The Nation Newspaper

Tag: Federalism

  • ‘Amaechi is fighting for federalism’

    ‘Amaechi is fighting for federalism’

    House of Representatives member Hon. Dakuku Peterside is the Chairman, House Committee on Petroleum Resources (Downstream). In this interview with Victor Oluwasegun, he speaks on the crisis rocking the Rivers State Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and the face-off between President Goodluck Jonathan and Governor Rotimi Amaechi.

     

     

    How will you assess the performance of the governor of your home state, Rivers?

    Impressive and spectacular. Governor Amaechi has done very well. Few Nigerians will disagree with me that he is among the top three model governors. He is outstanding in security, education and health. He has done well in roads and power, but above all , he has come to symbolise transparency and accountability. In terms of performance, Governor Amaechi is a gold fish. This simply justifies the support he is enjoying from Rivers people and Nigerians.

    Why is he having crisis in the Nigerian Governors Forum, the Rivers State PD and with the President?

    I am not aware that he is having any problems with the President. You see, in this clime, being honest, bold and courageous could lead you into trouble. Permit me to take the issues one after the other. On Nigeria Governors Forum, there is absolutely no trouble. Certain characters allowed themselves to be used for selfish reasons to destabilise a registered association that has stabilised the polity. Governor Amaechi’s only crime is that he puts a face to decisions made by his colleagues, very often for the interest of democracy and federalism. Some persons also claim that he is too forthright and I don’t know what crime that is called. However, the biggest unsaid problem is the perception by certain persons in the Presidency that Governor Amaechi has ambition to aspire to higher office. The attempt to criminalise ambition, if any, is the root cause of the perceived problem in NGF. This contradicts with the expectation of some of the President’s associates who are pushing that he should go for a second term.

    The second strand is speaking truth to power as can be seen in Governor Amaechi’s comments on the Sovereign Wealth Fund, excess crude account, Rivers-Bayelsa oil well issue, fuel subsidy, Eastwest road, Adamawa PDP case amongst others.

    Are there forces in the Presidency you alluded to responsible for the crisis in PDP Rivers State?

    Is there any crisis in PDP Rivers State? There is absolutely no crisis. What has happened is simple to understand, unless you chose to ignore or thwart the facts and continue in self delusion or you are outrightly ignorant of how the federal might can be manipulated against the perceived political opponents in Nigeria. A party congress was conducted peacefully in March 2012. Nobody raised issues until December 2012 when the interest of certain elements in the Presidency clashed with certain elements in Rivers State who are incurably ungrateful and who do not fear God. Then, some characters in the judiciary allowed themselves to be used and a controversial judgement surfaced. An Abuja High Court gave judgement in an issue it has no business with. One Felix Obuah, who never participated in any of the party congresses, started parading himself as the PDP Rivers Chairman. The same Felix Obuah has been going about making inflammatory remarks. If history teaches any lesson, it is that this ones too will be consigned to the dustbin of history very soon. I have watched how a certain colleague of mine from Rivers State sold his conscience and tries helplessly to defend the indefensible on the television. All the members of the PDP in Rivers State know who their leaders are and know who the charlatans are. Rivers people are more intelligent than the ignorance been displayed by the characters parading themselves as the officials of the PDP in the State. Rivers people know them and know their history.

    Are you suggesting that the judgement of Abuja High Court on Rivers PDP is faulty?

    I am not suggesting that, but the facts are clear. Prof. Itse Sagay, the respectable legal luminary, said that single judgement delivered by Justice Ishaq Bello had the capacity of derailing our democracy. He clearly said that it has no basis in law and portends danger to our democracy. Prof. Wole Soyinka expressed concern that the debasement and manipulation of the judiciary by the politicians as exemplified by the judgement of Justice Ishaq Bello can lead to anarchy. He acknowledged the effort of the current Chief Justice of Nigeria to reform the judiciary, but recognized the fact that there are dark areas and that this dark area is responsible for the seeming crisis in Rivers State. These are voices of reason. What has happened is an attempt to sacrifice the entire democratic project to get to one man who is perceived to be a political opponent. How do you explain a situation where there is a dispute among two persons who live in Rivers State over an event that occurred in Rivers State, yet a resolution was reached by an FCT High Court? How do you explain a situation where the congress in dispute took place in March, last year, and only became a subject of litigation one year after? What does the law says about the law courts entertaining purely intra-party matter? These are questions begging for answers. I am optimistic that the Court of Appeal will cure this malaise, restore sanity in the system and save our democracy from self destruction by a few desperate folks. The judgement has done a serious damage to our democracy

    The new or factional party officers in Rivers State, as you admitted, have suspended the members of House of Assembly and threatened to impeach Governor Amaechi. What is your take on that?

    It is laughable. It simply shows the degree of ignorance of the characters parading themselves as party officials in Rivers State. They are displaying ignorance or lack of knowledge of the powers of state party officers. Even, if we admit that they can suspend elected officials, and by extension, party leaders, by our law, they do not lose their seats in the legislature. So, I do not know what they stand to benefit by that rascality.

     

     

     

     

  • Fraudulent federalism; FRSC and Sunday service; Women and delivery services

    Fraudulent federalism; FRSC and Sunday service; Women and delivery services

    When will true federalism come to Nigeria? Is the current wave of violent unrest in Nigeria not directly linked to the massive 40-year fraudulent federalism and fiscal fraud with the resultant underdevelopment that has reduced Nigeria’s children’s maximum aspirations to celebrate the sporadic arrival of electricity sparks while in other countries, even African countries, electric power never departed, but just increased in 40 years? Those other African countries have never known an epidemic of fuel fumes and generators. Governor Fashola has asked this ‘True Federalism’ question as many times as this column has. Who can reconcile ‘True Federalism’ with the warped LGA creation between Kano+ Jigawa with 77 local governments and only 20 for Lagos State? Add to that warped federal policies on water, power, railways, jobs, scholarships, education and health. It is a miracle of self-help allowing us to survive the evil machinations of federal rule!

    To what purpose does the FRSC patrol the road on Sundays when locals are taking their children to and from church or lunch? Is it road safety? That is the time the FRSC selects to do ‘stop and search’ on the only day you are trying to get on the right side of God. I always feel sad when I see a danfofull of suffering citizens or a vehicle driven by a woman with her children or a family man with his family under such stress of Sunday. What motivates such FRSC officials to be out as early as 7am on Sunday in both Lagos and particularly in Ibadan on the Bodija/ Secretariat road? National interest, arrest number quotas, clearing the roads of dangerous maniac drivers or Road Safety which is their primary assignment?

