The Nation Newspaper

Tag: restructuring

Restructuring: Yoruba group urges use of conference report as template

Notable Yoruba personalities yesterday said Nigeria must be restructured to reflect true federalism and promote regional and national development.

They also urged the Federal Government to implement the report of the 2014 National Conference as a template for restructuring of the country.

The Yoruba personalities, under the aegis of Yoruba Leadership and Peace Initiative (YLPI), met in Ibadan, the Oyo State capital, on the need for the Federal Government to restructure the polity.

They said no nation has survived two wars, adding that Nigeria cannot afford another civil war.

The Yoruba personalities noted that the time had come for Southwest residents to take a stand on the current agitation among various ethnic nationalities.

Speakers at the parley, who emphasised Yoruba unity, noted that there was a national consensus that Nigeria was overdue for restructuring.

They urged the Federal Executive Council (FEC) and the Legislature to implement or review the confab report before the 2019 general elections.

Dignitaries at the event included a former Deputy National Chairman of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Chief Bode George, former Ogun State Governor Gbenga Daniel, Senator Bode Olajumoke, a legal luminary, Chief Niyi Akintola (SAN), Pro-Chancellor of Lead City University in Ibadan, Prof Gabriel Ogunmola, Mrs Bola Doherty and Chairman of Afenifere Renewal Group (ARG), Mr Olawale Oshun.

Others included the National Chairman of National Action Party (NAC) Dr. Olapade Agoro; Proprietor of Lead City University in Ibadan, Prof Jide Owoeye; a retired Archbishop of Methodist Church of Nigeria, Archbishop Ayo Ladigbolu; National Coordinator of Oodua Peoples Democratic (OPC), Otunba Gani Adams; the scion of former Ondo State Governor Adekunle Ajasin, Chief Tokunbo Ajasin; Secretary General of Yoruba Council of Elders (YCE), Otunba Kunle Olajide; Oloye Lekan Alabi and Convener of the retreat, Otunba Deji Osibogun.

George warned that the mistakes of the past should not be repeated.

The former Ondo State Military Administrator said there must be a collective effort to avoid truncating the unity of the Yoruba race.

On the need for restructuring of the country, George said: “Restructuring Nigeria doesn’t mean we are going to scrap the national government. You can see the way Americans work. What you produce, you should keep 70 per cent (of it) and then send 30 per cent to the national government. That will encourage development from the grassroots to the centre. It is the military government that made everything unitary. And that is the style in the military. We need to revisit it.

There has been a lot of outcry about it. I was at the conference. I supported it at that time and I do support it now. I will continue to support it.”

On the education and enlightenment of the younger generations, George noted that the thoughts of former Premier of the defunct Western Region, Chief Obafemi Awolowo, should be revisited in administering the Southwest states.

According to him, Awolowo’s methodology in education, health and politics remains the best till date.

George urged Southwest governors to pick it up and sincerely manage Yoruba states.

In backing the restructuring of Nigeria, Daniel suggested that the report of the 2014 National Conference should be examined and not thrown it into the dustbin by the Federal Government.

Ibadan politician, Dr Olapade Agoro, urged the Yoruba race to stand with Acting President Yemi Osinbajo, especially at this trying period.

June 30, 2017
Restructuring: LGs not states should be focus
SIR: The call for the restructuring of the country is gaining more voices by the day. Although, the ruling party, APC, made restructuring a priority in its manifesto during the elections, it has reneged on the promise.

Advocates of restructuring believe that more power and resources have been allocated to the federal government in our federal constitution to the detriment of the states. It has led to lopsided development and intense agitation for power on the assumption that having federal power would help speed up development in the section of the holder of the state power. Also, the incessant secessionist agitation is centred on the perceived domination of other groups by the north. To the advocate restructuring of the country, a situation where all security agencies are controlled by the federal government would make security of the component units endangered.

One feature of the agitation for restructuring is the call for the devolution of power to states. Former Military President Ibrahim Babangida put it succinctly: “I will strongly advocate devolution of power to the extent that more responsibility is given to the states, while the federal government is vested with the responsibility of overseeing our foreign policy, defence and the economy.” Babangida added that state policy should be established to cater for the security of a state.

What actually baffles and hence compelled me to write this is the removal of local governments in their call for restructuring. This is not surprising because most of the protagonists of restructuring are living in Abuja and state capitals and lack first-hand experience of the near total ruin of social economic lives at the grassroots.

As good as the idea of restructuring is, the major impediment to it is the elitist approach which would make the restructuring beneficial to the elite to the detriment of the grassroots people.

In actual fact, no sane person in the grassroots who witnessed or is conversant with the misfortune which governors have brought on hitherto flourishing local government system would pray that more power be given the states. In many states, for instance, Oyo State, the government has not conducted local government election in the last six years. Subterfuges have been invented to put the election on hold. Local governments in many states are run like liaison offices of the governors where every Dick and Harry are made local government chairmen.

Peanuts are given to the local governments out of millions of Naira due to them from federal allocations to pay salaries and emoluments of staff, while developmental work is put on hold. According to the report emanating from ALGON, 23 states owe local government staff backlog of salaries. Creation of LCDA in many states has not helped the matter because it has rendered the system comatose. This is because at the designated seats of the LCDA, signposts are visible with not workers at sight.

All development is concentrated in the state capitals and few towns, rural areas have been cut off from development. In few areas including the state capitals where developmental projects are ongoing, they are more or less misplaced priorities because the governors determined what is good for all parts of the state and never carry people along in their developmental strides.

One fears that if state police is established as Babangida advocated, some governors who have become demigod in their states and intolerant of dissenting voices would use the police to hound the opposition out of their states.

I join my voice to those of the protagonists of restructuring of Nigeria, however, the exercise should focus more on how to strengthen our local governments and make them autonomous institutions. If possible, states should be phased out and local governments retained as the second tier of the government, if we truly want development to go round. Invariably, devolution of power should favour local governments more than states.
- Adewuyi Adegbite,
ayekooto05@gmail.com
June 30, 2017
A promising consensus on restructuring
As the country prays for the health of the president and his safe return, and as grateful citizens commend the Acting president for steering the ship of the state as a faithful team player, it is not too early to think about what the legacy of this administration might be. Every president wants a legacy, a lasting monument to their names to which generations will look back and applaud.

