The Nation Newspaper

Tag: restructuring

  • Restructuring resonates at public lecture

    The clamour for restructuring took the center stage at a public lecture held yesterday at the Olabisi Onabanjo University (oou), Ago-Iwoye, Ogun State.

    The theme of the lecture delivered by Professor Oyebanji Oyelaran-Oyeyinka was “From Consumption to Production: A Road Map for getting Nigeria out of Economic Recession”.

    The guests including the executive secretary Of Obafemi Awolowo Foundation Dr Tokunbo Awolowo Dosumu, former deputy Senate Minority Leader, Senator Olrunnimbe Mamora and others insist that restructuring is the solution.

    Awolowo –Dosunmu said true federalism which her father championed right from his political career till his death is the solution to political crisis that is threatening the security of the nation.

    She said true federalism as practiced in the First Republic whereby each region was allowed to control its resources and develop at their own pace is what we need to move this country forward. The unitary system of governance which the 1999 Constitution represents is creating tension among the component units, she explained.

    “Those opposed to true federalism will sooner or later realise their folly because truth will come out to be truth. For Nigeria to remain mere geographical expression, it must be restructured.

    To Senator Mamora the easiest way to restructure is to have a new constitution. He said the National have no power to produce a new constitution, it can only amend; the power lies with the Constituent Assembly. He said agitation for restructuring by different zones of the country is borne out of desire for self- determination which can be obtained in the 1963 Republican Constitution.

    Mamora said from consumption to production is part of restructuring. Our penchant for foreign goods is legendary, it depletes our foreign reserve, he stated.

    The guest  lecturer noted that between 2000 and 2008 not less than 820 companies had relocated from Nigeria to Ghana and other African countries owing to poor power supply. He said poverty and unemployment  remain major challenges of the country.

     

  • Restructuring: Actions of the NASS disappointing, APC Chief

    A member of the ruling All Progressive Congress (APC), Chief Felix Anirah, has described as highly disappointing the failure of the National Assembly to support the call for devolution of powers to the states and restructuring of the country.

    He also said that the leadership of the National Assembly failed to see the urgency in the cry of Nigerians for restructuring, which he said would bring lasting peace and true federalism to the country.

    He said further that had the lawmakers supported devolution of powers to the federating units, “the issue of resource control would have been laid to rest by that singular act.”

    He equally berated the National Assembly’s voting against the Gender Equality Bill, saying “it’s is so sad that in the 21st century Nigeria, national leaders are still extremely biased against women.”

    He stated further that considering contributions of women during elections and to national development, “I think that 35% affirmation is even too low since they constitute over 60% of the voting population.

    “When the National Assembly resumes from their break, Nigerian women should mobilise to the National Assembly ensure that the bill is revisited and passed, or in the alternative they should occupy the National Assembly as the youths did in the quest to pass Not Too Young To Run Bill”, he said.

    He, however, commended the lawmakers for the passage of the local government autonomy bill, saying that it was a welcomed development.

    “We are calling on the 36 state governors to give the needed cooperation to ensure that the state Houses of Assembly do the needful by passing the bill, so that meaningful development will be experienced at the local government which is closest to the people.

    “We also use this medium to call on the national leadership of National Union of Local Government Employee (NULGE) and state executive to mobilise their members at the state to mount pressure on the state Assembly to ensure that the bill is passed. The nation is pleading on behalf of NULGE to the almighty governors to please let our people go (the Local Government).

    On the scrapping of the State Independent Electoral Commission, (SIEC), the APC chieftain said “the SIEC have failed woefully over the years, considering the pattern of results churned out by the bodies, it’s either total PDP, APC or APGA, so, scrapping them by the National Assembly is a cheering news to Nigerians.”

    Speaking on developments around the Felix Anirah Foundation, the organisation through which the party chieftain had reached thousands of Delta people with free medical care, he said that the foundation had been silently handling some events in the past three months, particularly, in the sporting activities.

    “We hosted the Delta Federation Cup final both male and female at the Sapele stadium.  Recently we sponsored a bone surgical operation for a 12 years old indigent pupil, Princess Nasiru, at the Central Hospital Sapele, which cost the foundation about N225,000.

    “We want to use this medium to commend the management of the Central Hospital Sapele, and particularly the Surgeon, Dr. James Egwuterai, for giving the Foundation needed support.

    “The Foundation, weekend also promised to sponsor the second edition of the Sapele Athletic Club Football Championship, which is played by cooperate organizations, religious bodies and football clubs in Sapele. The first edition saw Sapele All-stars football club Sapele defeating Winners Football Club with three un-replied goals at the final played on Sunday, at the Sapele Athletic Club”, he said.

     

  • Restructuring and National Unity 101

    A call for restructuring is not a call for anything antithetical to national unity

    If one were to count the number of times that Restructuring and National Unity occurred in the country’s newspapers and broadcast news in the last few months, it would certainly be a huge task. It is no exaggeration for such counters to discover that no other words rival these two, apart from the name of President Mohammed Buhari in relation to the progress he has been making with his medical treatment in the United Kingdom. Today’s piece is a response to a regular reader of this column who has asked that I ‘break down’ a recurrent phrase in this column: restructuring to ensure that national and subnational governments in a federal state share power and sovereignty with the intention to stimulate and sustain unity of the parts or national unity.

