The Nation Newspaper

Tag: restructuring

  • Stakeholders back proposed restructuring of NNPC, DPR, PPPRA

    STAKEHOLDERS have endorsed restructuring of the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC), the Department of Petroleum Resources (DPR) and the Petroleum Products Pricing Regulatory Agency (PPPRA) as enshrined in the Petroleum Industry Governance Bill (PIGB).

    It will bring about a profit-driven, efficient and virile petroleum industry if it is carried out, they said.

    The stakeholders include former Country Presidents, International Association of Energy Economist (IAEE) Professors Wunmi Iledare and Adeola Akinnisiju.

    They said Senate’s pronouncement  on repositioning the three agencies to achieve growth is a good omen for the industry, adding that the decision will unlock the potentials of the industry after several failed attempts.

    They said the passage of the PIGB and the subsequent restructuring of NNPC, DPR and PPPRA will help in bringing Direct Foreign Investments (DFIs) into the sector and reduce liquidity gaps.

    Iledare said NNPC, DPR and PPPRA are not scrapped by the Senate as Nigerians are being made to believe, noting that the agencies are being restructured for better performance. He said the  Senate has implemented parts of the industry reforms by restructuring the three agencies, stressing that operators have waited patiently for the reforms.

    He said:“The conclusion in some quarters that the Senate has scrapped or outlawed NNPC, DPR, and PPPRA was wrong. The three parastatals are still much in existence even though they are going to operate under new managements and names. What Senate did was to make the agencies stronger and result-oriented.

    “Due to the restructuring, a National Oil Company (NOC) will emerge to replace the activities of the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC). With NOC on ground, there will be an effective regulatory control in the oil and gas sector. Just as we have the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) regulating and supervising activities in the banking industry. The petroleum sector will be regulated by the National Oil Company.”

    He said transformation of the industry is long overdue, noting that operators have been expecting the sector to provide growth for the economy.

    Iledare, who was formerly with the University of Port Harcourt, Rivers State, said the restructuring will help in improving regulatory and commercial activities in the industry as NOC will be saddled with the responsibilities of facilitating commercial activities in the sector.

    Akinnisiju said under the new arrangement, NOC will be in a better position to drive growth by bringing in more local and foreign investors into the sector, adding that following the restructuring of the sector, NOC and other agencies would generate revenue for the government and other stakeholders in the value chain.

    “I foresee a situation whereby NOC would be operating as a commercial entity like Shell and other multinational oil companies. It would make money and provide dividends to its shareholders and the economy would be better for it,”he said, urging the Federal Government to provide conducive environment for operators in order to facilitate the much needed growth in the nation’s oil and gas industry.

  • Why restructuring won’t work now, by Fed Govt

    Why restructuring won’t work now, by Fed Govt

    It is possible, say SANs, others

    ADVOCATES of restructuring were told yesterday to take it easy.

    Their “agitation” and “provocative rhetorics”  cannot achieve their dream, Minister of Justice and Attorney-General of the Federation Abubakar Malami (SAN) said.

    He warned those behind the quest for restructuring to avoid demonstrations because “it is a complex process”.

    He said although Nigeria’s federal system had been experiencing challenges, its reforms could not be done in one fell swoop.

    Besides, democratic means should be deployed to reform the federal system, according to Malami.

    In his view, the abolishment of states through restructuring will have multiplier effects on the nation.

    Such effects, according to him, include downsizing of the National Assembly and abolishing State Houses of Assembly.

    Malami made the submissions in an address at a one-day think tank conference in Abuja , which was organised by the National Institute for Policy and Strategic Studies (NIPSS).

    The theme of the conference was “Federalism and the challenges of dynamic equilibrium in Nigeria: towards a national strategy”.

    The AGF’s speech to the nation’s think-tank(NIPPS)  was the first official reaction to the agitation for restructuring.

    Malami said: “In Nigeria today, there are demands for restructuring, for deconstructing the excessive concentration of powers at the Centre, for a dispersion  of power to the lower levels of government along with special provisions for the empowerment of women and other socially disadvantaged groups for the country to move away from the cooperative federalism of several decades to a more competitive form of economic federalism, for a fiscal federalism that presents the challenges of addressing regional inequalities and of balancing the concerns of equity and efficiency in intergovernmental fiscal relations, among many others.

    “Federalism is imbedded in our constitution as contained in sections 2,3 and 5. It is not out of place to state that as far as our constitutional democracy is concerned, the idea of restructuring is not a function of advocacy or agitation. It is about constitutional accommodation and or alternative constitutional amendment.

    “As things stand, restructuring requires amending the constitution to accommodate referendum or, in the alternative, a constitutional amendment to the 1999 constitution, which in  this case must be supported by majority of legislators in 24 states of the federation as enshrined in Section 9 of the constitution.

    “Whether that process is going to be an easy sale is a conjecture that should be left for deliberation. But one thing that is certain is the inevitable implication that abolishing states through restructuring process will certainly translate to the eventual multiplier effect of abolishing the state house of assembly and perhaps downsizing the National Assembly and probably the civil service and other related federal institution.

    “This indeed is a tall order that cannot be achieved through advocacy, emotional outburst or provocative rhetorics and demonstrations. The beauty of democracy is in the process and legislative process is in our case the only answer.”

    Malami, who admitted that the nation’s federalism was facing challenges, said restructuring cannot be achieved overnight.

    He added: “It is true that Nigeria’s federal system has been experiencing challenges and there have been agitations and prescriptions to reform and modify it. Reforms and modifications, institutional arrangement, systems and processes are normal in festoons, but are not done in single swoop as being advocated in Nigeria. Mega changes are not healthy for federations.

    “Change is a gradual process that must be democratic and subjected to legislative and administrative processes as provided by law. We must use democratic means to reform our federal system. We need to recognise that both federalism and democracy are mechanisms for managing diversity.

    “Indeed, while federalism provides the Institutional framework for managing diversity, democracy makes possible the negotiation for diverse identity claims by providing them with representation, voice and political mechanisms by which the competing claims are balanced and reconciled.