With a liberal communications policy that spread ownership of telephone across the board, Chief Obasanjo opened the country to the new Information Age. As important as the legacy of material innovation is, however, it cannot be the most important for a country that is deeply divided along the fault lines of nationality, language, and class. And with its use to spread hate on social media platforms which further deepens our division and threatens the fragile tie that seeks to bind, the new technology is a double edged sword.

The legacy of material innovation such as the telephone is especially volatile when it is not complimented by a robust economic policy that opens the doors of job opportunities for citizens. Without these, young and old are tempted to vent their frustration through the means available to them, that is, social media, a veritable source of social tension and unrest.

Since Obasanjo, succeeding presidents have not been as effective even when they belonged to the same political party. President Yar’Adua’s seven point agenda unfortunately did not get started before the cold hands of death snatched him. It was a case of a willing spirit and an unhealthy body.

Due to an inexplicable weakness of the will, President Jonathan, the luckiest political actor, failed to find his presidential mojo until it was too late. He transformation agenda attracted many who saw it as the sign of a new dawn. I was one of the early supporters. Three key elements were eye catching in the agenda: inclusive and non-inflationary growth, employment generation and poverty alleviation, and value reorientation. If the new administration was able to succeed in the three areas, Nigeria was going to have its breakthrough in no distant future. So we thought, until the agenda collapsed under the weight of ineptitude and the cultivation of vice replaced value orientation.

President Buhari and the All Progressives Congress were the beneficiaries of the collapse of Jonathan’s transformation agenda. They campaigned with a promise to restore security, revive the economy, and fight corruption, a partial list of a manifesto which includes devolution of power. Will the President and his team embrace this legacy-enhancing program?

Nigeria is at the crossroads of history. She may restructure according to the wishes of the vast majority of citizens and remain a united, prospectively prosperous country with happy citizens. Or she may remain a quasi-unitary state with its attendant social tension, political instability, general unrest and the real risk of another civil war, which may end it all.

Obviously, the first option is more attractive, not only because it promises the best possible outcome, but more importantly because it satisfies one of the most essential requirements of democratic governance, namely, that the government respond to the yearning of citizens and that the voluntary consent of the people is the immovable pillar of democracy. What has been the yearning and how has it been expressed?

The demand for restructuring, which started in the South in the 90s up until the last Confab has now spread to the entire country, with key voices in the North joining the chorus. Former Vice President Atiku Abubakar and former Military President Babangida have been very clear about where they stand on this critical national issue.

In many thoughtful interventions in the last six years, Atiku has appealed to the rational capacity of his listeners, the latest in his reaction to the APC Governors’ Forum. Atiku observed rightly, that the “agitations for secession would not have arisen if the country had shown sincere readiness to address the underlying problems that feed the agitations by separatist forces.”

But Atiku’s intervention is not a reaction to recent agitations. As far back as 2012, he had made the issue of restructuring a major plank of his politics. As he observed then, there is “too much concentration of power and resources at the centre. And it is stifling our march to true greatness as a nation and threatening our unity because of all the abuses, inefficiencies, corruption, and reactive tensions it has been generating.” He urged a reconsideration of the structure along the lines of the six geopolitical zones as regions and the states as provinces. We can be cynical about Atiku’s motive. However, he cannot be faulted for seeing the light much early on this matter.

On his part, Babangida has also joined the chorus of rational voices on the solution to the political problems facing the country. Apparently dismissing the fear of disintegration, the former military president argued that “the talk to have the country restructured means that Nigerians are agreed to our unity in diversity, but that we should strengthen our structures to make the union more functional based on our comparative advantages.” He also threw his support behind a constitutional amendment to provide for state police.

APC Governors’ Forum also made public its position on the agitation for political restructuring and true federalism, which the Forum claimed can be met through “adjustments in the Nigerian federal system. The focus of this restructuring is to restore the principle of non-centralization of power in the country’s federal arrangement being the defining element of a federal polity.” And in a show of inter-party solidarity, its PDP counterpart concurred. Restructuring is thus favorably adopted by the entire country.

Interestingly, the positions enunciated by prominent citizens and the Governors’ Forums are reiterations of the position of the ruling party, APC, as contained in its 2015 manifesto. The first item on the highlights of the manifesto is the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. And in the first bullet point of that item, APC promises to “initiate action to amend our constitution with a view to devolving powers, duties and responsibilities to states, local governments in order to entrench true federalism and the federal spirit.”

The second item on the manifesto is National Security. In Bullet 3 under that item, the party promised that it will “begin widespread consultations to amend the constitution to enable state and local government employ state and community police to address the peculiar needs of each community.”

A laser beam focus on these two items on which the party made a voluntary promise of restructuring is the needed response to the current agitation. Granted, the economic reality that APC found on the ground prevented a timely fulfilment of its promise; the time is ripe now for the progressive party to do the needful.

But some items on the APC manifesto could also conflict with its promise of devolution as they are certain to extend the reach of the federal government in almost every area, particularly health and education. The manifesto expressed a willingness of the party to engage in “national inspection” of schools, a purview of provincial governments in the 50s and 60s. The promise to establish vocational schools in each state of the federation is another. Whereas devolution of powers would require the shrinking of the responsibilities of the federal government, the manifesto appears to enlarge its scope.

PMB will get better and get back to work. He needs a lasting legacy. A successful restructuring of the federation will make him a true champion and father of a new Nigeria in which the idea of unity in diversity is fully realized and true federalism is enhanced.

Meanwhile, however, there is a loyal and competent Acting President, who enjoys the confidence of every section of the country, the National Assembly, and the ruling party. The three sides must collectively initiate the processes enunciated in the party’s manifesto to devolve power to the states and local governments and establish state and community police.
- PS. July is vacation time. This column will be back in August.
Follow me on Twitter:

@SegunGbadeg2002

@HarvestDayPub
June 30, 2017
What is restructuring?

Many readers of this column are contacting me with the message that they do not have a clear idea about what is meant by restructuring. What is restructuring? How will a restructured Nigeria be different from today’s Nigeria?

