By John Nnia Nwodo
Paper presented by
President-General of Ohanaeze Ndigbo, Chief John Nnia Nwodo at Chatham House, London, on
Wednesday, September 27, 2017
Let me begin by
extending my deep sense of gratitude to the Royal Institute of International
Affairs, for inviting me to participate in this current series of discussions
on Next Generation Nigeria: Accountability and National Cohesion.
The involvement of this reputable British Institute in discussing and
proffering suggestions for extant Nigeria’s problems is not only commendable,
but I believe most relieving for the British establishment, who must
understandably feel a deep sense of vicarious responsibility for putting
together a country confronted with such grim future.
Our first Prime Minister, Rt. Hon Tafawa Balewa
and the then premier of Northern Nigeria, Sir Ahmadu Bello, as well as the then
Minister for Finance Festus Okotie-Eboh, were murdered. A massive pogrom was
unleashed on South Eastern Nigerians living in the Northern
Nigeria . A
sitting Head of State from the South East, Major General Aguiyi Ironsi and a
governor from the South West Col. Adekunle Fajuyi were murdered. The military
suspended our 1963 constitution and adopted a unitary system of government to
fit their command and control structures. Opposition to this move by Southern
Nigeria led to constitutional talks in Aburi, Ghana. The agreements
reached at Aburi were jettisoned. War broke out and claimed more than three and
a half million lives mostly from the South East.
After the war, the
military-authored two more constitutions, one in 1979 and another in 1998/99.
The two military constitutions were finally approved by the Supreme Military
Council.
Under military
rule, this organ was the highest legislative organ for the country. It was made
up of senior military officers, a majority of whom were from Northern Nigeria . The last constitution of
1998/99 which the military approved was the legal instrument that governed Nigeria ’s
transition to democracy. It is still in use in Nigeria today.
It was not subjected to a national referendum. It created 19 states out of the
old Northern Region, 6 states out of the Western Region, 2 states out of the
old Midwestern Region and 9 states out of the old Eastern Region.
An agreement by a
constitutional conference convened by General Sani Abacha divided the country
into six geopolitical zones. This agreement was never incorporated into a
legislation even though it continues to be adopted for administrative purposes
by Government and the political parties. The creation of states and local
governments in these six geographical areas did not respect any equitable
parameter.
Our present
constitution is not autochthonous. It was not written by the people of Nigeria .
It was not approved in a National referendum. In jurisprudence, its
effectiveness will score a very low grade on account of its unacceptability.
Regrettably, it continues to hold sway and begins with a false proclamation, "We
the People of Nigeria …."
Our present
constitution was written at a time of unprecedented increase in National
revenue following the massive discovery of oil in Nigeria and
its global reliance as a source of fuel for mechanical machines. It had as its
centrepiece, the distribution of national revenue and national offices using
states and local governments as units for division. It constructed a federation
in name but a unitary government in practice following the pattern enunciated
in 1966 from the inception of military administration in Nigeria .
Competition and
drive for production by the federating units was destroyed. Each state and
local government waited every month for proceeds from oil generated revenue to
be divided out to them.
The Federal
Government became enormously powerful taking over mining rights, construction
of interstate highways, major educational establishments, rail and water
transportation, power and several infrastructural responsibilities previously
undertaken by the regions. Competition for control of the Federal Government
became intense and corrupted our electoral system. Corruption became perverse
as the Federal Government became too big to be effectively policed by auditing
and administrative regulations.
As I speak to you
today, Nigeria has
a grim economic outlook.Nigeria ’s
external debt has grown from $10.3 billion in 2015 to $15 billion in 2017. Her
domestic debt has also grown from 8.8 trillion Naira in 2015, to 14 trillion
Naira in 2017. Domestic debt component for the 36 states rose from 1.69
trillion Naira in 2015 to 2.9 trillion Naira in June 2017.
The Federal
government has on two occasions released bailout funds to enable states to meet
their recurrent expenditure requirements. Only about eight states in Nigeria namely Lagos ,Kano , Enugu , Edo , Delta, Abia, Rivers, and Kwara have
their internally generated revenue sufficient enough to cover their interest
repayments on their debts without depending on allocations from Federally
collected revenue.