    “There is no true or false federalism. Indeed, there is no single,  pure ideal federal model that is universally applicable everywhere. Each federation reflects the particular conditions and circumstances that produce it.

    “We cannot wish away the particular conditions and circumstances that have produced the challenges in our federal system. We must use democratic means to find solutions to these numerous challenges. It is democracy that articulates citizens’ preferences and places limits on arbitrariness.

    “As political realities and experiences across the world have shown, all federations, whether established by a coming together or holding together process, experience deep rooted conflicts and ours cannot be an isolated case.”

    The Acting Director General of the National Institute Policy and Strategic Studies, Jonathan Juma said since its adoption, federalism had been experiencing disequilibrium between centralizing and decentralizing forces which have affected the union.

    Juma, who was represented by the institute’s Director of Research Prof Habu Galadima said concern about the increasing number of centrifugal forces within the Nigerian federation had been expressed by experts, opinion leaders, civil society organisations and many others at all levels of government which requires urgent attention.

    He argued that despite guiding principles, Nigeria’s federal system faces the challenge of finding a balance between economic principles of equity, efficiency and effectiveness in allocating powers and resources.

    Juma said: “What factors have proven key to the success or failure of federalism in Nigeria to play its potential role in reversing or quarantining deep rooted conflicts, how can Nigeria’s federalism maintain a dynamic equilibrium between centrifugal and centrifugal forces in the country without excessively overheating the political system.

    “In what ways can the conflicting interests regarding the allocation of responsibilities, functions and revenue sources be accommodated to promote equitable development in the federation, fiscal responsibility, accountability and transparency and reconcile national and regional interests regarding natural resource

    Former Minister of Information Prof Jerry Gana said it was unfortunate that the  report of the 2014 National Conference had not been opened by the government.

    He said the report was made up of 600 recommendations which could lead to fundamental changes.

     

    “In a true federal system, power and functions must be wisely devolved to the federating units and adequate resources generated and not allocated to the federating units to perform their functions effectively,” he said.

    To another former Minister of Information, Prof. Sam Oyovbaire, it is wrong to be  calling  for “true federalism” because there is no false federalism.

    He said: “Federalism is federalism whether in the US, Canada, Australia or in Germany. There is no true or false federalism.”

    The co-founder of the African Policy Research Institute, Ambassador Sunday Dogonyaro said “Nigerians must stop deceiving themselves by saying that the union is negotiable when  the policy actions are not in tandem with this argument.

    According to him, apart from a few elite, nobody is comfortable with the present arrangement.

    “Studies have tend to suggest that the current federal arrangement is neither viable not sustainable,” Dogonyaro said.

  • Corruption, not restructuring is our bane

    SIR: There has been a renewed agitation for making the component states of the federation more productive by flipping the exclusive legislative lists in favour of the federating states. Proponents of this reform have suggested various nomenclatures such as restructuring, true federalism etc.

    One major derivative of that reform is the institution of state police.

    A major downside of restructuring with state policing as a derivative is that it is cast in the media as a zero-sum game.

    For instance, there seems to be a generic consensus that the topmost in the list of problems bedevilling the Nigerian nation is corruption yet proponents of restructuring cannot see any need to push various anti-corruption bills with the National Assembly through as an alternative to a swiping restructuring that may feed the incentive for civil war.

    The Police Reform Trust Fund Bill has been domiciled at the National Assembly (NASS) since 2008 yet the legislature is not in a hurry to pass the bill.

    A governor that can use his security details to physically prevent EFCC or DSS from performing their jobs cannot be entrusted with state police. The decibels resonating restructuring must be moderated with guarded introspection.

    What we forget is that what constrains any Nigerian president in turning the police to personal agent of vendetta is the oversight function of the NASS. This oversight restraint is absolutely absent at the state level where state Houses of Assembly are mere appendages of the executive.

    A social media clip where a legislator was kneeling down to beg a state governor for merely criticising the governor can attest to the master-servant relationships that exist between the executive and the legislature at the state level.

    It is trite to say that toothless state assemblies pose a veritable danger to the orchestrated true federalism particularly as it affects state police.

    Rather than pushing this nebulous restructuring that spells doom for the corporate existence of Nigeria with civil war as a proximate corollary, the NASS should progressively pass reformative bills pending with it.

    Nobody has articulated how restructuring will end corruption yet the more allocation various states of the federation get, the more impoverished the people become, the more governance is degraded and the more reckless governors become.

    Corruption and not restructuring deserves the greatest attention.

     

    • Bukola Ajisola,

    bukymany@yahoo.com

  • NEF ready for restructuring

    One of the most prestigious civic organizations of Arewa North, the Northern Elders Forum, has made a historic statement. Speaking to Daily Sun this past week, the spokesman for NEF, Professor Ango Abdullahi, former Vice-Chancellor of Ahmadu Bello University, informed Nigeria and the world that the forum is ready for discussions over the restructuring of the Nigerian federation. He added, in fact, that NEF is even ready for discussion of the issue of Biafran, and any other, demand for separation from Nigeria.

    In the South, throughout the acrimonious restructure-or-not-restructure debate that has been going on since 1999, the general picture as seen by the peoples of the South has always been that the elite of Arewa North are all opposed to restructuring. The very history of how the federation was gradually distorted between independence in 1960 and 1999, and how all power and resource control in our country was pulled together under the federal government, justifies such feelings about the northerners among southerners.

    The leaders of the three regions of our federation had in 1957, after long and constructive negotiations, agreed to a rational federal structure giving the federating units of our federation the reasonable amount of autonomy that would enable them to develop their resources, and that would make it possible for the different peoples of our country to live harmoniously together as one country. That structure benefited all regions.