There have been many published responses to these questions. I will try and state mine. But before I do that, I need to point out humbly that I am not offering any new or original ideas on the subject, since all I will say here have been repeatedly offered by me and many other Nigerians. Moreover, I must remind my readers that in 2014, Nigeria held a National Conference in which nearly 500 selected citizens, representing all parts of Nigeria, met for about four months, debated the question of restructuring, and reached agreement by 70% majority vote on all that they agreed upon. In my view, the report of that conference is a very important resource on the issue of restructuring.

First then, what kind of structure does the Nigerian federation have today? I would say that what we now have is not really a federation. The basic idea of a federation is that the various distinct parts of a country (especially a country comprising different ethnic nations) should be made a federating unit (or state). Each state should have the constitutional power to manage its unique problems and concerns, to develop its own resources for its people, to manage its own security, and to make its own kind of contributions to the well-being of the whole country. The central entity (or federal government) should manage common matters like the defence of the country, the relationship of the country with the rest of the world (or international relations), the country’s currency, the relations between the states of the country, and general principles like defence of human rights. That, essentially, was the federal arrangement that the fathers of the various sections of our country (Awolowo, Ahmadu Belo and Azikiwe) agreed upon in the 1950s.

But, since independence, our leading politicians, and our military leaders (both, mostly from the Arewa North) have gradually destroyed this structure and replaced it with a structure in which the federal government is the controller of virtually all power and all resources as well as the power to develop all resources, and in which the states have no control over their resources and must depend on federal allocations of funds to exist at all. The federal government is over-burdened, controls too much money, has become egregiously inefficient and corrupt and, essentially, is destroying Nigeria. The states are impotent, cannot develop their resources, cannot fight poverty in their domains, and cannot make their contributions to the progress and prosperity of Nigeria. The cumulative effect of all these is that Nigeria and Nigerians have become horribly poor, that most public facilities (roads, electricity, water installations, public administration, etc.) are not working or have perished, that most Nigerian youths are unemployed and hopeless. The relations between Nigeria’s nations has degenerated into enmity and hostility. Crimes have made life very unsafe all over Nigeria. In various regions of Nigeria, and for various reasons, Nigerian youths are demanding the breaking up of Nigeria.

Restructuring means that all these must be changed. It means that we must return to the kind of federal arrangement which our fathers evolved in the 1950s – even though we must now have more states than the three regions of the 1950s.

How many states should we have? Very many people say that the present 36 states are just too many, and that with 36 states we are spending too much money on state administrations. Many of these people are suggesting that we should adopt the six zones now popular in our political life (North-west, North-east, North-central, South-west, South-east, and South-south), and make them our new states. Some others want the 36 states to stay. Their best known argument is that it is going to be extremely difficult to wind up the present 36 states in order to recreate the four Regions that we had by 1963, or to create the six zonal states.

The 2014 National Conference heard all these arguments, as well as the special concerns of the various peoples of the North-central (aka Middle Belt) where religious and inter-ethnic conflicts have always been rampant. To be free from neighbours who are hostile and aggressive, various peoples of the Middle Belt asked for small states of their own. In sympathy with these peoples, the National Conference decided on nine states in each zone – making a total of 54 states. Critics of this 54-state decision have pointed out that 54 states are unreasonably too many, that each of the 54 will be weak, and that their weakness will only result in making the federal centre even stronger than before.

But the conference also took certain other decision relevant to this. The most important was that, after creating the 54 states, any group of culturally related states may agree to merge together into a zonal federation inside the over-all Nigerian federation, or to set up development institutions or programmes for their collaboration in development. Another was that in those areas where the people desire to move across state boundaries to join their kith and kin, a referendum should be held to determine their wish – and if the referendum approves of their wish, the state boundary should be shifted to join them with their kith and kin.

About the adjustment of power and resource control between the federal government and the states, the National Conference took very important decisions, all of which would take a lot of duties and responsibilities away from the federal centre and transfer them to the governments of the states. The most obvious concern the control and development of resources, and the control and management of education at all levels (though the federal government would still have some role in tertiary education – that is, education at the post-secondary level). There are many others – but they are too many to be detailed out in this column. The total effect is that the federal government will be smaller, leaner, control less money, and become much more efficient. The states will become what states are supposed to be in a federation – namely, the dynamic centres of development and growth. Hopefully, our states will resume the competition which used to exist among our regions in the 1950s up to 1966. As a result of that competition, the Western Region’s government worked closely with the Region’s farmers until they made Nigeria the second largest exporter of cocoa in the world; the Northern Region’s government worked closely with their region’s farmers until they made Nigeria the largest exporter of groundnuts in the world; and the Eastern Region’s government worked closely with their region’s farmers until they became the largest exporters of palm produce in the world. Cocoa earned the biggest income, made the Western Region our richest Region, and supplied most of federal foreign exchange. This is what development means – developing resources to generate money for further development.

No federal government can do all these things from one centre. By 1965, Nigeria exported 675,000 metric tons of groundnuts. By 1984, after the transfer of all resource control and development to the federal government (gradually from 1966 on), Nigeria exported only 25,000 metric tons of groundnuts. Can you see now how the deep poverty that now grips the North was started. The same happened to our cocoa and pam produce farmers. By 1984, Nigeria had ceased being a serious exporter of these products. Someone might say that in the place of the income from these products, there came the income from oil. There is a big difference. Income from oil is not income produced by our people; it is income produced by other peoples on our land, income earned from rents, royalties and licenses, income going directly into the hands of our men in federal power, for them to mess around with, to steal, and to waste. That is why oil has been a curse to our country and our people. In contrast, income from our agricultural and other products is produced by our own people (the fathers and mothers of our families), comes directly into their hands, for providing directly for our families.

If we restructure our federation now, and our states become again the rival centres of resource development, we may begin to see revival, and we may narrowly escape the break-up of Nigeria. If we continue to hold on to the present structure of our federation, Nigeria will surely break up – and very soon. Human tolerance for poverty and deprivation in the midst of plenty, and for chaos, hostility, violence and insecurity, has a limit. In Nigeria, we have reached that limit.