    Of course we must not suggest the dreaded but widespread self-serving ‘corruption’ as a motive but it is the responsibility of the FRSC and EFCC authorities to exclude that as a motive. Perhaps the motivation is just overzealousness as they are hoping to eventually replace their ‘oga at the top’ and need a powerful CV of road service as testimony to their ability? Seeing big strong FRSC men and women jumping sometimes from hidden positions into the road in Lagos, at Ogere and in Ibadan to stop vehicles merely going about their honest Sunday business does not speak well of the FRSC, especially if the vehicle is obviously on Sunday morning church mission. You must have noticed that even police have got their checkpoint mojo back through the back door by arresting anything moving with windows even faintly ‘tinted’. Opportunity knocks again. After that FRSC trauma, if they are released, the victims arrive in church late and frustrated if they are not arrested and the priests or pastor frowns at their bad example. ‘You do not go late to work. How dare you come late for God? If you are late for God, He will be late for you, Amen!’

    Of course, FRSC must be no ‘respecter of persons’ when it comes to the law but Nigerians should respect women a lot more than they do. Natural courtesy demands publicly funded bodies behave in a becoming manner. Of course dangerous and nuisance driving deserves and demands intervention but does intervention mean ‘draconian intervention or intimidation’ like ABCD=Arrest, Booking, Clamping, Detention when it is obvious that ABCD=Advice, Before Caution, Detention would be the more humane and logical way forward? Where is the guiding hand? Should everything be through fear and intimidation? The expressway is still full of trailers and lorries dangerously driving on the left instead of the right lane. The nation’s professional drivers have certainly failed their ‘KEEP RIGHT’lessons of the FRSC.

    At Ogere on the Lagos Ibadan Expressway exactly where the road has been cleared of tankers and trailers after 30 years of pain and anguish to millions of travellers daily, guess what? The FRSC has a permanent roadside checkpoint which narrows the road by their tactics of standing in one of the two lanes and waving you down. What was the point of opening the road into two lanes if the very force supposed to keep the two lanes open delights in creating an instant go-slow? Surely the FRSC patrol cars should not park in, or force vehicles to park in the same place it took 30 years to remove the trucks from? Does nobody supervise these patrol units? Sunday stop and search of women alone in vehicles and with children can be considered as a form of harassment and intimidation. It should be taken up seriously by women’s groups across the country including lawyers, nurses and NAWOJ.

    Not everyone who declares ‘I love you’ wants you to live or actually ‘loves you’. I tell my female patients to look in a mirror and realise that the person in the mirror is the only one who has their genuine maternity interests at heart. The man is more interested in the baby than the bearer. So their being neglected, beaten, deprived of antenatal care or good delivery facilities is manifestation of a warped ‘love from their husband’. No one can love you more than you. Nigerian women should each look in a mirror, before it is too late! Women should take more interest in where they and their female children and sisters are taken for ante natal clinic and delivery. The men do not care. Mission houses are for deliverance, hospitals are for delivery.

  • Patriotism, NYSC and ‘True Federalism’; ‘Victims Compensation Fund’

    Patriotism, NYSC and ‘True Federalism’; ‘Victims Compensation Fund’

    N886.4 billion distributed in February! Meanwhile, no books in schools and unrepentant failure of power supply. We are so rich in our poverty! Shame on us! But at least the almajiris are sitting on the best school furniture in Nigerian schools.

    Apparently suggesting that the NYSC should be scrapped is ‘unpatriotic’. The ‘Unpatriotic List’ is long. It includes not to have true federalism and to have only 20 LGAs in Lagos State Vs 77 in Kano/Jigawa States but who cares about those aspects of patriotism! Changes will not get through a ‘patriotic’ National Assembly. NYSC, under the guise of ‘patriotism’, serviced educational, health and other needs of all but especially so-called disadvantaged states at a cheap rate, allowing billions to be stolen. Today’s resultant decay has given an excuse for terrorism and arises from yesterday’s failures to develop in spite of funds at each point in our fiscal history. In human terms, patriotic NYSC members are often treated little better than cheap labour, cajoled into accepting wretched accommodation and feeding during orientation as their ‘patriotic duty’ and in ‘the national interest’.

    Remember the hundreds of patriotic parents sending their patriotic starry-eyed sons and daughters to go for NYSC only to have them return in coffins. Sometimes they arrive in those coffins with their throats slit merely for being NYSC members attempting to serve their country patriotically. And we are not at war, so they were not sent into ‘enemy territory’ but into a neighbouring state! What compensation do you give those bereaved and grieving parents whose children’s goals have been so sadly truncated? One who has lost a husband or wife is a widow or widower and one who has lost both parents is an orphan, but there is no word in most languages for one who has lost a child. Those parents will weep fresh tears today as they read this small honour done to their children, forgotten by a country struggling and killing its children in order to become a nation.

    Where is the ‘NYSC Memorial Wall’ listing and honouring fallen NYSC members? I did my NYSC in 1975 and we lost comrades. I am here with family and children but they have been dead since 1975, 38 years. What impact has that loss had on their parents and siblings and economic loss to Nigeria? Does anyone think about these things? When you get in your car, bus or walk down a road, it may be the last time due to no fault of your own, no matter how patriotic you are! Our police and soldiers are dying in greater numbers than their colleagues posted to war-torn Mali, in shootouts, drive-by attack, robberies, bomb blasts and as escorts for bullion vans and VIPs.

    Money and other material compensation acts do not substitute for a life needlessly lost or the pain inflicted by such a loss on the family. Prevention of loss is better than compensation. But for many, compensation is all they can see as a survival strategy for their families. However, if compensation is big enough and regular, it becomes helpful in paying the daily maintenance utility and education survival bills of those left behind. What compensation actually comes to the family survivors of the victims of the robberies and bombs? What comfort does that give to the junior brothers and sisters of the slain who in their own turn are now being called up to serve NYSC in the same states where their brothers and sisters fell victim to ‘unpatriotic actions’ of others, actions which can be triggered at any time? One-off compensation, one dose cure, even N1 or 10million, is inadequate. We pay ridiculously huge salaries and outrageous disengagement allowances, and even life-time pensions and salaries to convicted or pardoned four-year office holders. Therefore government and NASS owe NYSC and other victims of bomb blast and violence in this ‘The Undeclared War’ in Nigeria regular stipends to enable siblings and children and old parents achieve some measure of physical and fiscal comfort.

    Such an all-embracing ‘Victims Compensation Fund’ would be a welcome act of ‘patriotism’ by government and NASS. It would need to be renewed every year by N1b or more budgetary allocation and run by public/private competent hands without huge governance, not by ‘pension scam’ government officials. Meanwhile NYSC is sending unarmed young men and women into violence-prone and armed areas-just because there are Nigerians living there. It is unpatriotic to send them into harm’s way as the uniform, title and job mark them as targets. The suggestion of scrapping NYSC may attract attention to the NYSC to provide better safety measures and protection and to get members deployed in relatively safe areas. Do the NYSC officials and those complaining against NYSC being scrapped send their own children into such unsafe areas? Perhaps not! If the NYSC cannot be run better and safer, then it would be patriotic to reappraise it and perhaps restructure it or suspend it in some states or scrap it as having outlived its usefulness. One of such reappraisal suggestions is that it should justify its existence and the cost in lives.

