By Reuben Abati
No one should be surprised by the loud and widespread support that
has attended the latest call by former Vice President Atiku Abubakar that Nigeria needs to be
restructured. In his words, “our current structure and the practices it has
encouraged have been a major impediment to the economic and political
development of our country. In short, it has not served Nigeria well, and at the risk
of reproach it has not served my part of the country, the North, well. The call for restructuring is even more relevant today in the light of the governance and economic challenges facing us…Nigeria must remain a united country…I also believe that a united country, which I think most Nigerians desire, should never be taken for granted or taken as evidence that Nigerians are content with the current structure of the Federation. Making that mistake might set us on the path of losing the country we love…”
*Dr. Reuben Abati |
In those words, the
former Vice President and now APC chieftain simply summarized what is already
well known and has helped to draw attention afresh to what has been talked
about over time but which Nigeria
at the expense of its citizens and its own corporate existence is yet to
address frontally and forthrightly. Indeed, Nigeria as presently structured and
managed is not working. To save the country, the country must be restructured,
not only politically but also in terms of the relationship between the
federating units and the values that hold the union together.
Nations evolve on the basis of a creative rethinking of their processes and
experiences. When the Americans came up with a Presidential/Congressional
system of government in 1787, and wrote a Constitution to express their
aspirations and expectations, they wanted to address the cleavages within the
union and build a united country. In Nigeria , we inherited a skewed
federal arrangement from the colonial masters, failed to improve on this, and
ended up with the wages of that defect in the form of political crises and
eventual civil war.
We have experienced
years of military rule during which an enduring culture of praetorianism and
dictatorship was established and when eventually we returned to civilian rule,
we simply copied and pasted the American Presidential style of government. We
have also borrowed the slogan of federalism, but in reality what we have is a
unitary type of federalism, a unitary state, completely de-federalized. This is
ironic considering the fact that one of the reasons for the collapse of the
Aguiyi-Ironsi administration is commonly accepted to be his introduction of
Decree No 34 of May 25, 1966, which in effect, transformed Nigeria into a
unitary state.
*Former VP Atiku Abubakar and President Buhari |
The new men in power
claim that they have not read it, and that they have no intention whatsoever to
even glance at it – another clear evidence of how ego and present-mindedness
hobble the nation, and partisanship stands in the way of ideas and national
progress. Former Vice President Atiku’s advocacy should begin from within his
own party, the APC, now currently in power. There can be no real restructuring
of Nigeria without a governing basic law, that is the Constitution, a rule book
which spells out the people’s expectations and resolutions as matters of law.
There has been a
clamour for a People’s Constitution since 1999, but every National Assembly
simply tinkered with the process of Constitutional Amendment, thus allowing the
continuing survival of a military-imposed Constitution that promotes
over-centralized authority. It is a pity that the present National Assembly is
so conflicted it may not be able to summon the courage, the will and the
capacity to lead the process for restructuring Nigeria.
What no one can contest
nonetheless is that the prevailing system of “unitary federalism” has not
served Nigeria
well. Indeed, as Atiku puts it, “the practices it has encouraged have been a
major impediment to the economic and political development of our country.” We
run a country where nothing constructive happens in government except it is
sanctioned by Abuja ,
and by one man, the President of Nigeria. The Federal Government of Nigeria and
the President are so constitutionally powerful that other tiers of government
are at best appendages. Every month, state Governors and their accountants rush
to Abuja to
have their feeding bottles filled from the national baby-sitting nursery.
Without the federation revenue that is dispensed by the Federal Government, the
states and local governments cannot survive. Today, so many state governments
cannot pay salaries or embark on any development projects.
States were created in the expectation that by carving up the country into
smaller units, the kind of threat that led to the Biafran secession crisis and
the civil war of 1967-70 will not reoccur, and that the centre will have firmer
control of the constituent units. That has turned out to be an illusion, and a burden,
with the crisis in the North East, the South East and the South South. There is
so much unhealthy competition in the country, made worse by ethnic and
religious cleavages. Nigerians must find a new means of reducing unhealthy
competition and make our democracy more consociational, and inclusive.