June 29, 2017
Call for restructuring: Afe Babalola gives IBB kudos

•Legal giant says ex-military leader deserves award

If elder statesman Chief Afe Babalola (SAN) had his way, erstwhile military President Ibrahim Babangida will be honoured with the 2017 Nigeria Peace Award for joining the calls for restructuring. The legal icon and founder of Afe Babalola University, Ado-Ekiti (ABUAD) believes the time to restructure the country is now. In this piece entitled: “IBB’s call for restructuring – he deserves 2017 Nigeria Peace Award”, the eminent lawyer recommends the immediate convocation of a Sovereign National Conference (SNC) to pave the way for a referendum for Nigeria to have a constitution that is truly the people’s.

I join multitudes of friends and admirers of the former military president, Gen. Ibrahim Badamasi Babangida (IBB) to congratulate him on the celebration of his 75th birthday on planet earth. More importantly, I congratulate him profoundly for joining the call by many compatriots for the restructuring of the country.

IBB’s position reminds me of what Sophocles, a Greek philosopher, said in his book titled: The Theban Plays

“Do not let your first thought be your only thought. To think that your will is the only way betrays a shallow mind and an empty heart. It is for this reason that the meadows which move to and fro on a flood river remain unbroken while those that flow against the flood are broken asunder”.

I salute his courage and brilliance and his ability to position his mind having regard to the situation on ground.

This is a lesson for Nigerians who remain still and unbending on the issue of restructuring of Nigeria. I challenge them to rise up and embrace what the great Greek philosopher had espoused as far back as 441 B.C.

To say that the retired general is a different person to different people is like stating the obvious. However, what cannot be denied is that he is a courageous, fearless, highly cerebral elder statesman who could equally be controversial and often misunderstood.

I congratulate him particularly for embracing restructuring of our dear country thereby joining the ever-growing band of those of us from the North, West and East who have been clamouring for restructuring as the panacea for the myriad of problems afflicting the country today.

I have been an unrepentant advocate of the need to restructure Nigeria, so much so that I have been speaking, writing papers, delivering lectures across the country on the issue of restructuring since 2002 as the best way to achieve our aim and objectives of building a united and prosperous Nigeria.

1960 Constitution

Before 1960, our founding fathers met for almost 10 years in Lancaster House, London and took into consideration the fact that Nigeria is a country of nations with about 250 ethnic groups. In their wisdom, they made a constitution which allowed each component part to remain and practice its own culture and grow at its own pace under one umbrella of a united Nigeria and a befitting Federal Constitution.

The military

Unfortunately, that constitution was set aside by the military who thought they knew better than our forefathers. Again, the same military bequeathed to us the 1999 Constitution under which the centre had become so strong and the component parts so weak that there is virtually no meaningful development in almost all the states prior to the taking over by the military in 1966, our constitution allowed each component part to develop at its own rate. Consequently, there was healthy rivalry between the regions. The West was the most advanced and others followed and the country was developing at fast rate.

Although, we may not necessarily go back to the regions of 1960, we can substitute for the regions, something similar to it. Certainly, we need to restructure the country. We urgently need a forum where our problems would be discussed and arrive at a suitable federal constitution for the country. In order to solve the problem of unemployment, falling standard in education, recession, crimes including armed robbery and kidnapping, the country needs to be restructured.

Persuading others

I want to specially commend IBB for his new position and frank talk about the need for restructuring the country. I urge him to go a step further and persuade those still on the fringe particularly some former military rulers to join those of us in the forefront of the campaign of restructuring of the country for a true federalism.

Sovereign National Conference & referendum

I strongly advise the government to convey a sovereign national conference, the outcome of which will be ratified by referendum which will give birth to the people’s constitution.

For avoidance of doubt, the outcome of the referendum shall not be subject to the confirmation or approval of the National Assembly which as we all know will not take kindly to such recommendations such as legislators earning only sitting allowances.

June 29, 2017
Restructuring will check lazy governors, says Rep

A member of the House of Representatives, Mr. Sergius Ogun, has reeled out the benefits of restructuring the country saying it would help to check lazy governors and nonperforming states.

Ogun, a member of the House of Representatives Committee on Local Content, spoke in an interview in Yenagoa, Bayelsa State, when the committee visited the Nigeria Content Development and Monitoring Board (NCDMB) to perform its oversight functions.

The lawmaker and stalwart of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), who represents Esan North-East/Esan South-East Constituency of Edo State, said most state governors only survived on federal allocations.

He insisted that only restructuring would make the governors to engage in healthy competition and think out of the box to increase their revenues.

He said: ‘’I agree with restructuring 100 per cent. You tell me, if you don’t have any need to work and you earn a salary, will you wake up in the morning to go to work? That is what is happening.

‘’Today, state governors all over the country just send their commissioners to Abuja and at the end of the month, they bring a cheque. Some months back, I went to the North, I had a governor friend, I was trying to see for four days, I could not see him.

“There were investors that were coming into the country to see him, yet I could not see him. When I went there, I saw fruits just wasting.

‘’ I called a friend in the UK; we were talking, he said I should not bother that he was going to call a friend with a production company if they could use some of the fruits for their concentrates.

“You can imagine, to see that governor to let him know of the investors from the UK, he was unreachable. So, if he was not getting free money from the federation and he had to get that money, would he behaved like that? So, restructuring might just be the future of this country – the answer to all of these problems.

‘’On the handling of the Niger Delta problems, I do not know whether the Federal Government is being honest, that is the honest truth. I don’t know. Now, you are talking of modular refineries, they have said they would do this and that, where is the timeline to finish this?

‘’So, that is why it has become a protracted problem. So, they come and say we will do this to get them busy, they take the oil and sell, and then when the guys strike again, they say they will do this and do that. That is not honesty; we just want the solution to the problems.’’

Despite the gale of defection in the PDP, Ogun said he had never thought of changing his party.

He stressed that instead of defecting to any other party, he would go back to his business.

June 29, 2017
Atiku to govt: don’t ignore calls for restructuring

Former Vice President Atiku Abubakar has said that agitations for secession would not have arisen if the country had shown sincere readiness to address the underlying problems that feed the agitations by those he described as separatist forces.

In a statement from his media office in Abuja, the All Progressives Congress (APC) chieftain said recent voices in support of restructuring the country and true federalism by leaders and stakeholders were clear indications that he was not a lone voice in the call to restructure the country.