    Meanwhile, let us salute those currently in NYSC, pray for their safe return, set up state and national memorials to ‘NYSC Heroes Past’ and initiate political strategies to legitimise and legalise a ‘Victims Compensation Fund or Foundation’. To many heroes past and present are dying in vain.

  • Revenue allocation, federalism and state of the nation

    The issue of revenue allocation has remained a contentious and very volatile subject in Nigeria generating very strong reactions from each side of the divide anytime it is up for debate. Central to the issue is the whole question of over concentration of enormous financial resources at the federal government at the expense of other federating units.

    The current revenue formula in use is tilted in favour of the federal government, which takes a whopping 52.68 per cent of allocation from the Federation Account. The 36 states have a combined share of 26.72 per cent, while the 774 local government areas in the country take 20.6 per cent. Oil-producing states share 13 per cent in accordance with the principle of derivation.

    However, of late, there have been clamours for a review of the status quo by cutting the federal government’s lion share to make more funds available to states and local governments. State governors, through the Governors’ Forum, have led the clamour, claiming that development in their domain was being stifled due to inadequate funds. The financial realities in the states and local governments at present had made the need to review the formula very urgent. Without mincing word, the present revenue formula is not realistic.

    In fairness to all the states in the country, with, perhaps, few exceptions, most of them are making efforts, despite their limited resources to deliver the dividends of democracy to their respective states. In Lagos, for instance, the state government has continued its relentless pursuit of ambitious projects such as the redevelopment of the Lagos-Badagry expressway into a 10- lane road incorporating light -rail and BRT lanes, the expansion of the Ketu-Ikorodu road, the construction of more inner roads across the state, the Eko Atlantic City project, Independent Power Projects, construction of 16 Mother and Child Centres for easy medical access, environmental regeneration in addition to 1,960 other massive infrastructural renewal projects scattered across the state. This is, indeed, why allusion is currently being made to the evolvement of a new Lagos in many circles. But, in view of the reality of limited capacity to fund capital projects, most of the states in the federation have had to opt for the option of either borrowing from banks or raising bond from the capital market to finance capital projects. This is because the money they receive monthly from Abuja is barely enough to settle the salaries of workers as well as other overhead costs.

    Sadly, however, while most of the states are doing all they could to improve the standard of living of their people, same cannot really be said of the federal government which ironically corners the bulk of the country’s resources. This, of course, is not peculiar to the present administration of President Goodluck Jonathan. Succeeding federal administrations in the country have always left the country worse than they met it. From the ill- fated Shehu Shagari administration till date, the country has been wobbling and fumbling with no clear -cut sense of direction. Most federal roads are still bad, as they have always been; power remains evasive; major industries are folding up at an alarming rate; federal universities have become sorry sights while federal hospitals are not even good enough for senior government officials who would rather embark on medical tourism abroad at a great cost to the country. The rate at which federal infrastructure across the country rot away leaves much to be desired.

    The question then is: what does the federal government do with the huge state resources at its disposal via the favourable revenue allocation it gets from the system? If the federal government gets so much and yet is doing so little, where then is the justification for the current lopsidedness in the revenue allocation system ?After all, to whom much is given, it is said that much is expected but in the case of the federal government, the reverse is the case.

    Isn’t it time then for an urgent need to review the current revenue sharing formula in consonance with the needs of the other federating units? It is quite clear that of all the three federating structures making up the federation, it is the states and local governments that are really touching the lives of the people as they are the closest to them. The National Assembly needs to really emphasise fiscal federalism when it comes to the issue of constitutional amendment. The federal government should devolve more powers to the states or regions that make up the federation. Equally, some of the items on the exclusive legislative list of the current constitution such as customs, ports, police etc should go to the residual legislative list. For instance, the current trend of insecurity in the country requires state police that would normally be in a better position to curb crime using the community policing model. How can the governor of a state be held liable for the insecurity being experienced in his domain when the commissioner of police only reports to the Inspector General of Police and not the state governor?

    The federal government makes enormous financial gains from the Tin Can Island and Apapa Ports in Lagos and Calabar respectively from import and export duties but this is not supposed to be the case since these revenues should normally accrue to the Lagos and Cross River states’ governments who should in turn pay taxes of 20% of the revenues to the federal government. The collection of revenue by the Nigerian customs at these ports negates the principles of true federalism because these coastal states own these port resources and thus should not be deprived of the benefits accruing from its exploitation.

    True federalism implies a compromise between the extreme concentration of power (the current case in Nigeria) and a loose confederation of independent states, for governing people usually in a large expanse of territory. For instance, if we get rail into the Concurrent List and ensure the amendment of the Railway Act, it will not only be for the benefit of all the states and regions, but the country as a whole. In the same spirit of true federalism, it is also important to decentralize the control of power. Undoubtedly, without energy, every effort at development, including the drive will be hampered.

    In the spirit of justice and fairness, we need to reverse the status quo where the federal government holds as much power and influence as it currently does over the revenue sharing formula as well as other critical sectors in the country because it has little to show for it. We need to revert to the practice of true federalism in its true sense as it is being done in other advanced democracies of the world. Indeed, for us to reduce the pressure and tension associated with governance at the centre, this is the time to tilt towards the evolvement of a weak centre with stronger federating units. This is a main feature of a true federation.

    The solution to the myriad of problems currently confronting the country is to address the distorted federalism that the country currently runs. For us to move forward as a nation, grow economically, experience peace and attract the necessary foreign and local investments that would ensure real development, the restructuring of the polity to reflect true federalism is non-negotiable. The earlier we put an end to the current brand of federalism which the Deputy Senate President, Ike Ekweremadu, recently termed ‘feeding bottle federalism, the better for the whole country. The arrangement is grossly un-progressive and misleading. It should be discontinued.

    • Ibirogba is Honourable Commissioner for Information and Strategy, Lagos State

  • On the road to cosmetic federalism again?

    On the road to cosmetic federalism again?

    If the preliminary result of National Assembly’s efforts to involve Nigerians in the amendment of the 1999 Constitution released exclusively by Leadership Sunday is accurate (and there is no reason to disbelieve the notes leaked to the newspaper by those in charge of the exercise), then Nigerians calling for re-federalisation of the country are about being urged to start the process of de-militarisation of the polity afresh.