    But, as soon as some North leaders had found themselves in power in the federal government at independence in 1960, they had started to seek for more federal control over the regions. This had led them to launch a federally sponsored attack on the Western Region in 1962, resulting in the suspension of the elected government of that region and the general brutalization and pulling down of the region. When the federal authorities backed a blatantly rigged Western Regional election in 1965, most people of the region revolted, and the revolt ended in a virtual collapse of all governance in Nigeria, and in an ultimate military coup in January 1966. A counter coup, organized by angry military officers from the North followed in July 1966 – and thereafter, coup after coup followed, producing military dictator after military dictator from the North, each of whom found ways to pull power and resource control to the federal centre, thereby gradually reducing the federating units of our federation to impotent entities.

    The northern political elite gloatingly welcomed these developments, and a sort of plot evolved between them and northern military officers to give the federal government an all-controlling power over Nigeria. The coming, from about 1970, of increasingly large revenues from the mineral oil of the Niger Delta added greatly to the North’s incentive to centralize all resource control. In 1999, the last of the northern military dictators enshrined all the centralizing developments in a constitution for Nigeria. And that constitution was strongly welcomed by the northern political elite – and stubbornly defended since then by them.

    Virtually all persons and organizations of note in the South have spoken up in support of a restructuring of the federation. Almost all demand a return to the 1957 federal arrangement. More and more have been saying in recent times that further delay in restructuring the federation could, or even would, break up Nigeria. In this atmosphere, some citizens of the Igbo South-east revived demands for a separate country of Biafra and quickly attracted larger and larger followings. Some citizens of the South-south followed suit, and some of these are employing violent means to press their demand. In the South-west, tens of “self-determination” groups have emerged, many of them with many thousands of members, and most of them committed to working for a separate Yoruba country out of Nigeria. In the Middle Belt, many youth groups have emerged too, generally committed to the defence of their peoples against political and terrorist pressures – and more and more of these are speaking the language of separation from Nigeria also. Thus, as things stand today, Nigeria does not appear to have much time. The imperative now is simply this: “restructure now or break up”.

    Therefore, Professor Abdullahi’s assurance to the rest of us that his prestigious group of Arewa elders does not oppose restructuring but positively welcomes discussions over it, creates a sudden shaft of light.  He says, “Well, if you read our communiqué in Kano recently, we categorically stated that the Northern Elders Forum is prepared to engage in any discussion with any group that is supporting restructuring of Nigeria, so, this means that we are fully supporting restructuring”.

    Concerning the specific agitation for Biafra, Professor Abdullahi said, “You see, the issue of Biafra is all part of the discussion of restructuring Nigeria…Yes, if Biafra means negotiations, yes.  It’s all a matter of discussion, if it means Igbo want to have a country of their own separate from Nigeria, it means a matter of discussion and we are prepared for the discussion”.

    He also has positive things to say about separation in general. He says, “…f Nigerians are tired of staying together, they should be prepared to accept divisions instead of remaining in agony and disappointment of one another…You see, what I am saying is that every Nigerian should be able to speak his opinion about the state of the country…”.

    Then he adds the following crucial point about how people should handle the issues of Nigeria’s future. He says, “If it is discovered that the law of a country is violated, that some somebody has gone beyond his fundamental rights, the law is very clear on this. What perhaps government is concerned about is that violence was part of Kanu’s agitation, to realize his dream by force; I think that is what government is trying to tackle to my understanding. So if Kanu is talking about Biafra, he is free to talk about Biafra and everybody is free to talk about his understanding of the Nigerian state. We are always talking that the Nigerian state is not working and how can we make it to work? And if the best option is to call for separate countries, why not?”

    The historically important purport of Professor Abdullahi’s statements is that we Nigerians can, by discussion, decide the future of our country. That comes from an understanding of the fundamental facts of our country’s existence. Our country is made up of many different nations, each living in its own homeland, each possessing and cherishing its own culture, each endowed by its creator with its own sovereignty, and each hugging its own pride about itself and its ways. If some act of history happens to push all of these nations together under one common sovereignty, that act does not, and can never, eliminate each nation’s right to its original sovereignty. That is why every known multi-nation country in history, and every known empire ruling many peoples together, no matter how long it existed, ultimately broke up. That means that we Nigerians must reckon with the basic inevitability of Nigeria’s dissolution.

    Naturally, the urge of separation from a multi-nation country tends to be stronger in a larger nation than in a smaller one. The Yoruba, Igbo and Hausa-Fulani, each numbering about 50 million in population, are three of the largest nations in the world. Even with the best of good intentions, each of these three nations is very unlikely to remain for very long in a multi-nation country like Nigeria. If any of our three giant nations now shows impatience about its being part of Nigeria, we must not judge or treat it as if it is doing something wrong, something reprehensible. That is what nations as human groups do all over the world. Our other, smaller, nations will come to the same behaviour sooner or later too.

    For a multi-nation country, a federation is only a palliative – and palliatives are, by nature, only temporary. A unitary arrangement is an aberration, and aberrations tend to quickly self-destruct. That means that if we hold on to our present unitary arrangement, Nigeria will break up very soon.

    Still, we must thank Professor Ango Abdullahi for throwing in a shaft of light at this dark moment in Nigeria’s history. Whether we choose restructuring or breaking up, we know now that doing it with violence is uttermost folly. The future of our kind of country is pre-determined by forces beyond our control.

  • Is restructuring the answer to Nigeria’s problems?

    Is restructuring the answer to Nigeria’s problems?

    Many politicians and civil society groups are intensifying their agitation for the restructuring of the polity to reflect true federalism. Against the background of the upsurge in the agitation, Deputy Political Editor RAYMOND MORDI takes a look at what the idea entails.

    IT was former Vice President Atiku Abubakar that brought back restructuring in the country’s political lexicon, last year during the public presentation of a book entitled We Are All Biafrans by Chido Onumah. At the event, the chieftain of the All Progressives Congress (APC) said the structure of the country is heavily defective, as it does not provide the enabling environment for growth and progress among the 36 component states of the federation. Atiku, who spoke against the backdrop of renewed agitations by militants in the Niger Delta and the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), said the solution to the country’s problem is restructuring.