The former vice president has consistently spoken about the need to restructure the country and give true federalism a chance in the past two years. Other notable Nigerians have recently added their voice to the call as a result of recent events in the country.

Hailing the APC Progressive Governors Forum for supporting the call for restructuring and true federalism, Atiku said the issue transcends religion and ethnicity.

He described as patriotic the convergence of positions around restructuring by leaders and stakeholders from diverse regions of the country.

“The agitations for secession would not have arisen, if the country had shown sincere readiness to address the underlying problems that feed the agitations by separatist forces.

“The restructuring debate transcends the ambition of any single politician in Nigeria, and that any attempt to ignore the agitations could make a bad situation more complicated.”

He explained that avoiding a problem won’t solve that problem, adding that with so much hate, distrust, suspicions and fears in the country, political leaders shouldn’t be afraid to confront the challenge.

Atiku stressed that the present federal structure should be freely discussed by allowing the federating units voice their grievances with a view to finding workable solutions that protects the rights and interests of all.

He maintained that the country could not afford to allow bottled up frustrations of the people to explode into violence, which threatens not only innocent lives, but also harms the country’s economic assets.

Atiku, therefore, lauded the Progressive APC Governors, other leaders and groups for their courage to confront the country’s most urgent national challenge.

He added that separatist agitations were dangerously threatening the country’s unity and indivisibility, saying no country could afford to take these threats lightly.

June 28, 2017
APC governors back true federalism, restructuring

All Progressives Congress (APC) governors are backing restructuring and true federalism as a way out of the agitation for Nigeria’s break-up.

The Progressives Governors Forum also said that the recent agitation by some ethnic groups was a reflection of the prevalent weak governance, economy and law enforcement.

In an eight-page document containing the governors’ position on the challenges to Nigeria’s unity, entitled “There has to be a nation first”, they said that the demands for political restructuring and true federalism could be met by adjusting the federal system.

Such an adjustment, said the governors, will not on its own address the root and branch of the country’s challenges, but it is worth pursuing to meet the demands of various groups.

The governors said: “It appears that demands framed by different groups in terms of political restructuring or true federalism can be met through adjustment in Nigeria’s federal system.

“Although such adjustment will not on its own address the root and branch of Nigeria’s challenges, it is worth pursuing in order to meet the demands of various Nigerian groups. The focus of this restructuring is to restore the principle of non centralisation of power in the country’s federal arrangement being the defining element of a federal polity.

“Alongside the imperative of political and fiscal decentralization, contiguous states can pool resources to address common development challenges and embark on projects that can have maximum effect and efficiency through endevours.

“Where possible, and agreed upon, a regional approach to development issues that take cognisance of existing comparative advantages within the existing regions as the initiatives in the Southwest has demonstrated.

“Alongside addressing the issues of structures in the Nigerian federalism and the mode of allocation of resources among the constituent elements, there is the need to address deficit in governance and politics accountability.

“PGF challenges ethnic agitators and militant groups to demand good governance and effective service delivery at all levels where the Nigerian state system exists with endowed constitutional responsibilities.

“We charge genuine youth organisations to seek truly empowering programmes targeted at the youth population at all levels to demonstrate their commitment to a Nigerian nation that makes inclusive growth and development possible.”

The APC governors condemned the ultimatum to Igbo to leave the North, saying “the Progressives Governors Forum has watched with consternation and grief, the reckless and bellicose utterances of groups, organisations and individuals fanning the ember of ethnic and regional hate and openly seeking the dismemberment of Nigeria.

“It is even more regrettable, different groups issuing provocative statements, including the various Arewa groups that pose as representatives of northern Nigeria and other groups that issue statements on behalf of other parts of Nigeria, lack roots in the communities they claim to represent.

“It is however conceded that the proliferation of these youth groups in the first place is a reflection of the failure of development agenda that has not created a future for its youth population who now turn their energy to unproductive ventures, including serving as cannon fodders for politicians out of power.

“While the PGF believes that the unity of Nigeria is non-negotiable and is here to stay, it is a resolve that must be underlined by the commitment of elected public office holders at all levels to effectively govern and deliver services and promote social justice, make policies and pronouncements sensitive to Nigeria’s ethnic and cultural diversity and promote security and welfare of all citizens in their respective jurisdictions irrespective of the ethnicity and religion of individuals and groups.

“This statement of PGF reinforces the very bold and nationalistic pronouncement of the Federal Government and several APC governors since the unfortunate ultimatum issued by the so-called umbrella Arewa Youth Organisation to the Igbo community to leave Kaduna and other parts of northern Nigeria.

“The statement is to remind Nigerians that the highest political ideal, which Nigeria of all political tendencies and persuasions must seek to pursue is the preservation of Nigeria as a corporate entity within which we can pursue the lingering crisis of development and nation building.

“The idea of Nigeria being a mere geographical expression is a myth in the light of the present realities. We are convinced as governors elected on the platform of the APC that our party has already articulated a vision of governance and inclusive development can address these challenges in the long run.

“However, as we work assiduously to address these challenges with unprecedented political will and determination, the Nigerian nation has to survive as an entity before we can pursue the resolution of these challenges.”

The governors identified failure of development and nation building, regional inequality, failure of democratic governance and dangerous manipulation of difference as some of the issues, which, in their view, produced the tension characterised by competing demands for ethnic justice, pronounced and silent self-determination agenda, hate politics and extreme demand to dismember Nigeria.

In a statement signed by the Director General of the PGF, Salihu Lukman, the governors said the resurgence of desperate youth groups promoting ethno-regional identities and extremist positions from the geo-political zones was a reflection of prevalent weak governance, economy and law enforcement system in Nigeria.

The statement reads: “In line with the social democratic principles of the All Progressives Congress (APC), the PGF promotes all-inclusive government, for the development of policies and programs that improve the life of every Nigerian citizen, regardless of ethnicity and religious orientation.

“It is with this in mind that the Forum condemns in the strongest terms the present secessionist and separatist agitations promoting ethno-regional identity in the country. These sundry factional groups, claiming to represent different ethnic nationalities, sow seeds of disunity and promote secessionist agenda in the nation. We decry and reject their activities in all intents and purposes.