    We said in this column a few weeks back that Nigerians might be buying a lemon at the end of the protracted effort by the national assembly to neutralise the call for sovereign national conference or constitutional conference. We raised issues with the process of selecting or inviting citizens to meet representatives of the national assembly in hotels in state capitals across the country; the amount of time made available for discussion; and why on earth anyone would prefer such informal consultation with citizens to a referendum.

    With the release of outcome of lawmakers/citizens’ interactions in November last year published by Leadership Sunday of January 27, Nigerians may at the end be blamed for an amended constitution that is more unitary than the one that federalists have found to be a source of inter-ethnic or inter-regional tension and of national under-development since the outing of the 1999 Constitution by General Abdulsalam Abubakar, after the presidential and legislative elections of 1999.

    In what Leadership Sunday called the highpoints of the House of Representatives’ People Public Sessions on the review of the 1999 Constitution conducted on November 10, 2012, ‘Nigerians have rejected’ the following: any mention of the country’s six geopolitical zones in the constitution as administrative or political units; abolition of State Independent Electoral Commission (SIEC) and transfer of its functions to INEC; call for a provision to allow Nigerians in diaspora to vote at national elections; establishment of state police; affirmative action for women in elective offices; transfer of any responsibility from the Exclusive Legislative List to the Concurrent List; etc.

    Is the report of Leadership Sunday only about what citizens have rejected? No. As the paper puts it: ‘As widely expected, voting patterns show Nigerians want state houses of assembly to be granted financial autonomy/independence as is the case with the National Assembly….The collated report disclosed that Nigerians backed amendments’ to abolish Joint State/Local Government Account; to create a role or place for traditional rulers at federal and state levels; to award indigeneship (rather than residency) to indigenes of other communities; etc. What is unmistakable about the preliminary result of collation of responses from citizens that travelled to speak with legislators in November is that majority of such citizens largely prefer the constitutional status quo that puts centralism over federalism.

    It is not clear what the announcement in Leadership Sunday: ‘voting patterns on all the issues itemised in the template for voting during the sessions in 318 federal constituencies of the original 360 constituencies have been collated and ready for official unveiling on January 31’ is designed to achieve. Is the unveiling of an informal voting by citizens that had no mandate from their constituencies being packaged as a true reflection of the thinking of constituents on the items presented in November to selected invitees by legislators? Is voting by an infinitesimal number of invitees to public hearings in hotel rooms being designed as a substitute for direct indication of citizens’ choice? Are Nigerians being prepared by the leaked collation of votes of a few Nigerians that had the privilege to travel to state capitals to meet with lawmakers for what the national assembly is likely to recommend as amendments? What does ‘as widely expected’ mean? Who widely expected what—the legislators or Leadership Sunday? It is uncharitable to think that the national assembly would intentionally parade the views of a few Nigerians at one-day public hearing as the voice of 160 million Nigerians.

    What is not uncharitable to do is to remind members of the national assembly that fears expressed before the decision of the national assembly to initiate amendment of the 1999 Constitution may be justified at the end of exercise. When citizens called for sovereign national conference or constitutional conference for the purpose of writing a people’s constitution that is mandated by citizens and assented to by citizens through a referendum, members of the legislative assembly said that all that was needed was ordinary amendment to the 1999 Constitution. Legislators refused to include involvement of citizens directly in the process by rejecting calls for a referendum. Now the same national assembly is claiming that majority of Nigerians have taken a position on items slated for amendment, when in fact only a handful of citizens attended the hearings organised for interaction between lawmakers and citizens.

    Many citizens at that time warned that legislators elected under the constitution in contention were not elected to write constitutions and that the matter of creating a people’s constitution should be given to another group set up principally for that task. Citizens were told by lawmakers and even the president that Nigeria should settle for amendment to a constitution that citizens never saw until after the inauguration of the first post-military government in 1999. While citizens called for constitutional transformation, their leaders, elected for purposes other than writing a constitution, preached and pushed for panel-beating of a constitution that citizens thought was a write-off.

    If the leaked report to Leadership Sunday is accurate, then federalists and constitutional purists who warned that amending a constitution that had no imprint of citizens ab initio would amount to a waste of time and emotion may be more prophetic than legislators who affirmed that re-federalisation of the country was attainable through amendments. Issues that citizens have been reported to reject indicate that the 1999 Constitution authored by the military on the eve of handing power to elected governments in 1999 only needs cosmetic touches designed to enhance the powers of the centre.

    A graphic example of further de-federalisation of the polity is the so-called approval by citizens that the exclusive legislative list should remain sacrosanct. Another example is purported approval by ‘citizens’ of the provision to divorce local governments from the states that constitute them. The Federal Republic of Nigeria will be the first such federation in the world, just as it will be the first federation that is incapable of tolerating state and local government police for purposes of enforcing laws and ordinances created by states and local governments.

    Without doubt, the report released to Leadership Sunday must signal the message of a luta continua to lovers of federalism and believers in federalism as the only way to ensure sustainable democracy and development in post-colonial Nigeria.

     

  • Governors’ battle for true federalism

    Governors’ battle for true federalism

    Governors are raising fundamental questions germane to peaceful co-existence in the country. These include state police, devolution of power, restructuring of the polity and status of the local government. But critics have described them as oppressors in their states. Group Political Editor EMMANUEL OLADESU examines the Governors’ Forum’s battle for true federalism within the context of their opposition to council autonomy.

     

    The Nigerian Governors’ Forum (NGF) is not recognised by the 1999 Constitution. Membership of the association is voluntary. Its resolutions and decisions are advisory and not binding. But the body cannot be ignored by any politician. Observers believe that it is a potent force in the polity. In fact, it has now become a platform for the ventilation of grievances against the defective federal structure by the governors.

    Many politicians actually fear the body, despite its lack of legal backing. Recently, Senator Smart Adeyemi (Kogi Central District) chided the NGF for frustrating the constitution amendment process. He argued that governors have not given the exercise maximum support because they are opposed to local government autonomy. Also, former Education Minister Prof. Jubril Aminu has castigated the governors for exercising sweeping powers. He described the NGF, currently led by Rivers State Governor Rotimi Amaechi, as an oppressive body, whose wings should be clipped. Also, recently, prominent Ijaw leader and former Information Minister Chief Edwin Clark flayed the governors for oppressing the President. He said their virulent attacks were unwarranted. He also berated them for a shortfall in ethical perception, pointing out that, they have tolerated corruption by not speaking against the corrupt activities of their colleagues.

    In the past, tension existed between the 36 governors and federal legislators from their states. Some of the governors labeled the lawmakers as “Abuja politicians”, who are not conversant with the situation at home. Since the collapse of party supremacy, the governors’ powers and influence increased. In many states governors decide who gets what, how and when. Party faithful worship them as thin gods and lords of manor. Parties’ executive committees at the ward, council and state levels are created in their image. They are also the chief financiers of their states’ party chapters, dispenser of appointments and resources and automatic party leaders.