For the Federal Government
close to 40% of its annual revenue was spent on servicing of interest
repayments on debts and according to International Monetary Fund (IMF), this
percentage is expected to increase further. According to Fitch ratings,Nigeria ’s
Government gross debts is 320% of its annual revenue!! – one of the highest in
the world.
In the face of this
economic reality, the Population Reference Bureau predicts that Nigeria will in 2050
become the world’s fourth-largest population with a population of 397 million coming
after China , India and the United States of America .
This is only 33 years away.
In 2011, five
Colonels in the United States Centre for Strategy and Technology, Air War
College did a case study on Nigeria and the global consequences of its
implosion and came out with a conclusion that, “despite its best efforts,
Nigeria has a long-term struggle ahead to remain a viable state, much less a
top-20 economy”.
Faced with this
grim economic outlook and a structure inimical to growth what is, therefore,
our way forward? Our growth model has to change for us to survive as a country.
A model based on
sharing of Government revenue must give way to a new structure that will
challenge and drive productivity in different regions across the country. This
new model must take into account that the factors driving productivity in
today’s world are no longer driven by fossil oil but rather the proliferation
of a knowledge-based economy. The restructuring of Nigeria into smaller and
independent federations limits and the devolution of powers to these federating
units to control exclusively their human capital development, mineral
resources, agriculture, and power (albeit with an obligation to contribute to
the federal government) is the only way to salvage our fledging economy.
Restructuring will devote attention to the new wealth areas, promote
competition and productivity as the new federating units struggle to survive.
It will drastically reduce corruption as the large federal parastatals which
gulp Government revenue for little or no impact dissolve and give way to small
and viable organs in the new federating units.
Those campaigning
against restructuring in Nigeria have
painted an unfortunate and untrue picture that those of us in support of
restructuring are doing so in order to deny the Northern States who have not
yet any proven oil reserves of the ability to survive. This is unfortunate. The
new model we propose for Nigeria recognizes
that revenue in the world today is promoted by two main sources namely, human
capital development leveraging on technology to drive the critical sectors of
the economy and agriculture. Ten years ago the top ten companies in the world
were the likes of Exxon Mobil, Shell, and Total. Today the top eight companies
in the world are represented by technology related companies. They include
Apple, Microsoft, Google, Facebook, and Amazon.
The example of Netherlands in
Agriculture is also relevant here. The Netherlands is
the 18th largest economy in the world. It has a land area of about 33.9,000 square
kilometres. Niger State , one ofNigeria ’s
37 administrative units has about 74,000 square kilometres. Netherlands has
over $100 billion from agricultural exports annually, contributed mainly by
vegetables and dairy.Nigeria ’s
oil revenue has never in any one year reached $100 billion. Northern
Nigeria is the most endowed agriculturally inNigeria .
Its tomatoes, carrots, cabbages, cucumbers, tubers, grains, livestock and dairy
feed the majority of Nigerians in spite of its huge reserve of unexploited export
potentials. In a restructured Nigeria , Northern Nigeria
with the right agricultural policies will be the richest part of Nigeria .
Our analysis here
must be viewed from the background that datelines have been fixed by OECD
countries and China for
the cessation of production of automobiles and machines dependent on fossil
oil. This development and the new technology for production of shale oil in the United States has made
world dependence on Nigeria ’s
crude oil a rapidly declining phenomenon.
This brings me to
the question of what form Nigeria will
assume under a restructured arrangement and how this restructuring can be
brought about. Two basic models have been canvassed for restructuring in Nigeria .
A conservative model aimed at maintaining the status quo has been proposed to
mean simply a shedding of some of the exclusive powers of the federal
government like issuing of mining licences, permission for constructing of
federal roads and shedding of regulatory powers over investments in critical sectors
of the economy like power. This model merely scratches the surface of the
problem. It avoids fundamental devolution of powers.
The second model
calls for a fundamental devolution of powers to the States as federating units
and a lean Federal Government with exclusive powers for external defence,
customs, immigration, foreign relations and a Federal legislature and judiciary
to make and interpret laws in these exclusive areas.