“Acknowledging the rich diverse heritage of Nigeria as a country, the PGF particularly notes that the resurgence of desperate youth groups promoting ethno-regional identities and extremist positions from the different geo-political zones across the nation as currently experienced is a reflection of prevalent weak governance, economy and law enforcement system in Nigeria.

“The challenge before us as Nigerians therefore is to commit ourselves to the unity of the country. We must create by all means necessary, a country that we can collectively call our home, irrespective of tongues and localities. This is a vision the APC as a party is committed to lead and for which the PGF is unapologetically and intrinsically loyal. These threats to national unity must cease totally and put away into history.

“While acknowledging that as a nation, we do have challenges, PGF believes that the resolution of those challenges rests with the development of our democracy and with it, the ascendency of structured processes of national consultations, negotiations and invariably agreements.

“Some of the challenges are highlighted in the accompanied PGF Position – There has to be a Nation First. As Governors elected under APC, we will work with our party leaders, the Federal Government and all Nigerians who are committed to democratic development of all parts of the country to ensure unencumbered protection of lives of all citizens in every part of the territorial boundary of our nation.

“PGF, therefore, calls for the rise of all Decent Voices across this country to speak up against the upsurge of some desperate irredentist movements across all ethnic groups and support the emergence of a stronger and virile unified Nigeria for us all. The Forum insists that, regardless of our diverse identities and whatever differences, Nigeria has to thrive. Hence, ‘there has to be a nation first’.

June 23, 2017
Restructuring or federalism?
I have often told those who care to listen to even define what they mean by restructuring and I can’t seem to get answers. Or where we get, the answers are discordant and often tending toward federalism resource control and such.

What I understand it to mean is that we operate a truly federal system of government where every component part control their resources, have their domestic laws, have their own police, legal system, their own tax systems etc.

The states should be federating units donating some of their powers to the federal government to hold and use in trust for them on matters of common interest such as defence, foreign affairs, citizenship, immigration, currency and economy etc.

Let us adopt the USA model. USA practices federalism. Restructuring or federalism is totally different from the call for cannibalisation of the country. Restructuring or federalism howsoever called is not the same as secession.

Suffice to say that when Lagos State government took the federal government to the Supreme Court several times to insist on the practice of federalism from control of physical planning, local government administration that led to the withholding of Lagos State revenue allocation, to issue of land abutting the waterways, control of inland waters, Value Added Tax (VAT), and many other issues, those states and zones where the call for restructuring are loudest today sadly all opposed the position of Lagos State government at the Supreme Court on the altar of politics. We may go back and read those judgements for confirmation.

Lagos won 12 of such cases and against the federal government at the Supreme Court. That was the beginning of some elements of federalism and restructuring without calls to war or secession. I recall that I had to lead speak on behalf of Lagos State government in the company of Dr Akeem Olajide Bello, then an adviser to the governor on legal matters at the Senate hearing on the National Inland waterways Authority Act and made a robust presentation for state control of inland waterways and total repeal of the Act on behalf of Lagos State.

A then top ranking and very outspoken and visible Senator from Enugu State was the most vociferous opponent of our position. He even said publicly at the hearing that Lagos State was being too cantankerous and asked insultingly if Lagos was the only coastal state or with waterways in the country. This is a man whose state has rivers that could be of economic benefits to his state and people.

I educated him before his colleagues and the public in fine and polite language that he was not fit to be a Senator. I also recall telling him that if he and his state don’t t know the rights of his people and state, we in Lagos did and would assert same using the law.

I asked him if he was proud that by the National Inland Waterways Authority Law his people in Enugu State will need to travel to Lokoja to obtain licences to own and operate fishing canoes on the rivers and streams in the state

I felt he was very disappointing and was betraying his people.

The senator sought to be governor and is today one of the major voices and sponsors of secession and restructuring mixed up.

Lagos State House of Assembly subsequently repealed the National Inland Waterways Authority Act and promulgated the Lagos State Inland Waterways Authority Act and took control of the Lagos Lagoon and its intra-state waters. There were objections and protests from such bodies as Nigerian Ports Authority and NIWA.

Lagos called their bluff and challenged them to go to court.

Lagos used the instrumentality of the law, legislature and intellect to take its destiny in its hands and assert its rights. It was the series of litigation by Lagos State government that has now effectively handed physically planning and land ownership back to the states.

Before then, the federal government was giving planning permits for buildings in places like Banana Island and Osborne Foreshore and in many states of the country on lands that they called federal land contrary to the provisions of the Land Use Act.

Before then the federal government was issuing Certificates of Occupancy on land in the states.

Before then the federal government made a decree which vested and made it to own all lands that were within 100 metres from the shore of lagoons, rivers and ocean including the palace of the Oba of Lagos and all lands on Marina, around Bar beach, River Niger and Benue, Oji river, River Imo, Oguta Lake, Kaduna River to mention a few.

Before then, federal government had absolute control over even water streams and rivers in the villages and states. Before then federal government had land registries in the states; acquired land in states without resort to the state governments.

I even recall that the federal government was planning to develop a second phase of Banana Island. It was going to sand-fill some waters of the lagoon. Lagos insisted that it must get a permit and environmental impact assessment approval from it. The federal government insisted that it can reclaim the water because it had control over the outer waters in Lagos State.

Lagos then told the federal government that once the water is reclaimed and becomes land, it will be vested in the Governor of Lagos State by virtue of the Land Use Act. The federal government simply disappeared with its tail between its legs. That is using the law and the brains.

Today, if the federal government acquires land in Lagos, it must obtain the governor’s consent.

Today, if it wants to build in Lagos, it must obtain Lagos State government approval. Today, the federal government cannot regulate adverts on federal highways or roads in Lagos. Today, the Lagos waterways are busy with boats, yatches and hovercraft registered and licensed by Lagos Inland Waterways Authority.

Lagos has a consumption tax in place without allowing VAT stand in its way. It used the law and brains. Lagos collects Wharf Landing fees from all sea and land ports in Lagos State. Lagos collects advertisement income from all federal highways and roads in Lagos along with the local governments.

Lagos used the law and good thinking to acquire all lands and open spaces under bridges from the federal government. They are all today beauties to behold from the days when federal government allowed all sorts to happen under them when they were let out as garages and car parks.