    The NGF’s challenge to President Goodluck Jonathan on true federalism has jolted him. The President, and his deputy, Alhaji Namadi Sambo, who are former governors, could not underrate the association. The body has instituted four cases against the federal government. The most prominent one is the revenue allocation litigation. According to the governors, the President has a case to answer over the Sovereign Wealth Fund. Akwa Ibom State Governor Godswill Akpabio, who said that a master-servant relationship should not characterise inter-governmental relations in the country, frowned at the skewed revenue allocation formula. He said it was worrisome that the 36 states share 22 percent of the national revenue and the federal government gets 52 percent. He called for the review of the formula to enable the governors discharge their duties to their states.

    The governor of Ekiti, Dr. Kayode Fayemi, agreed with this view. But he expressed worry over the secrecy in governance, saying that no governor knows the amount that the country earns daily from oil. His Delta State counterpart, Dr. Emmanuel Uduaghan, objected to the opposition against the Petroleum Industry Bill (PIB). He said it is injurious to the people of the Niger Delta. Also, the governor said the time is ripe for the country to have state police, revised revenue allocation formula and true fiscal federalism.

     

    Governors as godfathers

     

    Since the aborted Third Republic, governors have assumed the status of godfathers. They dictated to the Houses of Assembly and ensured that the Speakers were under their armpit. President Jonathan was sensitive to the governors’ awesome powers when he requested them to nominate candidates for ministerial slots. That special privilege, which enraged the ruling party, further increased the powers and influence of the state party leaders, to the detriment of those outside their camps.

    Tongues were wagging. Would the governors recommend to the President credible party chieftains for the critical assignment? Would they only push forward names of lackeys and stooges who cannot challenge their domineering postures in the states? Would performing serving ministers who were not in the good books of the governors make the list? Would the nomination process be fair to all? Will it lead to the appointment of credible people as ministers at this critical time? Will the ministers not become governors’ liaison officers? Answers to these questions were elusive. Those who shared this view have described the ‘council of ministers’ as governors’ liaison officers in the federal cabinet.

    Analysts pointed out that the President may have unwittingly created discord in his party. They submitted that ministers who have performed creditably may not be nominated by the governors, if they are perceived as threats to their future ambition. They also pointed out that there was nothing on ground to guard against the misuse of the nomination power or privilege.

    However, President Jonathan adopted the option of carrying the governors along to ensure harmony in the state chapters of the party. The goal, analysts said, was to avert the recurrent situation whereby governors, who are state party leaders, work at cross purpose with ministers who are expected to work harmoniously with them for the success of the party at elections.

    The President, it was learnt, was fed up with the constant rivalry between the governors and ministers over their antagonistic political ambitions. In many PDP states, the party has often been polarised into the camps of governors and party colleagues, who are dubbed ‘Abuja politicians’ by the governors’ men. When the two factions struggled for the soul of the party in the state, the party had always ended as the main casualty. Ahead of the primaries that heralded the general elections, PDP states boiled over the contest for supremacy between governors and National Assembly members on one hand and governors and ministers on the other hand.

     

    Are governors dictators?

     

    As party leaders, governors are in a vantage position to manipulate the primaries to favour themselves or their anointed candidates. They have the deep purse to win the majority to their side and damn the consequence. But this combative style has always backfired. In Oyo State, although Governor Adebayo Alao-Akala and his men succeeded in edging out Senator Teslim Folarin at the primaries, the centre could still not hold as things fell apart. Former Governor Rashidi Ladoja, who suffered similar fate, left the party with his followers. PDP kissed the dust at the polls.

    In many states, the Houses of Assembly work hollow to the executive. The governor decides who emerges as the Speaker. Except in Lagos State, most governors loathe the idea of a fully independent legislature, supported by the House of Assembly Service Commission. Governors also determine, in many instances, who becomes members of the Houses of Assembly, Representatives and Senate. A political scientist, Boniface Ayodele, said the hands of the governors are also heavy on the local governments. “They are afraid to conduct council elections. They prefer to set up caretaker committees composed by their lackeys and cronies”, said the Ekiti State University don. In fact, some governors interfere in local chieftaincy tussles and insist on the candidature of their friends and associates for traditional thrones. “Governors are too powerful. The problem is that there is no one to tame them in their states, not even the parliament”, Ayodele added.

     

    Governors and party supremacy

     

    In the Second Republic, governors were regarded as primus inter pares by the members of the executive councils they presided over as Chief Executives. During that era, governors could not isolate themselves from the pack of democrats who constituted their teams. The new breed, who had blazed the trail in the Third Republic, were not rooted in the democratic culture of earlier periods, which thrived on internal democracy, constructive dialogue and wide consultation. In that era, which was generally regarded as an era of strong political culture, party supremacy was upheld and governors, ministers, commissioners, special advisers and state and federal parliamentarians were bound by party constitutions, directives, guidelines, rules and regulations. The late Kwara State kingpin, Dr. Olusola Saraki, who , alluded to the National Party of Nigeria (NPN) caucuses, submitted that these elected functionaries knew their limits because the party was supreme.

    The beat changed in 1999. Immediately the governors stabilised in their offices, the buck, henceforth, stopped on their tables. During the second term of former President Olusegun Obasanjo, governors were instrumental to the nomination of scores of politicians for ministerial positions. The formula employed for their selection was devoid of equity. Those who had scores to settle with the governors were denied the opportunity, despite their qualifications, competence and service to the party. Also, in 2007, governors were completely in charge. Only the candidates endorsed by them made the ministerial list. The governors also instructed the senators from their states to ensure that they scale through the screening hurdles in the Upper Chamber. A few of them who were lucky to be appointed by the President without consultation and involvement of the governors soon fell out of favour with the governors and the party at the state level.

    Lagos politician Isiaka Adekunle-Ibrahim, said governors grew wings because of the weakness of the country’s political culture. “The Governors Forum, as we have seen, is a powerful and influential political bloc. They are so powerful in the PDP and many of them often have their ways, no matter the odds”, he fumed.

     

    Governors’ push for true federalism

     

    However, governors have denied the allegations that they are oppressing the President. They claimed that, it is the federal government that is oppressing the states. Ekiti State Governor Kayode Fayemi clarified that the NGF is not driven by politics. “I am not a member of the political party that is the majority in the Governors’ Forum. It is only things that we agree that we push collectively. There are lot of things that governors do that they don’t do together. So, I don’t know how anyone will come by the conclusion that we are frustrating the country, oppressing the President and not allowing the constitution review process to progress”, he said.