    National unity has two connotations in the country. When it is used by members of the ruling group and their clients, it signals an effort by such people to conflate national unity with uniformity of ideas on keeping the existing structure of governance intact. It does not give attention to whether average citizens feel a sense of belonging to the state and to each other as citizens of the same country. In other words, whoever demands any change that may reduce the powers and benefits of those in the saddle of federal power is believed to be working against national unity, where national unity is synonymous with demonstration of consensus on the immutability of an existing system of governance. There is a sense in which this view of national unity and the rhetoric constructed around it is reminiscent of what Ibn Khaldun, an early expert on Arab history, once called Asabiyya, a ruse by members of the ruling group in many Arab countries to keep power for their use and discourage or prevent any move by citizens to reduce the size of power needed by the ruling group to sustain the status quo.

    Many politicians who have emphasised national unity as a concept in the last few months that the tempo of calls for restructuring have increased show more concern for keeping the current structure of power distribution intact. In fact, many of such people have deliberately conflated two contradictory demands by individuals in different sections of the country: secession/ disintegration and restructuring/re-federalisation. It is Asabiyya at its worst for any politician to discuss call for secession and re-federalisation in the same breath. It is obvious that those asking for restructuring do not want to secede from the rest of the country while those calling for secession do not want to be a part of the country.

    A call for restructuring is not a call for anything antithetical to national unity. On the contrary, it is a call for a commitment to reinforce national unity, where unity means creation of a system that facilitates and enriches a sense of belonging among various entities in a plural society. National unity is not a concept reserved for those in power alone; it is one that applies to all the people who inhabit a plural society. Correspondingly, restructuring is a concept that has value by promoting and safeguarding a sense of belonging among various components of socially and culturally plural society through creation of practices that set out to advance social and economic interests of members of the community or society. The phrase ‘members of the community or society’ refers not to representatives of the people but to citizens as principal stakeholders in a democratic polity.

    With respect to restructuring, it is wrong to assume that calls for change to the architecture of governance suggest efforts to water down national unity. In a federal democracy, no political group—national or subnational—should have a right to define terms of association. When politicians and their pundits refer to restructuring as an attempt to undermine national unity, such people are thinking like colonial masters to federating units that perceive the existing structure to be too suffocating for their own progress and happiness. No group in the country—be it in the executive, legislature, or judiciary—has such power over other groups in a federal democracy, regardless of the size of its population in relation to other groups.  Federations result from agreement of all parts to co-habit for mutual progress.  It is failure to sustain an agreement that can be dangerous to national unity. This explains why all federal governments that have succeeded had ensured that they created constitutions that citizens had a stake in from the beginning. That constitution of 1960 is a local example. With such constitutions arrived at by consensus of federating units, both rulers and the ruled are protected from any destabilisation of the political system. When some of such federating groups have reasons to feel uncomfortable with the extant system, they ought to have freedom to call for restructuring or renewal of the constitution.

    Let us examine a few provisions in the current constitution that citizens calling for restructuring may consider inimical to creating an enabling constitutional environment for states to respond to the needs of citizens and residents in the states. Restructuring is, more than anything else, removing existing practices that may be perceived as negative to interests of federating units or adding new practices that can enrich such interests. For example, the current law that allows the federal government and private companies to generate and distribute electricity while forbidding states to do the same can threaten national unity. How does such a law as the Power Reforms Act of 2005 enhance unity, if states cannot generate and distribute power, even if states need to create mini-grids for that purpose? What is so sacred about the national grid that no electricity generated by states must pass through it, the way the energy produced by Enron under Lagos State at the beginning of the 4th Republic had to be appropriated by the federal government, even if such law leads to darkness for citizens whose tax money was used to pay for megawatts? How would giving states the power to generate and distribute power to its citizens endanger national unity? Why in the first place should states need to ask for permission to generate electricity for its citizens in a federal democracy?

    Similarly, the current structure puts railway on the Exclusive List of Functions, thus making construction of rail lines and operation of rail transport by states illegal. If a state can provide rail transportation for its citizens, why should there be a constitutional provision that insists that only states in which the central government is interested in building rail transport system that can have it? How does this kind of provision enhance national unity or how would putting railway on the concurrent list hamper national unity?  Furthermore, a matter recently raised by Femi Falana regarding the federal government’s disobedience of the Court of Appeals’ judgement that the “federal government lacks the power to  authorize dredgers to mine any resources in the intra-inland waterways in Lagos State” draws attention to the danger inherent in wholesale importation of decrees created by military dictators into the 1999 Constitution. Why should control over intra-inland waterways in all parts of the country not be under the control of states in which such waterways are located? How does changing such decrees (converted into constitutional provisions) constitute danger to national unity?

    Moreover, why should construction of school curriculum in a federal system—ethnic or territorial—be in the hands of the central government? Put differently, how would leaving education at all levels in the hands of the states in Nigeria, as it is in Germany and the United States, be deleterious to national unity? Why must revenue for any form of sales tax first be sent to the central government for distribution to states? In what ways can leaving such revenue in the states from which it is generated endanger national unity? What advantage to national unity ensues from making registration of business a federal function?