    Since then the clamour for restructuring has refused to go away. Last Wednesday during the launching of a book by former Chief of Army Staff, Lt. Gen. Alani Akinrinade (rtd) restructuring was the main topic of discussion. This was because Akinrinade has been consistent over the years that restructuring is the answer to Nigeria’s problems. The auditorium of the Nigeria Institute of International Affairs (NIIA), venue of the event, was filled to capacity by his friends, associates, family members and admirers who came from far and near for the launching of Alani Akinrinade: My Dialogue With Nigeria, a compendium of interviews, speeches and lectures by the retired General over the years. At the occasion, many of them could not resist talking about restructuring, as a way to support Akinrinade’s views.

    The following day, associates of the late Obafemi Awolowo met in Ikenne, the home town of the late sage in Ogun State and demanded for the restructuring of the country, to stem the gradual slide into disintegration. The associates who regrouped for the maiden edition of the Awo Conversations declared that it had become imperative to reduce the overbearing influence of the Federal Government and devolve more powers to the constituent states.

    Indeed, there appears to be an upsurge in the clamour for restructuring. The Southwest which has always been in the forefront for the agitation for restructuring is still insisting on it. Speaker after speaker at the book launch backed Akinrinade’s call for the restructuring, saying it will bring about the real change the country needs. Among those who renewed the call are the National Leader of the All Progressives Congress (APC), Asiwaju Bola Tinubu; governors of Osun and Ondo states, Mr Rauf Aregbesola and Chief Rotimi Akeredolu; and Mr. Ray Ekpu.

    Explaining why Nigeria needs to be restructured, Akinrinade said only merchants of doom would advise President Muhammadu Buhari that restructuring will give birth to disintegration. He said his family has been urging him to put his experiences in a book and commended those who made the publication and its presentation a success, saying: “I hope that this contribution will halt the journey of our country to perdition.” He added that his initial efforts at putting his memoir together were consumed by fire during the NADECO struggle.

    Ekpu, the former Newswatch magazine Editor-in-Chief, also said restructuring would not lead to disintegration of Nigeria. He said restructuring is an idea whose time has come. He said: “Mr President should not listen to those saying that restructuring will lead to the country’s disintegration; it will not. A lot of Nigerians really believe in Nigeria. Restructuring will bring a great positive change to this country. This will make the President of Nigeria a great hero.’’

    Tinubu, who was represented by his media aide, Mr. Tunde Rahman, said he remains an advocate of restructuring. His words: “I believe and support restructuring. I also remain a true advocate of restructuring and true federalism and I will not be found wanting when and where the issue of restructuring is being discussed.”

    Governor Akeredolu said the time has come for proper restructuring of Nigeria. His words: “I share the view that there is need for decentralisation of Nigeria; I believe in it and I believe the time has come for proper restructuring in this country. I would argue it anywhere, any time and I will support it. I also believe strongly that we have to work out a master plan on restructuring and we have to discontinue just talking about it.”

    Governor Aregbesola said he is saddened by the poor efforts Nigeria is making at building a federation, saying the police must be restructured as a first step, even within the existing awkward federal structure. The governor who described himself as a federalist said Nigeria is the only federation where the police and the entire internal security arrangement are unitary. He said: “Why must the Commissioner for Police in a state report only to the Inspector General of Police? Why should the CP not take orders from the zonal commanders? It is an unconventional arrangement.”

    At the Ikenne event, renowned historian, Professor Banji Akintoye, who was the lead discussant, bemoaned the lopsided composition of the Nigerian federation which, he noted, had compounded her socio-economic and political problems. The event was organised for youths from different ethnic nationalities, as part of the activities to commemorate the 30th posthumous birthday of the late sage.

    Aside from Akintoye, other speakers at the event include Awolowo’s former Private Secretary, Odia Ofeimun, Afenifere chieftain, Adebanjo, Prof. Oladipo Akikugbe, Senator Anthony Adefuye, Dr. Tokunbo Awolowo-Dosunmu and Hon. Joshua Oyebanji, who represented the Speaker, Oyo State House of Assembly.

    Many prominent Nigerians have at one time or the other added their voices to the growing clamour for restructuring. This include: former Head of State, Yakubu Gowon; Nobel Laureate, Wole Soyinka; former Secretary-General of the Commonwealth, Emeka Anyaoku; former Kaduna State Governor and leader of the Conference of Nigerian political Parties (CNPP), Balarabe Musa; and Second Republic Vice President, Alex Ekwueme.

    The current upsurge in the clamour for restructuring has been blamed on what analysts describe as the poor governance style of the Buhari administration. The administration has incurred the wrath of the other regions of the country, because of the lopsided appointments in favour of the North and its perceived failure to deliver on most of its campaign promises.

    Major socio-cultural organisations in the South, such as the Afenifere and the Ohaneze Ndi Igbo, also believe that it has become imperative to restructure the dysfunctional and poorly designed political structures of the country. While these groups and individuals are aggressively pressing their positions and prescribing how Nigeria’s political structure and power vested on each layer of authority should be, their northern counterparts, such as the Arewa Consultative Forum (ACF) and the Arewa Elders Forum (AEF) are singing a discordant tune.

    The North seems to be the only region not comfortable with the growing demand for restructuring. Conservative northerners are suspicious of concepts like true or fiscal federalism, resource control, regionalism, weak centre, state police, and a new revenue sharing formula, saying it is a prelude to the breaking up of the country. They say the country’s problems have nothing to do with her political structure and allocation of powers, but poor leadership and corruption.

    What does restructuring really entail? Proponents of restructuring say it does not mean that a Yoruba man in Bauchi has to return to the Southwest nor that the Hausa man in Onitsha has to return to the North. In the words of a socio-political commentator, Christian Udechukwu: “Nigeria will be like the European Union where citizens are able to exercise the freedom to live, work and play where they choose without prejudice.