    The governor described Nigeria as a federation, adding that, there are only two levels of government, which are coordinate and no level can lord it over the other. “In a federation, and I speak as a political scientist now, and not as a governor, we have two federating units. When you have two federating units, they are not subordinate units. They are coordinate units. That is the language we use in political science. It means that they are sovereign, and if you are a sovereign, this notion that the federal government is the one protecting the nation against the excesses of rascals, criminals at the state level, who Nigeria must be protected from, is feeding bottle federalism.

    “ It is totally absurd and nonsensical because I don’t know of any federation in the world that operates that way. In the United States, the President cannot relate to the governor of California or the governor of Massachusetts, who is from his own political party that way. If he crosses the line, they will tell him that, ‘Mr. President, are you really sure of what you are doing?’ You cannot hijack the powers of a coordinate federal unit. But that is what happens here, and because governors are not the most popular public office holders, people confuse logic with logicality”, Feyemi added.

    He stressed that the governors were in a battle to sustain federalism. “On the issue we have raised fundamental questions, what people refer to as state police, our argument has not be about state police. The media describe it as state police. It is about multi-level police. We have never been against the federal police. We have said that the federal police has its own role in a federation. State police has its own role. Local police has its own role. Even, the university campus police has its role in that multi-level approach to security, particularly, law enforcement. But everybody refuses to take our line. They insist on federal police. I don’t know any governor that has ever said that the federal police is unacceptable and unwanted. We have always asked for is a multi-level police force to tackle our security challenge.

    “The other issue is our interpretation of the Section 162 of the constitution. We have a religious interpretation of it in the Governors’ Forum, which is why we are in court on about four cases. Sectionn162 of the constitution makes it very clear. Every penny that comes to the coffers of the Nigerian state goes into only one account, the Federation Account. Not JP Morgan, not Citibank. Because we run this federalism as a unitary state; of course, our authoritarian military past is affecting us; people do not pay fidelity to this critical issue. Monies are collected by NNPC. We don’t even know the amount. No governor in this country can tell you how much this country earns on a daily basis. There should be accountability and transparency, and nobody gives me a full picture of what we earn. Governors have raised these issues at every forum. We have four cases in the Supreme Court. The federal government has been requesting for an out of court settlements in the cases. Does someone who oppresses you go to the court to seek reprieve? We are the ones being oppressed and nobody is coming to our aid. May be, we have not sufficiently made it clear that the states are the ones being oppressed by the federal government.

    “That is actually what is happening. Some people are used to collecting money in an unaccountable manner. Let us render it to the Nigerian people. We like what Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, the Coordinating Minister of the Economy, has been doing by publishing what goes to us. That is fine. Our people should know what we get so that they can monitor us. We too want to know the actual money earned by the Nigerian state to which we belong, so that we can also challenge it with our own independent analysis. People should support us, instead of haranguing us”, Fayemi stressed.

  • ‘True federalism is the answer’

    ‘True federalism is the answer’

    Delta State Governor Emmanuel Uduaghan spoke with Correspondent BISI OLANIYI on the agitation for true federalism, state police, Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) crises and other issues.

    There is war in the ruling Peoples Democratic Party (PDP). What is the way out of the crisis?

    There is no war in PDP. As a governor of a PDP state, as the leader of the party in my state, and a leader of the party at the national level, by virtue of being a member of the National Executive Council (NEC), I tell you that there is no war in PDP.

    Yes, there are challenges in the party and these are challenges that are common in every big party like the PDP. There was never a time the governors decided to move against the national chairman of PDP. Alhaji Bamanga Tukur is an elderstatesman. We have a lot of respect for him. What you call the war in PDP is simply imaginary. It is not real. Whatever is being put in the media is being done by certain persons in Abuja.

    What is your position on the constitution review and contentious isusues like the state police and power generation, transmission and distribution?

    I am a strong advocate of state police. Security is too important to be played with. States across the country have been doing so much to empower the police. Power generation, transmission and distribution are still being controlled by the Federal Government, through the Power Holding Company of Nigeria. Some states are generating power, but there are challenges in the areas of transmission and distribution. My position on the constitution review is that this is the time to entrench true federalism in the country. There is no point paying lip service to it. Only true federalism will allow the component parts of the country to develop at their own pace. It will allow you to control power, security, resources and a lot of things.

    Are you comfortable with the Petroleum Industry Bill (PIB) before the National Assembly?

    We not only have polluted air in the Niger Delta, the soil is so badly destroyed that nothing can grow on it again. As for the rivers, they are so badly polluted that all the fishes in them are now dead.

    People should be sympathetic with what is happening in the Niger Delta, because of the environmental damage. They can no longer farm or fish, as a result of pollution and environmental degradation.

    The ten per cent to the host communities, as stated in the PIB, is not too much. I would have preferred 50 per cent, to address the developmental challenges. There are communities all over the world that have such funds, which sometimes are put in trust, that are managed locally or internationally. If the crude oil is in other parts of this country, the debate will not be on. Other people should show understanding.

    What if the PIB does not scale through legislative approval?

    I do not want to think about that. I am just praying it goes through.

    Do you believe in death penalty for kidnappers?

    As a person, I do not believe in death penalty for kidnappers. No crime has been solved by the death penalty. Death penalty leads to more desperation. Notable people have been unnecessarily killed and the evidence brought to the court, sometimes, is not accurate and innocent people are sentenced to death. We have the right to life. The public execution in Nigeria has not stopped armed robbery.

    Kidnapping is a big challenge to us. It has become an easier criminal activity than armed robbery. It is a bit of migration from armed robbery to kidnapping. There is no dividing line between the two. For me, a kidnapper is an armed robber. Instead of stealing money, he is stealing human beings and forcing people to negotiate. It is another form of armed robbery.

    We are dealing with kidnapping, first by strengthening our security agencies. Secondly, we are ensuring that our intelligence network is greatly improved upon. We are using various bodies for that. We are using vigilantes, traditional rulers, religious leaders and some of our youths. Intelligence is very key in this regard.

    The case in Delta State is a little more complex than it appears. Apart from the economic reason, it has a political undertone. At a time, the focus was on government appointees and their relatives, persons that are close to the governor. But notwithstanding, we are making progress.

    The case of the mother of the Finance Minister Dr. Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, about two months ago was a sore point indeed. But since then, things have been more on the quiet side. What has actually assisted us in tackling kidnapping is the ban on the use of commercial motorcycles (Okadas) in our major cities. Commercial motorcycles are major tools the kidnappers were using. Once we succeeded in banning motorcycles in some of our major cities, those cities have been quiet. We are moving to other areas, where we still have pockets of kidnapping. Even the Boko Haram suicide bombers have been using motorcycles.