But for the good thinking and law, Lagos may not have been able to recover Oshodi. And all these also bring in substantial revenue to the state and yet we still wonder why Lagos State has a monthly Internally Generated Revenue Income of well over N30 billion – over six times more than what it gets from the federal allocation that some others are crying over as their sole source of revenue.

And we still wonder why it is the second largest economy in West Africa, only after Nigeria and self-sustaining?

Let all states put on their thinking caps and use the law, legislature, judiciary, intellectual power to achieve the control of their destinies and resources and not by beating drums of war and secession.

It shouldn’t be by force or might. Let’s use our brains and intellectual resources to achieve federalism.
- Ogala Esq is a Lagos based attorney.
June 19, 2017
Restructuring as panacea to Nigeria’s developmental challenges
Fifty years ago, Nigeria fought a civil war over the issue of restructuring. Last week, Deputy Senate President Ike Ekweremadu at the World Igbo Congress (WIC) held in Enugu, insisted that “the minimum Ndigbo demand of Nigeria is a restructure of the federation so that every component part of it can substantially harness its resources, cut its coat according to its cloth, and develop at its own speed,”

He wants the Igbo “peaceful struggle for a better deal within the Nigerian commonwealth sustained.”His demand is not different from that of Niger Delta militants that want a restructured Nigeria where they will control their resources or even Boko Haram that believes the solution to the poverty and neglect of the north eastern part of the country is theocracy.

But perhaps more significant was the last week successful shutting downof the whole of the South East and some parts of Rivers and Delta states on the order of those most Nigerians have often dismissed as ill-informed spare parts sellers in spite of the counter order by the elected governors of the affected states.

I think this is a call on Nigerian leaders to stop playing the ostrich. It is better to discuss the process of restructuring the country through dialogue instead of through another war.

The battle for an acceptable structure for Nigeria is as old as the Nigeria state. The colonial master in view of our cultural differences had advised states be created along the lines of cultural development of each federating unit in order to ensure each group develop at its own pace without interference from others.

But for many of our political elite, with the prospect of independence, their concern was how to succeed the outgoing colonial masters as the new inheritors of power with all the privileges associated with it. They, therefore, urged the colonial masters to ignore our cultural differences which they claimed had been amplified by accident of colonial rule.

Hugh Clifford, Governor General of Nigeria in December 1920, for instance reminded our educated elite who were in fact thinking of a united West African nation that the over 350 ethnic groups in Nigeria were at different levels of cultural development. He insisted the idea of a united West Africa will be like talking of a European nation which would be an absurdity.

Reminding them that ‘the Hausa of Zaria are different from the Bantus tribes men of Benue valley’, he said he wished “the impossible were feasible that a collection of self-contained and mutually independent native statesseparated by difference of history and tradition and by ethnological,racial, tribal political social and religious barriers, were indeed capable of being welded together into a single homogenous nation.”

He therefore advocated a “national self-government that secured to each separate people the right to maintain its identity, its individuality and its nationality,its own chosen form of government, which had been involved for it by the wisdom and accumulated experiences of generation of its forbearers”

Oliver Stanley, the colonial Secretary of State also warned that it was the presence of the colonial masters that was keeping Nigeria and most African colonized states together and predicted a descent into turmoil by warring sects and groups if they left. Forus in Nigeria, it happened only five years after independence and leading to a civil war and the death of about two millions Nigerians. Congo, descended into chaos within a year of independence and the hostility has continued almost sixty years after

For efficient administration, Dr Nnamdi Azikiwe,one of Nigeria founding fathers whohad rejected cultural differences claiming it had been amplified by accident of colonial rule advocated a restructured Nigeria based on eight provinces
1. Northern Province, consisting of Katsina, Kano and Zaria
2. North Western Province, consisting of Sokoto, Niger and Ilorin
3 North Eastern Province,consisting of Borno, Bauchi and Adamawa

4 Central Province:Kabba, Benue and Plateau
1. Southern Province: Warri, Benin, Onitsha and Owerri
2. South Western Province: Ondo, Ijesha, Abeokuta, Oyo and Lagos
3. South Eastern Province: Calabar and Ogoja
4. The Cameroons.
Awo who had in 1947 warned that “Nigeria is not a nation. It is a mere geographical expression; there is no Nigeria in the same sense as there is the English, Welsh, or French; the word Nigeria is a distinctive appellation to distinguish those who live within the boundaries of Nigeria from those who do not” saw restructured Nigeria as a philosophy of opportunity to enable each ethnic group progress at its own pace. He thereforewent on to suggest the ten main ethnic groups as the basis of a restructured Nigeriai.e. Hausa, Fulani, Ibo, Yoruba, Kanuri Ibibio, Munshi, Edo, Nupe and Ijaw.

Tafawa Balewa in 1949 also admitted that. “The amalgamation of southern and northern Nigeria provinces in 1914 has existed as one country only on paper; it is still being far from being united. Nigeria unity is only a British intention for the country.”

However, the consensus was Bode Thomas’s recommendation of the division of the country into three permanent regions, each with its own political party. The three regions according to him can thereafter send their best to the center to preside over the affairs of Nigeria. Thus at independence we had three regions. The Midwest region was carved out of the West in 1963.

This structure was destroyed by the military whose only method is hierarchical control. To ensure total control from the top, the military opted for creating states to satisfy many of the restive groups in the country. We have ended up with 36 states and 774 LGAs – all of them looking up to the center for handouts.

ENEMIES OF RESTRUCTURING

The first enemy of a restructured Nigeria is the military that has tried to build Nigeria in its own image since its misadventure into politics in 1966. As custodian of Nigerian constitution, all the military ought to have done in 1966 was revert to our independence constitution. Instead of that, they have introduced all forms of social engineering programmes such as NYSC, Federal Unity secondary schools, Federal Universities, quota admission into universities, civil service and the army.

They have also divided the country into a dysfunctional 36 states and 774 local government structure, all in an attempt to continue to maintain their relevance. There are also the political elite, especially the military-created new breed politicians, who represent only themselves. GeneralOlusegun Obasanjo, for instance, became president even after he had been roundly rejected by his local government and ward.