When that change
comes, we will all still remain Nigerians, united by the ideals of freedom and
unity, but the long-term ideal will be to ensure that no one feels cheated or
oppressed, and that the country, stable, peaceful and properly re-federalised,
comes first in every circumstance.
Along this line, there
have been several recommendations including true federalism (to which the power
elite driven by selfish, ethnic and religious considerations has shown no
commitment), confederation and regional government (both of which in their
purest forms, may further raise the risk of secession), a parliamentary system
of government (which may not necessarily address existing fears, without a
socio-cultural transformation), these, in addition to the view that there is
nothing technically wrong with the current Presidential system of Government
(the problem is with Nigerian practices and attitudes). What may well work for Nigeria is a
combination of structures, a mix that is constitutionally made possible based
on local peculiarities.
This is another way of
saying that borrowed models may not fit into local circumstances; the best way
for a country to evolve is by working out its own structures and practices that
best suit its purposes and historical experience. In Nigeria , the basic issues that
should inform this are not hard to define. Many Nigerians feel excluded from
the current power sharing arrangement; they feel marginalized, treated unfairly
and alienated by a compromised state that is in need of reinvention. Groups
within the union believe that they contribute more to the Federal purse than
they get in return whereas those who do not contribute as much get a lion share
of accrued and distributable revenue in addition to readier access to power,
translated into an unfair, near-monopoly. There is also no merit, equity or
justice in the management of the country and the people’s welfare and
expectations.
A common denominator in
various proposals (by such groups as Movement for National Reformation, The
Patriots, Ohanaeze Ndigbo, Afenifere) is the demand for a different kind of
arrangement, which will also result in a different set of practices. I find
attractive the thinking that Nigeria
should devolve more power and responsibilities from the centre to the states as
federating units. These states can be organized on a zonal basis, to reflect
the existing six geopolitical zones, with each zone having its own government,
and responsible for its own development, very much after the pattern of the
regional system of the First
Republic . In that sense,
there will be six zones, each developing at its own pace, and making
contributions to a central government whose functions will be limited to
defence, foreign affairs, national security, management of national youth
service, national currency, and whatever other functions as assigned to it
under the new Constitution.
A unicameral
legislature at the centre will have equal number of members from each
geopolitical zone, and Presidential power at the centre will be rotated from
one geo-political zone to the other, for a single term each of about six years
to give every geo-political zone a sense of belonging and establish the
possibility of greater inclusiveness and access to power. This will be a matter
of law not convention, and to cure the mischief of likely secession by any
geo-political zone, the indivisibility of Nigeria will be retained in the new
Constitution, and in any case, since the various geo-political zones are not
necessarily homogenous in all respects, internal complexities may serve as a
bulwark against the threat of secession. The zones should not be carved out on
an ethnic basis.
In the new Nigeria
that many are asking for, the President of Nigeria will no longer function as a
monarch, exercising extra-ordinary executive powers. The Federal Government
will also not need to own and manage offices, vehicles, universities, colleges,
guest houses, and resorts in every city. Resources will be owned and managed at
the zonal level and revenue contributions made for the maintenance of the
Federal Government at an agreed ratio, thus, the focus of development will
shift to the geo-political zones and communities.
The Federal Government
won’t have to construct and maintain roads, dig boreholes, provide water and
electricity or feed school children: government will be decentralized with each
zonal government bearing the responsibility for the welfare of the people
within its jurisdiction. These details can be negotiated once there is a
commitment to change and a broad consensus on what exactly will work for Nigeria .
When that change comes,
we will all still remain Nigerians, united by the ideals of freedom and unity,
but the long-term ideal will be to ensure that no one feels cheated or
oppressed, and that the country, stable, peaceful and properly re-federalised,
comes first in every circumstance. Until this objective is achieved, we may
well be labouring in vain to build a nation.
*Dr.
Abati was special adviser on media and publicity to former President Goodluck
Jonathan
No comments:
Post a Comment