    How was your experience like during the kidnap of the mother of Finance Minister Dr. Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala?

    The truth is that every human being is important. Every human being kidnapped is a big challenge. Of course, there are still some human beings that give more challenges, if anything happens to them. Her own was more challenging, first, she is from the royal family – the queen of a community. Then, she is the wife of a prominent traditional ruler in the state.

    It is not just about the minister, but about the fact that the kidnappers went inside the palace to take a queen. It was very challenging.

    When will your administration’s power plant be ready?

    From the port in Port Harcourt, we have brought by road, the turbines to where we are building the power plant. The turbines are not more than six kilometres to the site. We still have the challenge of moving them to the site. By the end of this year, the power plant will be ready.

    We still have the challenge of transmission. The Federal Government is still totally in charge of transmission of power. Our hope is that when we start generating power, the people of Delta State should be the beneficiaries, rather than just take it to the national grid.

    How far have you gone with your administration’s “Delta Without Oil” initiative?

    We started with “Delta Without Oil”, but it is now “Delta Beyond Oil.” It simply means an economic agenda developing other areas of the economy, different from oil and gas, but using the current funds coming from oil and gas to develop such other areas of the economy, especially in the areas of agriculture and solid minerals. In terms of agriculture, we have our emphasis on the value chain of agriculture, by being able to encourage our farmers at the local level to produce so much. First, to feed ourselves. It is very important that we are able to feed ourselves and then we produce extra for economic gain.

    A typical cassava farmer is able to produce enough during the year to feed his family and will simply produce more that he can sell. When they are encouraged to produce so much and they do not have anything to do with the excess that they produce, they will be discouraged. When they produce so much, the price will drop.

    When we are talking of the value chain, we are talking of a situation where the farmer produces cassava and there is a system that ensures that for the fact that he produces it, it is taken off and processed. That is where the issue of processing comes in. We have a value chain from the farmer to the processing and packaging. We are encouraging the peasant farmers and large investors that will bring in cassava processing machines. I just used cassava as an example.

    One thing about agriculture is that it can employ massively and it can ensure that we do not go hungry. A society that is not hungry will be peaceful. If you are hungry, you are angry. If you are angry, you tend to be violent. A society whose people are able to feed themselves tends to be more peaceful, than when people are not able to feed themselves. We are placing emphasis on agriculture.

    We are using the economic agenda, believing that crude oil is a commodity that is very volatile. We are not sure of the price of oil at any particular time and will affect the state and national economies. It can also finish with time and we may not have the oil again. What happens? That is why, we, as a state, we put in place the economic agenda. So that in the future, with or without oil, we can survive. I am glad that all over now, in Nigeria, everybody is talking of Nigeria beyond oil.

  • Parasitic federalism

    Parasitic federalism

    LEADING northern politicians, including Chairman of the Northern Governors Forum (NGF) and Niger State Governor, Alhaji Babangida Aliyu, Senator Danladi Sankara of the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) from Jigawa State and Senator Abba Ibrahim of the All Nigeria People’s Party (ANPP) from Yobe State, have vehemently voiced their opposition to several aspects of the proposed Petroleum Industry Bill (PIB). The bill is awaiting the consideration of the National Assembly.

    From all indications, the passage of this all-important bill designed to sanitise and enhance the efficiency of Nigeria’s corruption-ridden petroleum sector will continue to be stalled by these and other distractions, to the country’s detriment. The specific grouse of the North is that the PIB further skews revenue allocation to component parts of the country in favour of the Niger Delta, which is the repository of Nigeria’s petroleum resources. In particular, the northern spokesmen take exception to Sections 116-118 of the PIB, which provide for the creation of a Petroleum Host Community Fund (PHCF), to which 10 percent of oil revenues will be paid for the development of economic and social infrastructure of communities in oil-bearing states.

    The northern political elite contend that the Niger Delta already enjoys considerable advantage in revenue allocation through the 13 percent derivation fund received by oil-producing states, the creation of the Niger Delta Development Commission (NDDC) with an annual budgetary allocation of N500 billion, as well as the Niger Delta ministry funded to the tune of N400 billion per annum. They also cite the substantial funds committed to the Amnesty Programme for de-militarised Niger Delta youths as well as extensive development initiatives undertaken in the area through the Corporate Social Responsibility of oil firms.

    What is portrayed as ‘preferential treatment’ of the Niger Delta states certainly does not take into consideration the historic injustices suffered over decades by the region. The exploration of oil and associated flaring of gas has completely devastated the environment, polluted the waters, destroyed sources of livelihood and created health hazards for millions of hapless residents. The oil wealth that largely sustains the Nigerian economy ironically became the source of pervasive poverty and chronic underdevelopment in the states where the commodity is located. It took a bloody insurgency that almost brought the economy to its knees for the plight of the Niger Delta to be taken seriously and attempts made to address its peculiar developmental challenges.

    The sentiments of the North on this issue only reflect Nigeria’s unhealthy and abnormal federal structure whereby all parts of the country are dependent on centrally collected and distributed revenue derived almost totally from the Niger Delta. In a genuine federal system, each part of the country should be able to tap its own resources and ingenuity to be significantly self-sustaining as well as contributing to the common wealth. What we have instead is an oil-driven parasitic federalism in which unviable and complacent states survive on handouts from the centre. This dependency syndrome must come to an end if the full potential of Nigeria is to be optimised.

    Ironically, the North has been the strongest supporter of the current over-centralised structure that undermines the development of the states. For instance, because of the monopolistic control of mineral resources by the Federal Government, several northern states are unable to take advantage of their huge deposits of solid mineral resources for the benefit of their people. What the north should fight is not the right of the Niger Delta to benefit from the resources within their territorial jurisdiction but the abnormal federal structure that impedes the rapid transformation of the entire country. Above all, it’s high time states began to look inwards for sustenance rather than continue to depend solely on handouts from the centre.

  • I will abide by what Nigerians decide on federalism, says Jonathan

    •Jemibewon, Fashola, others split over zones

    President Goodluck Jonathan yesterday said he would abide by what Nigerians may eventually decide on how to restructure the country.

    But he said the way forward is for all Nigerians to commit themselves to the cause of national integration.

    Jonathan spoke at a colloquium at ThisDay Dome, ,Abuja, to mark the 80th birthday of ex-Vice-President Alex Ekwueme.

    The panelists comprised Anambra State Governor Peter Obi, Niger State Deputy Governor Musa Ibeto, the leader of Niger Delta and Southsouth Peoples Assembly, Chief Edwin Clark, former Minister of Finance and Chairman of the Northern Leaders Political Forum (NLPF), Alhaji Adamu Ciroma, former Minister of Police Affairs, David Jemibewon, Kano State Governor represented by his deputy Umar Ganduja and the former Vice-President of the World Bank, Dr. Oby Ezekwesili.