    There are several other provisions in the current constitution, especially in respect of items on the concurrent list that those calling for restructuring may believe to be in the interest of development at the state level where governors and state legislators have direct relationship to citizens, a situation that does not exist for the federal government.  As elementary as the examples provided here may seem, they illustrate the concerns of those calling for restructuring, which by any stretch of imagination should endanger national unity. On the contrary, changing such provisions are, more likely to sustain and enrich national unity.

    Now that the ruling political party and governors of various regions have commissioned committees to study demand for restructuring, it will be of benefit to all saddled with such responsibility to assume that such calls are, unlike those for disintegration, not intended to destroy national unity but to promote it.

  • Between advocates and opponents of restructuring

    Between advocates and opponents of restructuring

    The souring of our national political discourse over the matter of restructuring the quasi-unitary system that the military imposed on the country since 1966 is not in the interest of anyone, whether advocates or foes of restructuring. Name-calling certainly does not help. Threat is counter-productive. There is no viable substitute for an adult discourse that privileges rationality over emotion no matter the depth of passion that the latter invokes.

    On the other hand, however, the state of the debate is a true reflection of who we are: true offspring of our founding fathers. They did not initially zero in on federalism. They had robust debates, sometimes inflamed with ruinous rhetoric, including, yes, name-calling! Threats of withdrawal from the union were made by all sides. But in the end, it was reason that prevailed and won initial opponents of federalism to the side of its advocates. The leaders saw the wisdom in the federal option, they embraced it and made the best of it.  Indeed, shortly after the motion for independence was passed in 1957, Alhaji Tafawa Balewa, who would later be named Prime Minister of the new nation, celebrated the choice of the federal system for the new nation in the following words:

    “But to me the most important result of the constitutional changes in 1954 was the introduction of a federal form of government for Nigeria—a system which I had advocated as far back as 1948 in the old Legislative Council. I am pleased to see that we are now all agreed that the federal system is, under present conditions, the only sure basis on which Nigeria can remain united. We must recognise our diversity and the peculiar conditions under which the different tribal (sic) communities live in this country. To us in Nigeria therefore unity in diversity is a source of great strength, and we must do all in our power to see that this federal system of government is strengthened and maintained.”

    A few years later after independence, the all-powerful forces of human nature invaded the system. Instead of strengthening the federal system, they subjected it to series of assaults. Those who sought to strengthen the system were treated as pariahs and for their intransigence, they were made to pay a heavy price, including long-term incarceration.

    Its lopsided nature was the first major concern for the strength of the federation. From 1954 to 1960, there was nothing resembling a common national identity beside the occupation of a common territory. Political parties were formed based on regional and ethnic identities. An obvious population imbalance between the three regions meant that in a parliamentary system, the region whose census figure was more than double that of the other two can expect to rule the country in perpetuity. Obviously too, if the unity of the new country was the consensual vision of its leadership, this kind of imbalance needed to be addressed for the sake of a more perfect union.

    Working for a more perfect federal union which accommodated diversity without jeopardising the goal of unity was the rationale of the agitation for the creation of more regions and especially for drawing the boundaries of regions to coincide with linguistic identities, which Chief Obafemi Awolowo championed. It was what attracted ethnic minorities to his political philosophy. Unfortunately, it was what irritated his fellow political leaders, especially the great Ahmadu Bello and Prime Minister Tafawa Balewa both of whom had been staunchly in favour of true federalism and regional autonomy. The idea that the North can be broken up into more regions was unacceptable to them. And it did not happen even when the Midwest was carved out of the Western Region.

    The rebalancing of the federation, which political leaders failed to do, the Gowon military administration accomplished with the creation of 12 states. However, this was after the federal constitution had been suspended and the system had been unitarised to conform with the military ideal of unity without diversity.

    The 1963 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria opened with the following preamble:

    “Having firmly resolved to establish the Federal Republic of Nigeria, with a view to ensuring the unity of our people and faith in our fatherland, for the purpose of promoting inter-African co-operation and solidarity, in order to ensure world peace and international understanding, and so as to further the ends of liberty, equality and justice both in our country and in the world at large, we the people of Nigeria, by our representatives here in Parliament assembled, do hereby declare, enact and give to ourselves the following Constitution….:”

    That made the 1963 Constitution the first and last sincere declaration on behalf of the people by their representatives. It was a federal constitution that respected the diversity of the country, acknowledged the right of regions to have their own constitutions, and accommodated their rights and responsibilities in the running of the country with the establishment of exclusive and concurrent legislative lists. Since then, every military constitution that has parroted the language of the 1963 preamble has been a bogus lie. But it is not just the lie that makes those constitutions intolerable as the foundation of our union, it is also because they have proved incongruent with the aspirations of the teeming population of the nation.