    “The proposed restructuring of Nigeria is to enable all of the six regions to decide on and have full control of matters of health, education, industrial development policy, power, agriculture, transport infrastructure, local policing, revenue mobilisation, mining, investment guarantees, local taxes and then leave the Federal Government in Abuja to decide only matters like defence, foreign affairs, immigration, international cooperation, national security and others. No more free money from Abuja to the three tiers of government for unaccountable expenditure.

    “Any region that wants to employ only their best and brightest to govern them can do so; and those who want rascals and illiterates in government can have them. Regions will be free and have power to name, shame and punish the criminals amongst them without recourse to ethnicity, religion and party politics at the centre in Abuja.  People can insist on local laws and order enforcement to protect their lives and property.”

    Udechukwu said regions that want 100 states and 1000 local governments can create them if it has money to pay for such big bureaucracy.  He added: “They can no longer rely on free money from oil and gas. Each region will have to be productive, innovative and creative for a secure future for its people. This is very simple. If this form of restructuring were to happen, then people will become more prudent and thoughtful in their daily choices.

    Is restructuring really the answer to Nigeria’s developmental problems?

    A lecturer in the Political Science Department, Federal University, Wukari, Taraba State, Dr. Godwin Dappa, said restructuring would be good for Nigeria, if it is done in the right way. He said Nigerians always come up with good ideas, but the problem has implementation. His words: “I think restructuring would be good, if we get it right. To a large, we do not have the political will to commit ourselves to what it entails. It has to do with total change, adjustment and revitalisation of governance structures.

    “We are still battling with the hangovers of our colonial experience. As we speak, we are fighting corruption, but nepotism, one of the greatest aspects of corruption, is on the upsurge. For instance, at the recent Department of State Security (DSS) recruitment, 51 out of the 479 new recruits are Katsina State, where most states in the South has between five and 12 slots. This is perhaps because the DSS Director-General Alhaji Lawal Daura and President Buhari are from Katsina. Rivers State has five slots, Akwa Ibom five, Edo six, Lagos seven, Delta eight, and Kano State 25. Indeed, 331 of the newly commissioned officers are from the 19 northern states and the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), while less than half of the total intakes were from states in the southern part of the country. This is lopsided; what criteria were used?

    “The agitation for restructuring is becoming strident now because the Nigerian populace is beginning to see that the existing structures are one-sided; the formation structures, the state structures and the government and politics structures are one-sided. Take a hard look at the service chiefs, from the police, to the army, immigration, civil defence and what have you, they are all headed by northerners.

    “If we restructure now, it will not be sincere enough, because we are not yet practicing the art and science of democracy; we are not yet there. Even some of the people from the Southsouth and Southeast that is agitating, as soon as they are called upon and settled, they would say ‘yes sir’ and join the continuity bandwagon.”

    A human rights activist and the Southeast Zonal Secretary, the Campaign for Democracy (CD), Dr. Jerry Chukwuokolo, equally believes that the current agitation for restructuring would not see the light of day. He said: “It is very unnatural for anybody that has certain advantages to let go, especially when such people have caliphate mentality of subjugation. This is the case in Nigeria. But where people think of equality, in terms of sharing the commonwealth, restructuring would have been the best for Nigeria.

    “The way it is, the caliphate has rejected the idea of restructuring and they hold all the aces, particularly the armed forces, which is the feudal instrument of subjugation. But, it won’t work; at a point in time the bubble will bust. There is nowhere it is recorded in history that a group of people can continue to subjugate others forever. If people are following what is going on, they would know that the game is up.

    “You can see the context in which I say I don’t support restructuring; otherwise, it would have been the best thing that would happen to Nigeria.”

    In his piece last Sunday, titled How Democratic is the 199 Constitution? newspaper columnist, Ropo Sekoni, said it is trite to say that the 1999 Constitution has become an albatross around the neck of the nation and the nationalities that constitute it. He said many citizens in the last two decades have been calling for restructuring in the belief that the 1999 Constitution had de-federalised the country in a way that makes it unstable and economically stagnant.

    He said: “Now that the country is at its lowest ebb economically is a good time to pay attention to those calling for re-federalisation of the polity and economy. Reading ulterior motives into every call for restoration of federalism will only amount to distraction from the real problem…”

     

  • A vote for restructuring

    The concept of “Restructuring Nigeria” has become a glorified concept in the media as a result of several agitations by many Nigerians, who believe the hope for a better country is still realistic and can be attained through federalism.

    Many people, including journalists and political leaders, have made cases for restructuring and this has become a topical issue in the media. It is important to note that the debate on restructuring did not just arise naturally; it is because of the fundamental flaws of the 1999 Constitution, which recently led to institutional crisis.

    A writer, Emmanuel Ugwu, in his piece titled: Interrogating the restructuring of Nigeria, posited that the Boko Haram crisis, activities of Fulani herdsmen and those of Niger Delta militants were pointer to the fact that there is need for restructuring.

    This means that people want a return to the system of government we embraced immediately after independence. This choice is informed by the inadequacies of presidential system we are practising now. People want a weak centre, while more powers are given to regions. According to Dele Babalola (2013), Nigeria’s  federal  experience  began  in  1954  under  the  tutelage  of  the  British  colonial authority and the fundamental aim of federalism was to hold together the diverse groups that have been lumped together in the British-inspired contraption called Nigeria.

    The country is made of different ethnic nationalities, which earns the country an important position in the world. This diversity should have been our source of strength towards building a prosperous nation. But, reverse has been the case, because of the present realities.

    According to Adejumobi (1991), Nigeria, born in 1914, after the amalgamation of the northern and southern protectorates, was a by-product of a “fraudulent” social contract and not of a “negotiated will” of the every part.  In other words, Nigeria is a country formed through forceful amalgamation of its constituent parts without proper consultation about the willingness of these parts to federate by the colonial government.

    The sole rationale for the then colonial government’s action was the expediency of commercial interests and economic imperialism. This was corroborated by Lady Flora Shaw (1904) (later Mrs. Lugard)  who  coined  the name “Nigeria” when she said: “As  in  India,  so  is  in  Nigeria,  we  meant  to  trade,  but conquest was forced on us. Having conquered, we are obliged to administer and the hope that lies before us is to develop from small beginnings which have been made in Nigeria, such another great or prosperous dominion as our ancestors have created for us in India.”

