community composed of free individuals needs a governance structure; and over the years of human existence, different systems of political-economic governance have been operated. From communal to slave systems, from feudal to capitalistic, from monarchical to aristocratic, from autocratic to fascist and militocratic. The experiments have been varied and consequential. But none has endured except democracy and the reason democracy endures is that it exemplifies and validates the natural human affinity and quest for freedom.

    If freedom is the ultimate political value for human beings, and if democracy validates, protects, and promotes, human freedom, then we must expect that our quest for true federalism would also guaranteetrue democracy and promote human freedom. This is the basis for my question: does true federalism guarantee true democracy?

    My inclination is to argue that why true federalism is a necessary condition for true democracy in a multinational state, it is not by itself a sufficient condition? It is easy to see that true federalism is a necessary condition for true democracy. Mill argues rightly that “free institutions are next to impossible in a country made up of different nationalities. Among a people without fellow feeling, especially if they read and speak different languages, the united public opinion, necessary to the workings of a representative government, cannot exist.” The next best alternative to make such a system work is to give recognition to each nationality through a federal system of government.

    But while true federalism is a necessary condition in such a structure, it is not sufficient. For, a true federal system may end up empowering a few elites and power-brokers within a nationality at the expense of the freedom of every individual member of the nationality. To know what else must be added to true federalism for it to lead to the end of true democracy and individual freedom, we need to understand the impediments to the realization of the latter even in a truly federal state.

    First on the list of impediments is self-interest which is now a proxy for ethnic interest. In a malfunctioning quasi-unitary state, ethnicism is the culprit. Nepotism is the foe of freedom. We tend to ignore the fact that these cleverly elide the obnoxiousness of individual egos masquerading as ethnics. The nepotist revels in the act because it enhances his image within the group and his private interest is thus promoted. In a truly federal state, this human urge for image enhancement and ego bolstering is not suddenly supplanted with a desire to promote the freedom of all fellow-ethnics.

    Consider even now what goes on in the various states of the lopsided federation. Where there is no visible nepotism, there is factionalism even within the same political party. Party members are categorized based on loyalty to leaders, including governors, instead of loyalty to party manifesto and governing philosophy. Based on the universality of human nature, whichseldom respects moral and political ideals of freedom and equality, without additional effort to make the ideal of individual freedom the centerpiece of a true federal structure, we can expect some variants of the following.

    Nepotism will relocate to states or regions with regional tribes within regional nationalities using the political power of numbers to oppress and exploit their minority members. We could see federal

    bigmanism becoming state or regional bigmanism. We could see the enlargement of the coast of regional or state tin gods. Without additional efforts, transparency is not likely to increase, and candidate imposition is not likely to abate. As our people understand so well, it is imprudent to allow a sharp pointed wood to be menacingly close to one’s eyes before raising an alarm.

    Morning predicts the day. What we see now in state and regional politics is likely to dictate what democracy looks like in a truly federal system.

    But of course, there is always the power of the people to determine their fate. Southwest leadersmust always remember Awolowo’s eternal wisdom garnered from experience of leading our people. As he once observed in Path to Nigerian Greatness, the Yoruba are a sophisticated people who will not allow their rights to be trampled upon for long: “Many rights are enjoyed within the family; these rights are fundamental and inalienable, because the urge for their enjoyment is inherent and instinctive in man…. Because of their inherent and instinctive nature, these rights cannot be permanently suppressed. In the short run, they can be held in abeyance, but even only at great risks to the peace, harmony, and cohesion of the family.”

     

    • Follow me on Twitter:

    @SegunGbadeg2002

    @HarvestDayPubs

  • True federalism in installments?

    Thus far, we have not heard rebuttals of the recommendations. Rather, there has been a lot of hysteria triggered by seeming disbelief that a party in power at the centre is proposing true federalism. In place of a counter-narrative or alternative position on true federalism, what we hear is that the recommendations are coming too close to the elections. If something is desirable, surely the imminence of elections should not render it unappealing. The reality is that restructuring is a nation-building opportunity. There is now no significant constituency against the idea that states should exercise consequential powers, assume more responsibilities and control resources. It is time to make it work, for the benefit of the peoples of this country.—John Odigie-Oyegun, APC Chairman

    When eventually the El-Rufai restructuring committee reaches the senate, it will be photocopied to 109 pieces and shared to the senators to use as Toilet paper. If there are extra copies, it will be shared to Suya and Akara hawkers outside the National Assembly to use it to wrap their products. El-Rufai restructuring report will be shredded and modify to serve as a good toilet paper for senators. If there’s seriousness in restructuring it could have started in 2015.—Shehu Sani.— APC Senator
    We are not practicing true federalism in Nigeria. The last time we practiced it was during the time of late Chief Obafemi Awolowo. The issue of federalism has nothing to do with ethnicity but a fight between the wealthy and poor people. The APC promised to practice true federalism but yet to do so. I believe that a continuous advocacy for true federalism will definitely yield the desired results soon.—Abiola Ajimobi.—APC Governor

     

    With the recent release of the report of All Progressives Congress’ Committee on True Federalism under the chairmanship of the Kaduna governor, Nasir el-Rufai, the author of the phrase “Nigeria as a federation without federalism,” what many thought would calm the nerves of federalists is likely to sharpen the debate on restructuring. Regions seeking federalism are likely to complain about attempts to restructure on the template employed by military rulers to de-federalize the country: piecemeal restructuring, if advocates for true federalism stick to their demand for a new Nigeria, as a union of user-friendly relationship between national and subnational governments. In a way, the three quotes overleaf signal the debate that the country is likely to experience after digestion of the long-awaited report.