    First, the fact that states have become mere appendages to the central government makes it impossible for them to effectively promote the interests of their residents. This is especially with regards to their responsibility for the social and economic welfare of their citizens. Whereas the 1963 revenue formula prioritises the interests of regions vis-à-vis the allocation of revenue, the 1999 formula reverses this in favour of the central government. In real terms, since states are closer to the people than the central government, they are better placed to know and promote the people’s social and economic well-being than the central government. Therefore, it stands to reason that more revenue be available to states/regions.

    Second, the security interests of regions/states have been compromised with the pivot of the 1999 Constitution to the central government in the matter of the institution of the police. It has become clear that the Nigeria Police is incapable of securing the totality of the country. The upsurge in criminal activities, including kidnapping, cultism and armed robbery is an incontrovertible evidence. But the Constitution has apparently barred states from establishing their own police. It is unclear which interest is more important—the abstract interest of the state in unity or the concrete interest of citizens in security.

    Third, the radical change from an emphasis on regional autonomy which respects diversity and healthy competition to state dependency which objectifies uniformity has been a mockery of the practice of federalism. It is more so when the change was not wrought through a democratic consensus but with the fiat of an unelected military junta which pretended that it knew better than an overwhelming majority of citizens what was good for the country. That majority has relentlessly voiced its concern for the direction that the military has taken the country and has demanded a return to a true federal structure.

    Fourth, while the creation of states has made government closer to the people than the former regions, it is also clear that the balkanisation that state creation represents has made the states weaker vis-à-vis the centre. Whereas the regions were almost self-sufficient in their economic needs, the states have proven incapable of satisfying the yearnings of their people.

    These are the reasons for the call for a return to regional structure. Human nature being what it is, this has not gone down well with those who have benefitted from the current system even if it is not working for all. It is clear, however, that we must come up with a creative approach to our governance structure. To this end, almost every zone of the federation has championed voluntary regional integration. While those efforts are commendable, they are not a substitute for a formal process that recognises the challenge of a wobbly system and summons courage to fix it.

     

    Follow me on Twitter:

    @SegunGbadeg2002

    @HarvestDayPub

  • Electoral reforms panel seeks INEC’s restructuring

    Electoral reforms panel seeks INEC’s restructuring

    The Constitution and  Electoral Reform Committee (CERC) has proposed a massive restructuring of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).

    The Ken Nnamani-led committee, set up by the Federal Government , in its report obtained by The Nation, proposed far-reaching reforms of the electoral agency to make it truly independent.

    Part of its proposal is on the process of appointment of chairman and commissioners of the agency.

    The committee also made recommendations on defection from political parties, how to approach the death of a candidate after winning an election when the result has not been announced and onus of proof before the tribunals.

    It recommended a rigorous screening for the INEC chairman and commissioners.

    It suggested a nine-man screening committee comprising representative of the National Judicial Council (NJC), the Director-General of the Department of State Services (DSS), the National Human Rights Commission, the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) and five others.

    Besides, advised the committee, the 1999 constitution should be amended to enable defecting lawmakers in the National Assembly or state House of Assembly to vacate their seats.

    To avoid a repeat of what happened in Kogi State, the committee said a fresh poll should be conducted if a governorship candidate dies before announcement of results. Abubakar Audu, the All Progressives Congress (APC) candidate died before the result of the election was announced. He was leading on the ballot.

    The report said: “Nigeria operates the independent non-partisan model of constituting the leadership of Election Management Board (EMB).

    “However, the Committee believes that the current method of appointing the leadership of INEC is not sufficiently embedded with the ideals and values identified above.

    “The appointment of INEC leadership is not sufficiently removed from the hands of those who can influence the decisions of the agency.

    “In addition, the process of appointing INEC leadership has not been adequately framed and institutionalised in such a way that those appointed do not feel a sense of gratitude to the appointing authority.

    “While the Committee recommends that the President retains the power to appoint INEC Chairman and Commissioners because of the need to maintain a sense of coherence in the appointment process, it proposes a more inclusive Commission.”

    The committee said: “A major step towards making INEC leadership more responsive and independent is to subject the mode of appointment of the Chairman and Commissioners to a more rigorous screening.

    “The Committee therefore recommends that the position of INEC Chairman, National Commissioners, and the Resident Electoral Commissioners should be advertised and applications be evaluated by a Screening Committee appointed by the President to serve on an ad-hoc basis.

    “The Screening Committee shall recommend three nominees for each position to the National Council of State.

    “The National Council of State shall then recommend to the President two nominees for each office and the President shall forward one name for each position to the Senate for confirmation.”

    To strengthen INEC, the committee recommended the setting up of a nine-man team comprising the representative of NJC, the DG of DSS, the NBA and six others.

    It said: “The Screening Committee shall comprise:  a retired Supreme Court Justice as Chairman who shall be nominated by the National Judicial Council; the  Executive Secretary of the National Human Rights Commission; the  President of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA); the  Director General, Department of State Services (DSS); the  two nominees of Civil Society Organisations;  two women representatives;  a former Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission; one representative of the Nigerian Youth Council; and the  Secretary of the Independent National Electoral Commission to serve as Secretary to the Committee.

    “The Screening Committee shall:  advertise the vacant position of the Chairman, National Commissioners and Resident Electoral Commissioners; receive applications and screen the applicants; and in making nominations reflect Federal Character and the National Gender Policy.”