    Adejumobi argued further that the merging of diverse people, with varying backgrounds and cultures created both horizontal polarization and primordial loyalties which invariably makes national integration difficult. More so, the colonial politics of divide and rule, and its strategy of regionalism (introduced in 1946 via the Richard’s Constitution), effectively laid the foundation for ethnic chauvinism, sectional political parties, and parochial-cum-disunited indigenous political elite.

    The colonial state also imposed a patrimonial system of administration (in the ideological guise of indirect rule) on the country, in order to enlist the dominant status group in the service of colonial rule, and to contain the political consequences of changes in class structure (Adejumobi, 1991).

    In which case, the political relations that existed were vertical in nature. It was one of domination, control and dependence, with subordinate clients jostling for the favour of their patrons. The whole governmental structure during this period was characterised by a military-like chain of  responsibility extending from the governor down to the village head (Oyediran, 1988).

    According to Adejumobi, it can be assumed that federalism is not the total way out of Nigeria’s problem. It may as well be viewed strictly from different angles that the periods of regionalism marked the most significant development of Nigeria. The central argument is that, the federal solution in Nigeria was necessitated by the desire to achieve ‘unity in diversity’ and this was made possible by the presence of certain socio-economic forces.

    Strictly following the path of the First National Conference held in 1950; it was placed on record that many representatives of the nation and communities subscribed to the concept of federalism. In justification to the subscription, Chief Obafemi Awolowo, one of the proponents of federalism was quoted in his book: Thought on Nigerian Constitution (pp 48-49) that: “From our study of the constitutional evolution of all the countries of the world, two things stand out quite clearly and prominently. First, in any country where there are divergences of language and of nationality – particularly of language – a unitary constitution is always a source of bitterness and hostility on the part of linguistic or national minority groups.”

    Awomolo further said: “Nigeria is not a nation. It is a mere geographical expression.” Inferences from the positions of many great personalities that argued against federalism, posited that Nigeria cannot be seen as one. It is only a big camouflage to see every tribe as one.

    There is a sharp disagreement between ethnic groups here. However, we have been successfully colonised to speak English. There is no gainsaying the fact that we have remained second citizens by adopting a foreign language as official language at the expense of our own indigenous languages.

    Perhaps, Nigeria is the Abiku which Prof Wole Soyinka talked about in his poem titled: Abiku. Because of the flawed federalism we practised, we have witnessed avoidable institutional and human crises, which pose threats to the continuous existence of this country. Except we restructure and renegotiate our unity, we would only be living in a jungle. We also need to restructure ourselves before restructuring the system. We make the system, not that the system makes us.

  • Unilever to sell spreads business in global restructuring

    Unilever to sell spreads business in global restructuring

    Unilever Group, the parent company of Unilever Nigeria Plc, has indicated its intention to divest its spreads business as part of a global restructuring of its businesses.

    Unilever Group said the divestment was part of a strategic review aimed at accelerating sustainable shareholder value creation.

    Unilever Nigeria yesterday confirmed the plan to sell the spreads business but added that the announcement has no immediate effect on the activities of the Nigerian subsidiary. Unilever Nigeria’s share price remained unchanged at N33.15 per share at the Nigerian Stock Exchange (NSE).

    Chairman,   Marjin Dekkers, said the proposed sale of the spreads business and other restructurings were fully supported by the board of directors.

    According to him, the review that the board of directors of the Unilever Group has undertaken has been detailed and comprehensive and it has confirmed that the group’s model of long-term shareholder value creation has been successful and remains as valid as ever.

    Chief executive officer, Unilever, Paul Polman, said the group has decided that the sale of the spreads business would lead to accelerated development of its portfolio.

    “After a long history in Unilever, we have decided that the future of the spreads business now lies outside the Group,” Polman said.

    Nigerian shareholders had largely shunned a N43 billion share-acquisition bid by Unilever Overseas Holdings , United Kingdom aimed at acquiring a quarter of Unilever Nigeria’s shares to increase the multinational’s majority equity stake in the Nigerian subsidiary to 75 per cent.

    Unilever UK’s total shareholdings in Unilever Nigeria only increased by 8.49 per cent from 50.04 per cent to 58.53 per cent after the conclusion of acquisition bid. Besides, Unilever UK had resorted to mopping up the shares of Unilever Nigeria through the Nigerian Stock Exchange (NSE).

  • Corruption fighting restructuring

    It would appear the nexus between corruption and the dysfunctional structure of our federation is yet to be fully appreciated. Any strategic weapon designed against corruption which forecloses the systemic and institutional deficits that reinforce and sustain it, would amount to scratching the surface of the matter.

    If the government is serious about waging a successful war against corruption, it must opt for a more holistic and enduring perspective to the matter- approaches that do not just focus on its manifestations but the wider dynamics of environmental shortfalls that nurture and sustain it. Ironically, in the current fight, concerns focus more on symptoms rather than the root causes.

    Admittedly, huge sums of money looted by former public officers have been recovered by this government and those before it. We are daily regaled to our consternation with the unbridled looting that goes on within government circles, as one former public officer after the other is exposed in this looting bazaar.

    Of late, about N3 billion was recovered in a hidden safe belonging to a former Group Managing Director of the NNPC, Andrew Yakubu, while more than 17 exotic vehicles were recovered from the warehouse of a former boss of the Nigerian Customs Service, Abdullahi Dikko. The list is endless as sundry former political office holders including many former governors are currently facing corruption-related charges.

    All we have been treated to still represents a tip of the iceberg in the corruption matrix. Many of those who milked this country dry have been left to enjoy their loot.  Even now, and with all the posturing of the government, corruption is still rampant.

