E.T OKERE
In one fell swoop, five state governments lifted restrictions on open religious activities contrary to fears that allowing such will fuel the spread of the COVID-19 virus.
Apart from that the debate over whether or not the restriction should be lifted has pitted some Christian religious leaders with one another, the move by the state governments concerned once again underscores the fact that the COVID-19 fight is not well coordinated, as noted in a previous article in this column.
Apparently, what led to the rather haphazard manner in which the entire thing is being handled was the federal government’s restriction of its initial intervention to only Lagos and Ogun states plus the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), the three areas where the first set of index cases was recorded.
President Muhammadu Buhari’s first national broadcast on March 29, was emphatic that the lockdown, which he announced during the broadcast, was specifically targeted at those there areas.
As expected, state governments, taking a cue from the president, also imposed a lockdown on their states, with varying degrees of peculiarities most of which, however, put their citizens in some difficulty.
For example, whereas, the federal government imposed a curfew from 8pm to 6am in Lagos, Ogun and the FCT, most of the state governments put theirs between 6pm and 6am. Consequently, citizens of such states were at difficulty complying with the local timing.
Many thought that the federal government’s timing – 8pm to 6am – superseded that of the states and, as such, stayed outside beyond 6pm.
Of course, trust our security agents and overzealous government officials; they did not hesitate in profiting from the innocent contraventions. After all, they would say, Nigeria is a federation and the states are “independent” of the federal government.
It is this lack of uniformity in the enforcement of rules guiding the COVID-19 fight that is principally responsible for the poor implementation of other restrictions, notably that on inter-state movement. The ban on inter-state movement was interpreted differently across the states.
Added to the fact that most of the states are almost borderless – you can hardly notice when you enter one state from another – many citizens thought it was an imposition, even unnecessary intervention, from Abuja.
In most of the states, especially in the South, even more particularly in the Southeast, the states are so contiguous that people from two neighbouring states share the same markets, eat in the same restaurants and drink in the same beer parlours till late in the night.
When it came to enforcing the inter-state movement ban, therefore, the arguments by contraveners is often more on sentiments than a show of remorse.
Besides, most state officials whose responsibility it is to help security agents enforce compliance often decided cases on the basis that these are, after all, “our own people”.
Extrapolated, a more worrisome dimension surfaced when state governments in the North began to repatriate Almajiris to their so-called states of origin.
But how could that happen when there is supposed to be a ban on inter-state movement? Of course, the question became academic once the governors concerned had made up their minds, not minding what is in the interest of the nation at large.
As things stand today, the movement of the almajiris, initiated by governors of some states in the North and initially meant it to be an intra-North affair, has snowballed into deep suspicion between the North and the South.
Meanwhile, the federal government seems to be lost on how to intervene on the matter. After all, Nigeria is a federation where the states and the federal governments are “co-ordinates” and none has power over the other. I hear you!
As I write this, there are feelers that the president might make another national broadcast – the third since the COVID-19 breakout – on the stance of the federal government on the lockdown and the easing out.
Nobody knows what the president will say – perhaps except the “enemies of the state” – apologies to my friend and colleague, Femi Adesina, but it is most likely that he will only once again make mention of Lagos, Ogun and the FCT, again leaving the governments of the rest of the thirty four states to do whatever they deem fit.
But I rather would the president, without infringing on the right of the state governments to function as ‘autonomous’ entities, give guidelines that will be more transcendental and make Nigerians as a whole seethe fight against COVID-19 as a national one, beyond the convenient interpretations by state governments.
Read Also: True federalism the only way forward, says Adebanjo
For example, the issue of timing of the curfew should be harmonized. It is 6pm or 8pm? The issue of inter-state movements should also be looked into.
Imagine how difficult it is to enforce a ban on inter-state movement between Lagos and Ogun states, for example; in a situation where quite a good number of people who work or do business in Lagos reside in Ogun.
Then, take the issue of the powers of the National Agency for Disease Control (NCDC). What authority does it have over the states? We saw what happened in Kogi State where the agency’s officials were reportedly chased away by the state government.
A similar question would be if the states have the prerogative to determine whether or not there are cases in their states even when they have little or no testing facilities.
Overall, I believe that it would be illusory for the governments – federal and states – to beat their chests and declare that the fight against COVID-19, from a national point of view, has been so far satisfactory.
In a previous column, I drew attention to the fact that Nigeria is under-tested and the inherent danger therein. For obvious reasons, the testing capacity is not likely to improve.
And the decision by some state governments to lift the ban on gatherings, especially religious gathering, without an adequate testing machinery, nation-wide, is not comforting.
It has been said that things may never be the same again after COVID-19. Whether in the realm of economics, politics or religion, pundits are emphatic that people, individually and collectively, will review their relationships.
One notable pastor was quoted as saying that many Christians may no longer bother about attending church services.
Some even say that husbands and wives will review the rules of engagements! In all the post COVID-19 speculations, the relationship between the different segments that make up Nigeria is not left out.
Some say that this is the time for Nigerians to redefine the terms of their relationship as a federation. Well, at a time like this, all sorts of ideas fly about.
Yet, a period like this is not one to talk about the serious issue of our troubled federalism. The problem at hand requires a uniform and harmonized approach to a solution while not losing sight of the imperatives of our flawed structure.a
Leave a Reply