    On defection by lawmakers to other parties, the committee called for amendment to the 1999 constitution to enable members of the National Assembly or state Houses of Assembly to automatically vacate their seats.

    It said:  “No elected person shall become a member of a party other than the one on whose platform he was elected, except on the grounds of de-registration or merger of the party. Where an elected official resigns the membership of the party on whose platform he was elected his seat shall become vacant, and INEC shall conduct a fresh election to complete the tenure in the case of legislative seats and for a fresh tenure in the case of executive position won by a new candidate”.

  • Our Girls; Saturday Burials; Restructuring

    Our Girls are still missing since April 15, 2014. Pray and work.

    Today: Move Friday funerals to Saturdays pls; Restructuring the Lagos-Ibadan road budget; Restructuring for true federalism.

    Burials on Fridays in cities should be changed to Saturdays by Christians. The national financial loss is huge from ‘Loss of Work Hours’. While local mourners can attend a ‘Thursday Wake Keeping’, many others take two days off with all Thursday required to travel to ‘Make the Wake’. Friday is a ‘Full Funeral Day’ in four or five parts- Lying In State, Funeral Service, Interment, ‘After Party’ aka ‘Celebration of Life’ aka ‘What A waste of Money honey’ aka ‘Siddon Look Dazed, Deaf, Hoarse and Speechless by Monster Music X 6 Hours’ and finally the Sunday outing for the clergy-led ‘Family Squeeze’ for the ‘growth’ of church organ or orphanage!  Sunday, you count the profitable losses, planning the next weekend event, not your work week!

    ‘Move burials to Saturday, keeping a 5-day work week and attend the wake on Friday evening, or take a half day on Friday- normal for many workers. Keep funerals for Saturday as in the towns. The Bishops Conferences should direct this change: ‘Saturday for funerals and weddings’.

    Restructuring ONE- Road Restructuring: Once again differing political agendas and questionable ethical morality decisions by the majority of NASS politicians, with apparent Machiavellian maliciousness, conspire to further deny the rights of Nigeria’s millions who daily are deprived of fast modern pothole-free road/rail transport-a right in 130 countries. In this case, on the Lagos-Ibadan axis but also on East-West, Ore-Benin, Ibadan-Ife roads and the shameless political prostitution around the ‘Most Aborted abiku Second Niger Bridge’ to choose from sick roads nationwide shown on Channels daily! Nothing new, no lessons learnt but predictable destruction of simple dreams of a UN-approved Basic Right To ‘Normal’ Life. Are we not human, like those in the Diaspora after all!! The citizens’ lives are inconsequential politically, merely a bargaining chip in ’The great games politicians play without a care while the citizens Pay, Cry and Die In Despair’. To road and bridge users, construction is quality of joy vs sadness, pain vs pleasure, life vs death, economic survival vs ruin if one is stuck for hours on a ‘one hour road’ because NASS chooses to cannibalise road budget funds to, in my opinion, ‘misapply’ them to finance morally indefensible Constituency Projects which NASS members should instead face ‘Home Constituency’ LGA chairmen to carve out of the N1,000,000,000/annum/ LGAs.

    Curiously, no governor has spoken against the ‘Nasty ‘NASS Action’ and yet all ‘states and the FCT’ have human and cargo traffic suffering on that axis! Shame on the Governors’ Forum for not defending citizens’ right to ‘priority execution of that road project which is a joint political PDP/APC flagship project to correct the abandonment of the road by successive governments since 1989. May those NASS members have ‘Priority Exit’ in the next election to join our go-slow without sirens and police escort, Amen. Affected citizens get ready to vote in 2019!!!

    Both the federal government and NASS got that contract wrong. Financial challenges demand a ‘Contact Restructuring’  to ‘Immediately Complete The Asphalt Surface’ stopping the expensive 240km of cement double central median for when there is money, if ever – Phase 2!

    Restructuring TWO- Country: So after a failed ‘Restructuring Vote’, the ‘Restructuring Agenda’ can be revisited only because of ‘People Pressure’, not because of ‘Political Conscience’ or it is ‘Right and Proper’ to correct gigantic government wrongdoing, an ‘amoral legalised illegality’ and perverting the course of a Just Society. Fighting for change, even in your employee NASS members’ attitude, can work even without money under the tall cap, envelopes and Ghana Must Go bags. Who has been surveyed or telephoned for an opinion by any politician? You mean not one of the 400+ NASS members needs your input? Splitting the exclusive list into nine is long overdue and is a success of the citizens’ Tsunami of protest! Those who have constantly benefitted in power and financially ‘at our expense’, since 1966 by refusing to relinquish ‘Unitary’ government must see their failure, the near zero development, even in their own home region. Feudal federalism must die! Lagos State is ‘feeding the nation through VAT’. Logic demands that freedom, an ‘Alternative Political Theory’, ‘Decentralisation of Funding and Political Power’ and ‘True Federalism’ should benefit Nigerians better than the failed sectional ‘Unitary’ and ‘False Federalism’. Apart for politicians’ bloated ‘Salaries and Perks’ ‘SAPiing’ gains of a Unitary Government, the citizens suffer and only Abuja stands, almost a Gomorrah or Pompeii, where money has been  ‘mis-spent’ on decadent infrastructure and perks for politicians.