    The mini-conference was moderated by ThisDay Chairman Nduka Obaigbena, with the following respondents, former national chairman of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Senator Ahmadu Ali, former Akwa Ibom State Governor Victor Attah, former PDP National Chairman Chief Solomon Lar, a former Secretary to the Bayelsa State Government, Bolaere Ketebu.

    Represented by the Secretary to the Government of the Federation, Senator Anyim Pius Anyim, the President said he has resolved to work for the actualisation of national integration.

    “The challenge of our time is the failure of our constitution. 52 years of independence, it is clear to all that there is really the need for every one to commit to national integration.”

    On the agitation for true federalism, Jonathan assured that he would abide by the decision of Nigerians on how the nation should be structured.

    He urged leaders to stay away from divisive tendencies in order to build the nation.

    The President described Ekwueme as one of the architects of present day Nigeria and founding member of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and indeed a great star of our time.

    Former Head of State Gen Yakubu Gowon, who chaired the occasion, said: “I do not accept call for sovereign national conference but a national constitutional conference.

    “Today’s event may well serve as a mini national constitutional conference because people from various ethnic and religious groups are represented here.

    “Nigeria needs a veritable platform such as this one offered by the former Vice President’s birthday for us to redesign the way forward and where issues relating to the equitable distribution of our national resources can be discussed and resolved”

    On the celebrant, Gowon said: “Ekwueme’s mental alertness is never in doubt despite grey hairs, just as he may risk losing count of his string of degrees in Architecture, Urban Planning, Sociology, History and Law.

    “He is an astute politician and a consensus builder. I know him to be a good man and a patriotic Nigerian.”

    Gowon, who stood in for former President Shehu Shagari, said Ekwueme’s penchant for acquiring academic degrees is perhaps unequalled.

    Lagos State Governor Raji Fashola said he disagreed with the move to introduce the concept of six geopolitical zones into the constitution.

    The governor said with the present agitation for more funds between the existing tiers of government, it is obvious that the six geopolitical zone structures will find it extremely difficult to find its bearing.

    Fashola proposed the Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN) propelled regional economic integration being canvassed for the Southwest.

    He listed some of the national values that the country must always stand for as multi-party system, true federalism and a resolve to address the insecurity problem and incidence of natural disaster as one body devoid of politicking.

    He described Ekwueme’s as gentleman and one of the few good men Nigeria can boost of.

    On his part, Obi said there is no need to amend the constitution.

    The governor said: “The creation of the six geopolitical zones was based on injustice and inequality because some zones have seven states, whereas other zone like the Southeast has five states.

    “There is, therefore, the need to amend the equality as contained in the six geo-political zones.”

    Ganduje said the six geo-political zones as presently constituted is “not acceptable to Kano people”.

    He said the zones were a military creation during the 1994/1995 National Constitutional Conference.

    “The creation of the zones was deceitful. It was not based on land mass and population. We are deceiving ourselves; the six geo-political zones are not acceptable to Kano people.”

    Jemibewon, who spoke thereafter, opposed the call for the call for the cancellation of the zones, saying if anything like that is done, “there would be uprising”.

    Ibeto, who represented the Niger State Governor, called for the strengthening

    Said he: “There is nothing wrong with the six geo-political zones, what I will advocate is that the zones should be strengthened to perform. We need to strengthen the zones by providing the enabling environment.”

    Mrs. Ezekwesili said the significance of the colloquium is the identification of the vision and identity of the country.

    She called for the establishment of the law and order as what happened in Port Harcourt and Mubi where students were killed still remain a challenge to entity called Nigeria.

    Ciroma said he is opposed to zoning, but, in the long run, the best option is to improve the performance level of the states to ensure good governance.

    He said if the argument of the zones is carried into a conclusive end, then the states as a federating structure would have to go.

    Clark said the zones as the federating units are not equal, as “some zones have more states than others.

    “There are zones with seven states and others with five. Where then is the equality?”

    He said some states are dependent on others and cannot even initiate or generate funds as they depend on crude oil and federally collectible revenue as their source of income.

    Clark called for the scrapping of the states to be replaced with the six zones as the federating units.

    Attah said a national conference where the future of the country will be decided should be planned and all ethnic groups will subscribe to the agreement of one Nigeria.

    He said so far, Nigerians seem not be satisfied with the agreement of the constitution.

    Ms Ketebu queried why Bayelsa State has only eight local governments instead of 10 that was recommended by the National Constitutional Conference of 1994 and 1995.

    He said the White Paper of the Constitutional Conference was tampered with, as the outcome was not what the conference produced. She said Nigerians should be given opportunity to produce the constitution that is acceptable to it.

    Lar called for the improvement in the status of the six geo-political zones. He lamented that the powers at the centre were enormous and that in the past the regions had much powers before the military adventure in politics.

    “It was the military that made the powers at the centre to be enormous. They made the states to become like local governments.

    “My advice is that Nigerians should be patriotic and we should not be sectional. Let us work to improve the six geo-political zones, it is not good –to scrap them.”

     

  • Ohanaeze backs fiscal federalism, regional police, six regions

    The apex Igbo cultural organization, Ohanaeze Ndigbo, on Friday expressed its support for agitation for fiscal federalism.

    The body also canvassed for recognition of six regional structures in the constitution and establishment of state police.

    This is contained in a paper Ohanaze presented at a two- day Public Hearing on the review of the 1999 Constitution.

    The public hearing was organized by the Senate Committee on Constitution Review in Abuja.

    A top Chieftain of Ohanaeze, Dr. Olisa Ebigwei, made the presentation tagged: “The position of the Igbo nation.”

    Ohanaeze said that there should be six regions corresponding with the present six geo-political zones as the federating units to be headed by elected Governor General.

    The body said that each region should enjoy the same powers and autonomy as was the case at independence in 1960.

    On fiscal federalism, Ohanaeze noted that at independence, revenue sharing formula was 50 per cent on derivation to the region of origin, 20 per cent to the Federal Government while the balance of 30 per cent was shared equally among the regional governments including the regions of origin.

    It said that the formula was reconfirmed in the 1963 Republican Constitution.

    To make more funds available to the proposed six regions, Ohanaeze recommended 30 per cent based on derivation and 70 per cent to be shared by the Federal Government and the six regions taking into account the reduced responsibilities of the Federal Government and the increase roles of the regions.

    It said the agreed allocation for the six regions should be shared equally among them.

    On the tenure of the chief executive at federal, regional and states, the body said a president of the Federal Republic of Nigeria shall hold office for a single term of six years and shall not be eligible for another term of office.

    It said the president shall be assisted by a vice president of his choice, whose role shall be defined by the constitution.