This second model
proposes states at the federating units with two different approaches. The
first approach simply wants the states as the federating units and a federal
government with limited powers. It wants the states to control a percentage of
revenue accruing from their areas and contribute an agreed percentage of such
revenue to the federal government.
The second approach
proposes the states as the federating units with a region at each of the six
geopolitical units whose constitution will be agreed to and adopted by the
states in the geopolitical region. The regions will have the powers to merge
existing states or create new ones. There will be regional and state
legislatures and judiciary dealing with making and interpreting laws made in
the respective political entities. This approach proposes a revenue sharing
formulae of 15% to the Federal Government, 35% to the Regional Government and
50% to the State Governments.
To achieve a
national consensus on this subject requires a national discussion. Regrettably,
the ruling party, All Progressives Congress (APC) which promised restructuring
in its manifesto after two years and four months in office is still appointing
a committee to define what sort of restructuring it wants forNigeria .
To make matters worse, none of the other political parties have come up with
any clear-cut route for achieving a consensus on this matter.
The National
Assembly itself is a reflection of the deep ethnic divisions in the country and
the Northern majority conferred on it by the military makes it highly
unacceptable to Southern Nigeria .
Recent resolutions made by it on devolution of powers have not helped the
situation. Happily, the Senate President has promised a revisit of the subject
matter.
In the recent past,
self-determination groups have sprung up inNigeria .
The self-determination groups include IPOB, MASSOB, YELICOM, Arewa Youths, Niger Delta Republic and
Republic of the Middle Belt.
Of all these groups
IPOB and Boko Haram have been designated as terrorist organisations by the
federal government. This development in relation to IPOB is unfortunate. Boko
Haram is an armed organisation which has attacked and occupied Nigerian
territory hoisted its flag and appointed local authority governments.
It has abducted and
abused Nigerian women, kidnapped and imprisoned many and killed over two
hundred thousand people. It is still involved in guerrilla warfare against Nigeria yet
the Federal government is negotiating with them. No member of Boko Haram
captured by the military is under trial. Members of this Federal government are
on record for condemning the previous government for brutal murder of Boko
Haram members and condemning the retired Chief of Army Staff for zealous
prosecution of the anti-terror campaign. Members of the sect who confess to a
change of mind have been received along with their abducted female partners in
the Presidency and rehabilitated.
The declaration of
IPOB as a terrorist organisation is in my view hurried, unfair, and not in
conformity with the intendment of the law. Whereas I am not completely in
agreement with some of the methods of IPOB like its inappropriate and divisive
broadcast, the uncontested evidence given by the Attorney General of the
Federation in an interlocutory action claiming that IPOB attempted and/or
actually snatched guns from law enforcement agents are, if proven, merely
criminal offences. They do not constitute enough evidence to meet international
law definitions of a terrorist organisation. Happily, the United States Embassy
in Nigeria only
three days ago shared this conclusion and asserted that the United States
Government does not recognise IPOB as a terrorist organisation. This same
unarmed IPOB that is being stigmatised by the Nigerian government had its
members murdered in Asaba, Nkpor, Aba and Port Harcourt simply
for having public demonstrations without the federal government ordering a
judicial inquiry. Instead, after I called for one and Amnesty International
provided evidence that 150 of them were killed, the Chief of Army Staff set up
an inquiry composed of serving and retired army officers thus abandoning the
rules of natural justice which prescribes that you cannot be a judge in your
own court.
The Igbos in Nigeria feel
the treatment of IPOB as unfair, discriminatory and overhanded. They see the
move as an attempt to encourage a profiling of Igbos in the international
security arena.
We know of other
self-determination groups in Nigeria that
are armed and have destroyed government and private sector installations and
wells that government prefers to negotiate with rather than label them as
terrorist organisations.
Fulani Herdsmen
otherwise called the Fulani militants have ravaged farms in the Middlebelt,
South West, and South Eastern Nigeria killing several farmers in the process.