    How much free fuel and phone cards/ day for politicians while the country goes road-less and bridgeless? Restructuring is a major ‘anticorruption’ part of ‘The Change Agenda’. It is therefore a deconstructive betrayal seeing APC NASS members dumping the party manifesto while the APC leaders charged with interrogating the ‘Restructuring Agenda and Process’ are questioning the morals and motives of those, like myself, seeking ‘Restructuring’ labelling us ‘Opportunists’ and ‘Job Seekers’. Rather ‘My’ opportunities are truncated by false federalism. Which job I apply for?  If restructuring requires a ‘Constituency Conference and a Referendum’, then ‘So Be It’. Will NASS members recant or will they have to be pushed out????

    NB: Nigerians- Expose a new generation of ‘I LOVE NIGERIA’ KNOWLEDGEABLE CANDIDATES for 2019.

  • I didn’t call agitators of restructuring political jobbers – Osinbajo

    I didn’t call agitators of restructuring political jobbers – Osinbajo

    Acting President Yemi Osinbajo, has expressed surprise at the report that he described those agitating for restructuring as political jobbers.

    A statement issued by his Senior Special Assistant on Media and Publicity, Laolu Akande, said that at no time did the acting President describe those asking for restructuring as political jobbers looking for appointments.

    He said the video, audio tapes and full text of Osinbajo’s speech at last week’s National Security summit organised by the Department of State Services (DSS) are publicly available.

    The statement said: “While several newspapers and media outlets reported Prof. Osinbajo’s said speech last Wednesday, not one of the publications made such a blatantly inaccurate claim that he said those asking for restructuring were political jobbers.

    “Besides, the debate on restructuring is an important one and the calls for restructuring cover a wide range of legitimate and constitutionally valid issues. Indeed all Nigerians have both a right and a duty to advance their arguments on the subject.

    “The acting President himself had expressed support for State police based on the community policing model, advocated for devolution of powers to the states and fiscal federalism.

    “Besides, the Buhari administration has been active in supporting state rights in several ways including in fiscal matters and will continue to do so.”

  • Restructuring, yes, but our manners and attitudes first!

    I have read tons and tons of words on why Nigeria should restructure at this time. All the proponents of restructuring aimed at one thing: restructure the economy and the politics of the nation.

    I beg to differ: There’s not much wrong with the constitution upon which all these issues are predicated. It is a constitution that will be used to advance society better in other climes like in the USA, or Britain that gave birth to the Yankees. Conversely, if those who readily point at the Constitutions of the UK and USA as near-perfect, bring those sacred documents to Nigeria for implementation, most of them will mess up those Constitutions and the country as a whole.

    Some of these proponents of restructuring also believe in the balkanisation of Nigeria, as if that will automatically put an end to our woes, and put more tuwo, fura, akpu, eba or amala on the table of Nigerians.

    But I’m persuaded to think the problem that we have in this country has to do more with our attitudes and manners than any document.

    For example, who says the problems of the micro units in Ogun, Kaduna, Plateau or Igboland will disappear when Ijebu becomes a state or the republic of Biafra is actualised?

    Break up Nigeria and you will get Ogun State’s local rivalries among Remo and Ijebu; among Egba and Egbado who now feel good being called Yewa; Southern Zaria and the other part of Kaduna State; the rest of Rivers State and the Ogonis, commonly derided as “Ogoni pio-pio” while I lived there in the mid-70s; the natives and settlers of Plateau State as well as the minority Hausa speaking and the majority Yoruba-speaking parts of Kwara States; upgraded to the national, if not international fore.

    Let’s restructure our mindset and attitudes to ourselves genuinely and we would have sorted or fixed all the problems we magnify and situate as the bane of our nation. Our unrelenting craze for mindless acquisition of money, in spite of the religions we subscribe to; and the ultra nepotic instincts in most of our people, are what we should subsume and the fog beclouding us will clear sooner than later.

    At his installation as the first chancellor of the then University of Ife (now Obafemi Awolowo) in 1967, Chief Obafemi Awolowo touched on the power of the human mind and how it should be moderated to advance societal good. Hear him:

    “The fact remains stubborn and indestructible that poverty, disease, social unrest and instability, and all kinds of international conflicts, have their origins in the minds of men. Unless we tackle and remove or at least minimise these evils at their source, all our efforts in Nigeria to bring about happier circumstances for our peoples, and all the endeavours of mankind to evolve a better world, would be completely in vain.

    “It is only when the minds of men have been properly and rigorously cultivated and garnished that they can be entrusted with public affairs with a certainty and assuredness that they will make the best of their unique opportunity and assignment”

    These immutable words, uttered 50 years ago, still remain relevant to our circumstance and sum up everything that it is not really the Constitution (being currently tinkered with as if some persons are targets of recrimination and vendetta) that is the bane of our buoyancy as a nation but our mindset. I so move ..!