    One good news about the report is that the ruling party has finally accepted the need to heed the pledge in its manifesto: “Initiate action to amend our Constitution with a view to devolving powers, duties and responsibilities to states and local governments in order to entrench true Federalism and the Federal spirit.” For those whose idea of restructuring is captured by this promise, the report of the committee may seem good enough, even though the first step in what ordinarily is a tortuous process is being taken almost at the end of the third year in the first tenure of four years. Such people are likely to heave a sigh of relief that it is better late than never. And the committee’s decision to prepare an executive bill to take the few devolved powers and functions to the National Assembly shows an intention on the part of the committee to make up for lost time.

    Some advocates for federalism have since the release of the report expressed a measure of relief about what they see as progressive response to devolution: establishment of state police, re-recognition of the fact that local governments are part and parcel of states and should not be separated from state to constitute a third tier of government, establishment of state court of appeal, some measure of resource control that re-establishes the dichotomy between onshore- and offshore petroleum, even though both damage the environment with as much vigour; leaving registration of business names to states, etc. The committee has identified some items for devolution, but it is an exaggeration for anybody or party to claim that the few items marked for devolution are enough to return the country to a truly federal system. It is still arguable that what the APC has done is to move the country from nominal federalism to cosmetic federalism.

    In contemporary political lexicon, the federalism that can be restored with the few items in the section of devolved powers is Permissive Federalism or Picket Fence Federalism, a situation where the central government decides which powers to transfer to subnational governments. In this situation, the federal government is the giver rather than a fellow sharer of powers with subnational units. Others may call this administrative rather than constitutional federalism, for the simple reason that, like the 1999 Constitution, final decisions of the powers to devolve does not include representatives of the federating communities with mandate to negotiate with representatives of the central government and the ruling party. Of course, the choice of permissive federalism by the committee is in consonance with the party’s campaign manifesto, which is not to restructure but to devolve powers. APC recommendations or concessions that the party is ready to give at this point should not be with any prejudice to continued demand for a new union by advocates for restructuring.

    It seems that the party has made some proposals that can give the impression of fulfilling its election promise to devolve powers, duties, and responsibilities to states, not necessarily that it has done anything to restore true federalism. For example, the simplest demand: restoration of secularity to the Nigerian State has been put on hold in a country that is already polarised by sectarianism. Anybody that reads the current constitution cannot but have the impression that Nigeria is an Islamic country even though this is far from the truth of the history and contemporary reality of the country. A constitution that describes the country as an Islamic State has its own tension in a multi-religious society. Tax payers’ money is being spent to send government representatives to several Islamic organisations, apart from federal and state funds committed to support both Muslims and Christians to go on religious pilgrimage to Mecca and Jerusalem. It is therefore surprising that the APC committee has chosen to ignore wishes of those it surveyed on this matter.

    With approval of all the recommendations, the status quo crafted by decades of military dictatorship will still be intact, despite the few devolutions recommended by the committee. For instance, there is no certainty about how to reconcile resource control with fiscal federalism. Those who want fiscally independent states or regions not dependent on monthly allocation from the federal government are likely to be disappointed, as much as those who prefer that the central government is made much leaner than it is at present. Giving freedom to states to merge if they so desire on the one hand and retaining a system in which the federal government allocates money to states on the other hand makes nonsense of the demand for regionalism that can save the country from 37 bureaucracies that the states have become. It is, therefore, not surprising that the issue of regionalism has also been put on hold, like that of secularity of the polity. Railway and transmission of electricity remain on the exclusive list in the 21st century. A core of the calls for restructuring is the negotiation of a constitution to replace the 1999 Constitution that discountenanced the right of citizens to participate in creating the constitution by which they are governed.

    There is no doubt that the APC committee has given deep thought to the items it has chosen to examine in relation to the intention to entrench the federal spirit. If all the recommendations are approved by the party and the president, and are subsequently constitutionalised by the legislature, Nigeria will be taking the first step in a thousand-mile journey to true federalism. It is premature to turn the proposals from the APC committee on True Federalism into a campaign matter as the chairman of the party has done in the quotation overleaf. Those who say the only major devolution is law enforcement. The functions on the Concurrent List shared by the central and state governments are still intact, apart from state police and state court of appeal. Citizens must find it curious that the same committee has recommended giving more money to subnational units without noticeably reducing the workload of the central government. Certainly, APC can do better than this.

  • Oyegun: Nigeria’s federalism bastardised

    Oyegun: Nigeria’s federalism bastardised

    National Chairman of the All Progressives Congress (APC) Chief John Odigie-Oyegun has said Nigeria practises a bastardised federal system of government.