We also have the economic elite who acquired their wealth as contractors to government. Many of them served as fronts for the military. They are the major beneficiaries of an ill-implemented privatization programme through which a total investment of about $100b the nation made between 1970 and 1999, was cornered by the elite whoconfiscated Nigeria Airways, NICON, Federal Palace Hotel, Hamdala Hotels, AP, NEPA, Nigerian Vegetable Oil Limited among many others for a paltry $1.5b. Of course, Nigerians who have become wealthy multi billionaires in their forties without owning industries or inheriting wealth, will do everything to sustain the current system. And since they control the wealth, they also control the media which they have continued to use to dismiss informed Nigerians who canvass for a change, as ethnic irredentists.

But what is the way forward?

We cannot achieve much without a theory. Because of the peculiar nature of man, model builders from Aristotle to Kenneth Wheare have tried to come up with models to provide solution to man’s unique problem.Our leaders are therefore not being called upon to reinvent the wheel. We can learn from the experiences of other multi ethnic societies.

Let us first look at Europe, where state formation ran its course, through tribal warlords to divine right of,it was discovered the nation state was inhibiting the freedom of individuals and group identity. Knowing that‘modern democracy favours the individual as bearer of rights and privileges and not groups’, they opted for federalism that convers status on communities. The federal arrangement ‘formally recognizes groups’ identities as legitimate and autonomous participants in the political process by asserting that formalrelationships are a part of individual liberty and identity.’

Following the assertions of some model builders such as Daniel Elazer, who after two devastating world wars said “federalist revolution is the only safeguard for peace and stability in a rapidly changing world” and Pierre-Joseph Proudhon, a French model builder who predicted “the 20thcentury will open the age of federations or else humanity will undergo another purgatory of a thousand years”, most Western nations including former unitary states like Spain and Belgium went on to embrace a federal arrangement

Unfortunately our self- serving elite in Africa have continued to play the ostrich while the former colonial masters who have been vindicated are increasingly becoming more apprehensive about their post-colonial states degenerating to failed states characterised by weak, ineffective and corrupt central government as a result of misrule by their new rulers.

Thousands of hungry and jobless immigrants from ex-colonies are flooding the metropolitan nations in droves. In 2011, France experienced first-hand, the anger of the hungry when frustrated homeless immigrants descended on the properties of their wealthy hosts. In 2012, it was the turn of Britain as angry youths freely moved around London, looting and setting fire on malls. Anarchy is slowly creeping into Italy, Greece and Spain.

But the West is prepared to forestall the looming anarchy as a result of migration of frustrated, desperate jobless youths to Europe where the percentage of the unemployed is in some places is as high as 30%. The starting point is checking the greed of their own citizens and their collaborators in the poor African countries manned by incompetent thieving political class.

In 2013, US President Barack Obama had during his second inauguration warned: “The patriots of 1776 did not fight to replace the tyranny of a king with the privileges of a few or the rule of a mob”. The French, after the massive destruction of property by disgruntled immigrants have become very active in Ivory Coast, Guinea, Tunisia and Mali. Then UK Prime Minister David Cameron, speaking in Davos ahead of the G8 meeting held between June 17 and 18 2013, in Lough Erne, Northern Island, UK, had complained openly about squandered “Nigeria oil exports worth almost a hundred billion dollars”, an amount he said was “more than the total net aid to the whole of Sub Saharan Africa”.

Our structure, our former colonisers have confirmed, is the bane of our society. All our country’s woes – crisis of revenue allocation, corruption, infrastructural decay, collapse of educational sector as well as religious intolerance, stem from the unworkable federal arrangement selfishly imposed by the military and sustained by those benefiting from the anarchy – especially the parasitic federal government whose major preoccupation is sharing what does not belong to it, cornering in the process over 50% of what others produce.

Restructuring is a win-win situation for Nigeria especially the dominant ethnic groups. It will for instance allow the acquisitive Igbos, who after fighting a war and is today at the forefront of agitation for restructuring, to look beyond taking pride in thriving in other people’s land,to plough back some of their wealth in their communities to end the revolt of the poor who have been forced into criminal activities instead of just building ‘a place of the people’ among the squalor of the poor and the deprived, as the great Ozumba Mbadiwe once did, or their Abuja representatives who kept their peace while $34b of the $44b allocation for the dredging of River Niger was shared with no work done while the current Deputy Senate President occupied the same position under David Mark.

And for the South-west, restructuring will put an end to the mischief of Yoruba leaders who dabble into other ethnic groups’ affairs in the guise of exporting Yoruba values which have often led to the devastation of Yoruba land by vengeful ethnic warlords and their collaborators. Restructuring will allow the new Yoruba leaders to devote their time and talents to the unfinished Awo agenda and his compatriots’ crusade to create an egalitarian society that supports free education, free health services, full employment and life abundance for their people.

Restructuring rather than an elusive search for national character or common vision is a win-win situation for all. For instance, it will be sweet justice for some northern states’ ex-governors like Sani Yerima of Zamfara State who according to retired Ambassador Olu Aina ‘underwent indoctrination and exposure in all the training camps of Osama Bin Laden,’ before coming to launch his political sharia with fanfare supported by some northern leaders The Lamido of Adamawa who during the 2014 Constitutional Conference said that if Nigeria became ungovernable , he had about two million Fulani who live across in northern Cameroon and Chad to fall back on, will have an option to do exactly that in a restructured Nigeria.

Dr Alex Ekwueme, a former Nigerian Vice President as well as NADECO have endorsed a six geo-political zonestructure for the nation. The 2014 Constitutional Conference midwifed by President Goodluck Jonathan recommended fiscal federalism and decentralization of the police force among others. The new geo-political zones according to them will be forced to look inwards to finance their developmental programmes.
- Excerpts from lecture delivered at the 2017 Caleb University Political Science and International Students Association (CUPIRSA) Week, 5th June 2017, at Caleb University,Imota, and Lagos State.
- Dr. Jide Oluwajuyitan was a former Executive Director (Editorial and Advertising) The Guardian Newspaper Limited, a former Executive Director, Vintage Press, Publishers of The Nation Newspaper and a former lecturer at the Department of Political Science, University of Lagos.
June 11, 2017