     

    …111 or 11 is my number

    Adversity is a good school; anyone in doubt can ask me.

     When you are faced with one, you either get sunk or you swim to get on top of the tide and convert it to some good uses.

     I headed to begin a life in self exile in London late in 2001 with mixed feelings. In one sense, I felt it was just about time I took off to relax and refreshen myself after a hectic time in politics and in my professional business. In another sense, it stared me in the face that I was beginning a new life into an uncertain future, especially when I bolted out in a hurry, without bidding anyone farewell.

     But I knew straightaway that I had to brace myself up to be incharge of whatever situation I would meet in England. As an incurable optimist, I quickly adjusted myself, recalling the great words of Ralph Waldo Emerson that “enthusiasm is the mother of effort, and without it, nothing great was ever achieved”.

     To make London a permanent home, as it were, was not what I wished at that time but I had little choice in the matter as I had been caught between the valley and the deep blue sea.

     Details of what transpired are best left for another occasion but suffice it for now to say that the experience I gathered there, was very enriching.

    Number played some part in the game and when I opened shop at 111, Rushey Green in Catford, London South East, I knew God, the master designer, was at work.

    “God moves in mysterious ways, His wonders to perform; His purposes ripen fast, unfolding every hour”, according to William Cowper. Designing some trade and PR strategies came easy and it wasn’t long before I dominated the town centre, confirming a long canvassed view that when you set out each day believing in your dreams, know without a doubt that you were made for amazing things.

     The number 111 had electrifying effect on me and the environment; and until the office moved elsewhere in mid-2000, my Castle Estates (Lewisham & Bromley) office, directly opposite ARGOS in Catford, was a place of choice for prospective clients in search of rental accommodation in South East London from SE1 to Orpington in Kent.

     Now again, I’m back to where I know best, meeting you every Saturday in The Nation newspaper, as a columnist. A curious coincidence is that ‘My life’ column has appeared twice now in this newspaper on Page 11. The fact that I didnt design my column on a particular page, suggests strongly that the choice of Page 11, has a divine ring to it.

    If you say, as King Sunny Ade sang in one of his records, 111 or 11 is my number, then you are damned right. When I was seeking out an office to rent in London for my estate business, I wasn’t particular about any number but when one was eventually found and negotiation concluded, the two-floor building was registered as 111, Rushey Green and, boy, I made good business in that premises until, the twist of fate.

    That was a premises many prominent Nigerians were enamoured of, for its strategic location in the town centre and for its internal aesthetics. It happened to be the only A+ residential letting agency owned by a blackman among a motley of nine others in the vicinity. The founder of Oluwalogbon Group, Chief Stephen O. Bakare, whose penthouse apartment in the London Westend in an harbour area stood in a special class of its own,  often teased me anytime he visited, by asking for my upstairs office/conference room to be loaned to him anytime he had any business deal to cut.

    Veteran administrator and the Osupa Adinni of Lagos, Alhaji Sinari ‘SBD’ Daranijo was another matter altogether. He learnt of my sudden flight to exile and when a year later, during one of his summer holidays in London, he decided to fetch me out; and when we eventually met in my Catford office, he was so impressed with the set-up that he was profuse in his prayers for me. As a big uncle and neighbour in Ilupeju Estate, he made himself a regular caller in my office anytime he came round Catford to transact some business. His daughter, Jadesola, eventually joined my workforce and she proved a diligent and reliable staff before she relocated to Dublin.

    Now, as a columnist, I have berthed on Page 11 of The Nation on Saturday and  mythologists need to help to decode the significance of 111 and 11; and what omen “11” portends.

  • Restructuring ignores bad leadership

    There is a hit song on the airwaves and it is called restructuring. Former Vice President Atiku Abubakar croons it with the passion of a Marvin Gaye. The Alaafin of Oyo Oba Lamidi Adeyemi III lends royal gravity to it. Nobel laureate Wole Soyinka intones it with a finality, in fact saying that virtually everything can be negotiated or, in another word, restructured. Eminent writers and commentators have nearly sung themselves hoarse. Such is the currency of the song that, at the rate it is being belted out, the 2019 presidential campaigns will be completely colourless without the ‘r’ word.

    The mission of the restructuring orchestra is clear: to knock it into the heads of those in authority and make them see the necessity and urgency of rejigging the country. They point out that rather than going forward, the country is in fact in retreat, that federal authorities are robbing Peter to pay Paul, and that infrastructure is suffering, as are security jobs, national cohesion, and virtually everything.

    The other day Southwest governors who gathered in Abeokuta were looking back nostalgically to the days when their states were once one region, when they managed their own resources and built institutions and infrastructure, some of which still endure till this day. Restructuring will do them a lot of good, I imagine.

    To their Southsouth counterparts, who in fact have kicked up more dust over the matter than anyone else, no music is sweeter than that of restructuring. Such is the fever that a wide-brimmed hat favoured in the region was christened ‘resource control’, which their leaders often wore as they harassed federal authorities for more oil cash.