    Oyegun, who spoke at the public presentation of the APC’s Committee Report on True Federalism, said true federalism entails devolution of power to the federating units.

    He said: “There is no doubt at all that where we were and where we are today is basically a bastardised kind of federal structure, more like a Unitary system. What we are going to present to the nation today are the considered views of the critical mass of this nation who participated strongly in the result being presented today.

    “When the issue of restructuring cropped into the public domain last year, the main reason being one more issue with which to trash the Buhari administration. At that point, it was clear that this nation was facing a major issue that needed to be straightened out and we need to find a new reality.

    “For President Buhari, the reality was the economic wellbeing of this nation, based on the strength of our people and what we can produce and based on the productivity of Nigerians themselves. Right now, work on that very foundation is virtually complete and this nation is now set on the path of gradual growth.

    “He also has the issue of security to deal with and that has been effectively tackled. The issue of Boko Haram inherited in the Northeast has been dealt with. That is not to say that we are not also faced with equally serious security challenges. The assurance I will give today is that measures that equally effective are already being put in place to tackle that menace of the so called herdsmen malice once and for all.

    “We did not at that time think that the issue of true federalism or restructuring was an immediate problem because it was necessary to fix the economy, lay the foundation of power because without, you cannot talk of meaningful development, lay foundation of infrastructures.

    “Without power and a proper railway system, you cannot develop because you must grow with development. What this mean is that you can grow without development, while you can develop when the impact of growth is beginning to reach the people. So, we had this challenge and did not think we should add the extra burden of restructuring.”

    Chairman of the APC Committee on True Federalism and Kaduna State Governor Mallam Nasir El-Rufai said states should exercise consequential powers, assume more responsibilities and control resources.

    The governor, who was represented by his Special Adviser, Political, Mallam Uba Sani, said it was time to make the idea of having a true federalism work in Nigeria for the betterment of the people.

    He said since the summary of its report was released, it has become clear that “we have added value to the whole debate about restructuring, devolution and federalism.

    “We have defined the values that in our opinion promote and connote true federalism and proposed a clear roadmap for implementing the recommendations. The APC committee on true federalism has produced clear recommendations to strengthen federalism.

    “We have not heard rebuttals of the recommendations. Rather there has been a lot of hysteria triggered by seeming disbelief that a party in power at the Centre is proposing true federalism. In place of a counter narrative or alternative position on federalism, what we hear is that the recommendations are coming too close to the election. If something is desirable. Surely the imminence of elections should not render it unappealing.

    “The reality is the restructuring is a nation building opportunity. There is now no significant constituency against the idea that states should exercise consequential powers, assume more responsibilities and control resources. It is time to make it work for the benefit of the people of this country.”

    Former Minister of Information Prince Tony Momoh said what was needed was the political will to actualise the principles of true federalism, while the Deputy Whip of the House of Representatives, Parry Iriase said the recommendation should be forwarded to the National Assembly as an Executive bill, saying it will be easier and faster to deal with an executive bill than an individual member bill.

     

    APC’s report on restructuring a ruse, says PDP

    The Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) has dismissed the report of the All Progressives Congress (APC) on restructuring, tagging it a ruse and fresh attempts to deceive Nigerians ahead of the 2019 elections.

    In a statement yesterday by its National Publicity Secretary, Kola Ologbondiyan, the party said it amounted to outright depravity that  APC leaders would suddenly turn around to pose as fathers of a restructured Nigeria.

    It noted that the attitude and body language of APC leaders, including President Muhammadu Buhari, indicated that they have no intention of implementing any form of restructuring.

    The PDP recalled that President Buhari, had, in his 2018 New Year  address to the nation, rejected the idea of restructuring when he declared that, “When all the aggregates of nationwide opinions are considered, my firm view is that our problems are more to do with process than structure”.

     

  • Federalism: Yakasai seeks implementation of committee’s recommendations

    Elder Statesman Tanko Yakasai has urged President Muhammadu Buhari to implement the recommendations of the Nasir El-Rufai-led committee on true federalism.

    In a statement in Kano, Yakasai opined that the recommendations were in tandem with the recommendations of the 2014 National Conference.

    According to him there have been discussions to finetune the constitution and see how it can conform to the present-day political reality.

    Yakasai also congratulated the National Chairman of the All Progressives Congress (APC), Chief John Odigie-Oyegun, and the National Working Committee (NWC), for their foresight in constituting the committee on True Federalism.

    The statement reads: “I am happy to note that throughout these discussions, there has not been any opposition to the issue of re-examining our constitution and seeing how best we need to realign it with our existing situation.

    “I appreciate the foresight of the APC’s NWC for deploying the strategy to steer the country through this debate without bitterness and rancour.

    “If recommendations of the 2014 National Conference had been subjected to a White Paper Committee, by either the previous or the current administrations, the conclusion of the El-Rufai-led committee could have been arrived at much earlier, and it could have moved this country forward in our search for a convenient constitutional arrangement which will satisfy the yearnings of the majority.”