    Not only have some key government functionaries been accused of corrupt practices with the same government looking the other way, just last week, Chairman of the Presidential Advisory Committee against Corruption, Itse Sagay accused the Nigerian Customs Service and the NNDC of unbridled corruption even under the present administration. He illustrated his case against the NDDC, citing reckless vehicle purchases that are at variance with the current mood of the nation.

    If Sagay could go public with such allegations, it is to be imagined that the war against graft can succeed only to the extent those holding public offices are blocked from finding loopholes to fleece the nation. Where the opportunity to steal and escape unnoticed exists, chances are public officers will dip their hands into the public till. That is the foreboding reality.

    And it is so because the system of government we operate is patently defective. Not only are its structures not conducive for nation-building and inculcation of patriotic ideals among the disparate groups, the political recruitment process is tainted and incapable of producing quality leaders of nationalistic hue. The main qualifications for the highest political office- the presidency – have been ethnicity and religion rather than capacity and requisite training to grapple with the complex challenges of statecraft.

    We are trapped in this predicament because of the disproportionate powers of the central government. The federal government controls everything including life and death. That is why competition for that office has remained rancorous and volatile. It is so because the competing sections want to take control of its resources for the advantage of their ethnic groups and members of their families. And given Richard Joseph’s characterisation of our politics in the prebendal sense, one can better appreciate why corruption has remained a hydra-headed monster in our public life.

    In his theory of the two publics, Peter Ekeh gave insights into how our colonial experience gave rise to the emergence of two realms- primordial and the civic public. While the primordial realm is associated with a high level of morality, the civic public is denied of it. Thus, certain actions considered a taboo in the primordial sphere are tolerated and hailed if they concerned the civic public.

    That is why those who steal from the till of the government are sometimes hailed while stealing from the purse of the ethnic union is highly despised. It all has to do with the amorality that is the fate of the civic public. That also accounts for the serious competition between the state and primordial cleavages for the loyalty of the citizens.

    In effect, the dysfunctional federal structure and the amorality that is associated with civic structures have had the net effect of unleashing in this country the looting spree that goes on in public life. For this country to make reasonable progress in the war against graft, it must evolve models that mark a sharp departure from the current situation where the central government controls everything with unlimited access to the national wealth. Devolution of powers and fiscal federalism hold the ace.

    With that, the bitter competition and rivalry among the component units to control the center will be stymied. Corruption at that level will also reduce very substantially. It is possible for this competition to shift to the component units thereafter. But the difference will still be there because competition will be circumscribed both in scope and destructive propensity.

    Acting President Yemi Osinbajo argued along this premise last week when he said they curbed corruption in the Lagos State judiciary through institutional reforms. He attributed its success to the fact that a “system was in place and impunity was not allowed.” For him, corruption can be effectively tamed if “we put in place models that will work.”

    The model on which our federalism is erected cannot work. Nigeria is not just working. Our federal structure has been an unmitigated liability. And rather than check corruption, it has everything that aids and abets it. Those who are putatively comfortable with it, do so because they are in positions to corner its unlimited resources for self-serving predilections. Its extant structures must be tinkered with to check corruption and unleash the creative energies of the component units for rapid development.

    So when you get to hear some people tag themselves patriots, nationalists or statesmen; when you hear them parrot the non-negotiability and indivisibility of the country, beat war drums to keep Nigeria one, you are being regaled with the sing-song of those who either currently benefit unduly from the stupendous resources at the centre or owe their questionable wealth to the public offices they hitherto occupied. As soon as that advantage is under some threat, they switch positions either as religious fundamentalists, insurgents or self-determination crusaders.

    The real issue is what each gets from the central authority. And since those opposed to restructuring seem contented with what the central authority offers them or are afraid of what they stand to lose if new paradigms supplant decadent ones, it can be safely extrapolated that corruption constitutes the greatest impediment to evolving a functional model for cohabitation and rapid development. It is a case of corruption fighting restructuring for fear of a new model that will eventually kill it. The choice is ours!

  • It’s up to Nigerians to decide on restructuring, says Atiku

    It’s up to Nigerians to decide on restructuring, says Atiku

    •Ex-VP meets IBB, governor in Minna

    Former Vice President Atiku Abubakar yesterday challenged Nigerians to decide whether they wanted to restructure the country or not.
    He said he would no longer advise the government publicly.
    Atiku spoke yesterday in Minna, Niger State, after meeting ex-Military President Gen. Ibrahim Babangida and Governor Abubakar Sani-Bello.
    The meeting, held at Babangida’s home, lasted about two hours.
    Atiku arrived at Minna Airport at 12:40p.m. and was received by the governor. They went together to Babangida’s home.
    After the meeting, the former VP addressed reporters. “I came to visit Gen. Babangida and wish him well.”
    He said he would no longer advise the government in public, adding that his advice would be channelled confidentially.
    “If I have to advise the government, I will do so in confidence and not on the pages of newspapers.”
    On restructuring, Atiku said it depended on Nigerians. “It is up to Nigerians to decide on the restructuring of the country.”
    He was accompanied by Cpt. Yahaya Gombe, Amb. Yahaya Kwande, Alhaji Kwaironga Jada and Alhaji Jamilu Jibrin.

  • Nigerians: To pray or not and the unassailable need for urgent restructuring

    But prayer alone cannot, and will, certainly, not save Nigeria.

    What you will read in this piece is not apocryphal. But since Nigeria has become the prayer capital of the world, it looks rather insidious to even begin to ask the question as to whether we should pray, or not. We must, however, bear in mind the teachings of Apostle Paul concerning faith: In James 2:14-26, he says: 14 ”What does it profit, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can faith save him? 15 If a brother or sister is naked and destitute of daily food, 16 and one of you says to them, “Depart in peace, be warmed and filled,” but you do not give them the things which are needed for the body, what does it profit? 17 Thus also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead”. And our Lord, Jesus Christ himself gave us the strongest link between faith and prayer when, in Matthew 21:21-22, he said: “Truly I say unto you, if you have faith, and do not doubt, you shall not only do what was done to the fig tree, but even if you say to this mountain, ‘Be taken up and cast into the sea,’ it shall happen. (22) And all things you ask in prayer, believing, you will receive.”