    Let’s stop the restructuring lullaby for a while and consider its inherent dangers. First, it gives governors the impression that the problem with their unflattering states is first and foremost failure to restructure. This is false. Second, it also absolves them of culpability in the underdevelopment of their states. Ask them how much their states get each from the federal purse, how much they, themselves, personally get in security vote, how much their states make in taxes and levies, and what they do with all of it. Ask the Niger Delta state governors, who often cry over oil cash derivation, what efforts they have made to develop several other resources in their states. Ask them to honestly declare their daily, weekly and monthly expenditures, so that we might have a fair idea what their priorities are, whether their hearts are really in governance, and not in travelling or unsettling their political opponents. Has it not been reported that governors not only buy expensive  bulletproof vehicles for themselves but also for their wives? Which one of them has a heart for governance?

    The governors should provide the development plans they drew up for their states and their people over a decade. But don’t ask them what they have done, because they will mention a few roads they repaired, a bridge or two they are building, three or four classroom blocks they are rehabilitating or some soft loans they gave to a few widows, all of which count for pretty little. It is doubtful if any governor has a development plan for their state. When they hear the restructuring song, especially from such reputable individuals as Prof Soyinka, the governors get a sense that the trouble lies elsewhere, that some man in Abuja is in fact their number one enemy. Former President Goodluck Jonathan even asked President Muhammadu Buhari to implement the report a national conference held before Buhari took office, hoping to score an inconsequential political point.

    Much as rejigging the country is good, there is something else that needs to be rejigged first: the process that produces pretenders to the throne. Several governors clearly misgoverned their states, and many are still doing so. There is little we can do about those who wrecked their states and went away; not even jailing them or getting them to vomit what they stole will do justice to their atrocities. But we can ensure that pretenders do not go near the state house again. Voters can shun their campaign rice, reject their monetary offers, and cast their votes for the candidates whose backgrounds are checked, cross-checked and certified good. The electorate can also refuse to be distracted or deceived by the restructuring song and ponder on the character and motives of some of the singers. When they say they want restructuring, will they stand aside and watch a crop of young people take over the reins of power? Are the restructuring crooners not merely scheming to worm their way to power?

  • Still on restructuring

    •N.Assembly’s attempt to ignore the loud campaign for stronger states is a recipe for failure

    In spite of strident calls  for  structural alignment of the Nigerian political space, the National Assembly spoke last week, loudly rejecting the popular clamour. The Senate, while allowing a few amendments to the 1999 Constitution, saw no justification to bring the country at par with other federations where multiculturalism has found expression in a delicate distribution of power between a central government and the federating units.

    As K. C.Wheare, the man  generally regarded as the father of contemporary federal theories defined the concept in His famous book; Federal Government, it is regarded as “the method of dividing power so that general and regional governments are each within a sphere co-ordinate and independent”. He further expounded that no tier of government should be so strong as to subsume the others, thus provoking the feelings of marginalisation.

    The agitation for equitable distribution of powers preceded the country’s independence in 1960, as protestation by minority groups over fears of domination in an independent Nigeria led, in 1957, to the empanelling of the Willinks Commission. It was felt then, by the departing colonial officials, that features of a federal system, including a fairly rigid written constitution, supremacy of the constitution that contains a Bill of Rights and a bicameral legislature would assuage the feelings of the minority people.

    In the 1960 and 1963 constitutions, there were fair guarantees for the powers of the regional governments. Indeed, the regions were almost at par with the Federal Government, as they were largely financially strong and had as much power as to legislate on almost all items, including the setting up of diplomatic channels in major metropolitan cities of the world. The Western Region, for example, had an Agent-General in the United Kingdom. The region also had its own Court of Appeal.

    It was expected that the on-going review of the constitution would avail the country an opportunity to make a fundamental statement on restoration of the federal principle. But, this has been thrown away by the Senate that has rather opted for cosmetic tinkering with the system, by ratifying independent candidacy, reducing the age for qualification to contest for political posts and strengthening of the local governments through direct allocation of revenue from the federal purse.

    The legislators appear not to understand that a federal system is hinged on a two-tier structure. The review by both Houses of the National Assembly appears to have overlooked the imperative to devolve powers to the states as federating units and thus empower them to control resources generated at that level, while a fraction is paid into the federal coffers to cater for foreign affairs, defence and similar unifying responsibilities.

    As things stand, Nigeria is a laughing stock in the comity of nations as it is only federal in name. The Federal Government can legislate on any matter, and on the few matters over which the states have the power to legislate, they share concurrent power with the centre and, in case of conflict in the laws made at both levels, the federal legislation prevails. The states’ legislative capacities are therefore more theoretical than real. The insurgency and separatist moves are extreme reactions to an unfair and unjustifiable governance system. Unless this is addressed, the future of the country remains bleak.

    While we agree with the state governors that they should not be called Chief Executives and Chief Security Officers merely by name, we wish to point out that the structural incongruities run deeper than they are treating it. Every state deserves to have its own civil security outfit that would conform to its culture, with the policemen recruited from the local environment.

    We call on the state governors not to limit their agitation to this. Unless there is a wholesale restructure of the polity, by which the state police fits into a new system that devolves more power to the federating units, state police may be a farce as many of the states might not even be in a position to fund the new outfit.