In January 2016 they killed 500 farmers and their families in Agatu in Benue state. In Enugu state,
they murdered more than 100 farmers in Ukpabi Nimbo in April 2016. Photographs
depicting them with automatic rifles trend in the entire world media, yet not
one of them is facing criminal charges, nor is Operation Python
Dance being conducted in the areas where they ravage and kill and
the Federal government describes them as criminals and not a terrorist organisation
notwithstanding their classification by the Global Terrorist
Index as the fourth deadliest terrorist group in the world (see
British Independent Newspaper, 18th November 2015). The
London Guardian Newspaper
of 12th July 2016 indicated that Fulani herdsmen killed one thousand people in
2014.
Let me seize this
opportunity to once more thank the Royal Institute of International Affairs for
inviting me as President General of Ohanaeze Ndigbo to speak here today. In Nigeria , Ndigbo whose
social cultured organisation I lead are, notwithstanding their historical
experiences in Nigeria ,
the most loyal ethnic group to the concept of one Nigeria .
We are the largest ethnic group other than the indigenous group in any part of Nigeria .
We invest and contribute to the economic and social life of the committees
wherever we live. We are proudly Christians but very accommodating of our
brothers of other religious persuasions. We are grossly marginalised and still
treated by the Federal government as second-class citizens. No Igboman, for
instance, heads any security arm of the Nigerian Armed Forces. Our area is the
most heavily policed as if there was a deliberate policy to intimidate us and
hold us down.
Our endurance has
been stretched beyond Hooke’s gauge for elastic limit. The deployment of the
Nigerian Army under the guise of Operation Python Dance to
the South East was unconstitutional under S. 271 of the 1999 Constitution.
Deployment of the
army is only allowed in circumstances of insurrection, terrorism and external
aggression not in killing of priests, or fighting kidnapping. And in those
circumstances where they can be deployed, leave of the Senate must be sought.
This brazen impunity in dealing with matters which concern the South East is
provocative.
The Arewa Youths
Council by issuing a quit notice for Igbos to leave Northern Nigeria and declaring a Federal
Republic of Nigeria without Igboland had committed serious infractions of the
law. First by declaring a new Republic of Nigeria which
excises the South East unilaterally, they were committing treason. By issuing a
proclamation for Nigerians to leave any part of Nigeria forcibly
they were infringing the fundamental rights of innocent Nigerians, as
guaranteed by the Constitution to live and do business anywhere. By commencing
an inventory of Igbo property in Nigeria for
seizure by October 1st, 2017, they were attempting conversion. By proclaiming a
mop-up action of those who did not comply with their order by October 1st, they
were, without doubt, inciting genocide. Yet in spite of all these orders to
arrest them by the Kaduna State Government and the Inspector General of Police
were not enforced nor were they prevented from holding court with Governors and
leading elders from the North.
The only hope for
change in Nigeria today
is the rising call for restructuring pioneered by the Southern leadership
forum, supported lately by ex Vice-President Atiku Abubakar, former President
Ibrahim Babangida and leaders of the Middle belt including Dan Suleiman and
Prof. Jerry Gana.
Our expectation is
that now that our President is fully recovered and back to work, he will
address the situation by constituting a nationwide conversation of all ethnic
nationalities to look into the 2014 National Conference report and the trending
views on this subject matter so as to come up with a consensus proposal that
the national and state assemblies will be persuaded to adopt.
To continue to
neglect a resolution of this impasse will spell doom for our dear country.
Our argument is
further reinforced by a two-year extensive study by the UNDP titled, JOURNEY
TO EXTREMISM released in September 2017 which indicated that
exposure to state abuse and marginalisation not religious ideology are better
predictors of radicalisation.
It also indicates
that those living on the periphery of their country with less access to
education and health services are more vulnerable to be recruited into violent
extremist groups. InNigeria ,
millions of unemployed graduates from universities waiting for up to 10 years
without gainful employment are restive, agitated and veritable cannon fodders
for escalating restiveness.
In conclusion, I
hope that the Royal Institute of International Affairs, the British Government
and British interests associated with Nigeria will
continue to offer useful advice to our polity that will lead to an early
resolution of our situation.
I thank you for
your kind attention
John Nnia Nwodo
Wednesday 27th
September 2017
No comments:
Post a Comment