    If we see the essence of work to prayers according to Apostle Paul above, then consider the following which has circulated serially on the interne but which I will not ascribe to who it is alleged authored it because I did not see the name mentioned in my source:

    “After independence, in order to build a great nation, each country went to work. But in Nigeria, after independence, our people went to pray and fast.

    So, while we were praying, Malaysia came here and took our palm seedlings and built a great factory of it.

    While we were praying, Singapore went into investment in technology.

    While we were praying, India went into ICT.

    While we were praying, China went to massive industrialisation.

    While we were praying, UAE went into massive infra structural development.

    While we were binding and casting Lucifer, Japan went into technological development.

    While we were speaking in tongues, Denmark went into education of her citizens.

    While we were mounting big speakers in our places of worship, USA was mounting man on the moon.

    After our prayers, God, being a wise God, decided to reward us according to our labour.

    Since those that went into industrialisation, technology, infra structural development, ICT, education etc have been rewarded accordingly. It’s only wise God rewards us with our efforts in prayers.

    That’s why today, Nigerian pastors are competing in building the biggest churches. That’s why there are more prayer houses and worship places than hospitals and schools. That’s why people rush to prayer houses for medical and business solutions instead of hospitals.

    That’s why we don’t do business feasibility before jumping into it since we are going to back it up with prayers. And when it collapses, we blame the devil.

    That’s why it’s a sin to say anything negative about Pastors and Imams.

    That’s why our Pastors don’t consider the opinion of engineers while building and blame the devil when the building collapses.

    That’s why faith in God replaces building pillars and when it collapses we blame it on Lucifer.

    That’s why our Pastors are making sure they plant church branches instead of schools on every street in Nigeria.

    That’s why we always wait for God to do for us that which ability would’ve accomplished.

    That’s why we want our teachers to labour on earth and go to heaven for their rewards.

    Nigeria is a prayer-loving, God-fearing, nation. Religion has taken the place of technology, infrastructure, education etc.

    When travelling, we ignore all the necessary road requirements, servicing of our vehicles and pray. And, once we pray, we can put half serviceable vehicles on the road and blame our step mothers or mothers-in-law if anything goes wrong.

    That’s why there are more people dying on our roads than wild animals in the forest.”

    When you juxtapose the above with our geo-political realities, it will be extremely difficult, if not impossible, to see prayer as about the only thing holding, not just the country, but the individuals together in our totally blighted country today.  As I wrote on this page last Sunday, President Buhari, who many wrongly hold responsible for the state of the nation, was gifted an Augean stable not even Hercules could have completely cleaned up in two terms of four years each. It is that humongous.  As I have said time and time again, it will be extremely difficult to match the depravity of PDP’s 16 years’ stranglehold on Nigeria with any in modern history. I am a historian and should know. What debauchery chieftains of that party could not effect by themselves, we saw children of two of their past Chairmen do, fleecing Nigerians of billions of naira in the oil subsidy scam. And that is not counting those who were paying billions, in cash, buying houses in Abuja or those turning money for equipping the army into eye-popping real estates in Abuja. I have asked those who think they have a punching bag in Buhari to do only a little introspection to see how wrong they are. And this is nothing like exculpating the president from blame, the most egregious of which is surrounding himself with an Hallelujah chorus in the name of a kitchen cabinet complete with a cast of shadowy Second Republic advisers who, being mainly Fulanis, must have wrongly advised his mode of appointments and the extremely poor, if not deliberately, unfair handling of both the ongoing herdsmen’s murderous exploits, and the carnage in Southern Kaduna. All these three have called to question President Buhari’s fair mindedness but I know only too well that he did not cause the ravaging hunger in the land; did not crash oil prices nor did he rev up the naira exchange value to the dollar which is a direct consequence of the former.  Those who carried truck loads of dollars to Yoruba palaces during the last presidential election must certainly carry that inescapable cross and burden of history.

    I digress.

    Nigerians cannot, and, certainly, must not cease praying or they are lost. Let us see how Emeritus Professor Jide Osuntokun (UP SCHOOL!) captured Nigeria’s present day realities in his column  in The Nation of Thursday, February 02, 2017 : “Some three or four years ago, a friend and colleague of mine from Bauchi State told me he was going on a flying visit to Azare. Knowing the terrain, I told him to go to Jos and then Bauchi and then to Azare. He laughed and said that it would be suicidal of him to take the road to Jos because on seeing him, a Fulani man, the local people would kill him. Because of this, he said he would drive to Kaduna then Kano and from there to Bauchi. This was some kind of Israelite journey. To be sincere, I did not know things were this bad. Now even driving from Abuja, the seat of the federal government, to Kaduna has become problematic because I am told the road is infested by all kinds of highway robbers and ethnic militants. The picture is not good at all. The north-east is not safe because of Boko Haram. The Delta is unsafe because of Niger Delta militants. Cattle rustlers are making the north-west problematic, the Biafra militants are challenging government’s hold on the south-east. The Fulani herders are making life difficult in the north-central zone. It is only a matter of time for peace to disappear in the south-west. The area is now under threat of Ijaw militants from the Niger Delta and herdsmen from the north. The picture of countrywide insecurity is complete. In this kind of environment, we should forget about foreign investment without which the problem of unemployment will become more acute’.

    But prayer alone cannot, and will, certainly, not save Nigeria.

    Therefore, in spite of the debilitating socio-economic problems the president is daily grappling with, he must, if he truly loves this country, immediately set up a panel of very responsible, patriotic and capable Nigerians who would pull together the reports and recommendations of all past National Conferences and, from them, distil recommendations that will give this country a new lease of life.

    Their recommendations should then go to a referendum but without the slightest input from this National Assembly; not even as little as a coma.

    The bell is tolling. Nigeria’s situation is dire, and extremely precarious. The president must not wait for it to unravel by itself.