By Charles Okoh
The senate president, Ahmad Lawan and his counterpart in the House of Representatives, Femi Gbajabiamila, are two of a kind. Apart from the fact that they both belong to the ruling party, the All Progressives Congress (APC), they also seem resolved to maintaining the status quo to hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil about the party and the federal government. If that is what being loyal to one’s party means, I leave that to all to conjecture, but how do we tell when the opportunity to transcend party politics to projecting national interest beckons?
To be sure, both gentlemen have told us severally that they do not intend to ruffle the feathers of the executive, at least not openly, and they have kept faith to that for about two years since their inauguration. However, the very essence of separation of powers in a democracy would be completely defeated if the other arms of government would acquiesce with all that the executive throws at them.
The issue of the 1999 Constitution, which we operate, has been a
subject of debate for as long as the constitution has been in force. Some have
argued that the constitution is so flawed that it is practically inoperable,
while some have argued that the constitution may not entirely be the problem
but the operators of the constitution. They believe that no matter how good a
constitution may be it cannot be perfect and that if the operators of the
constitution are sincere, the 1999 Constitution would suffice.
But what is not in doubt is that every constitutional process is
a journey and not a destination. It must continue to evolve and since life
itself is not static the laws guiding man and his society must be dynamic and
accommodating of changes every now and then as the people deem fit.
The hue and cry over the constitutional conflicts around the
1999 Constitution has become the loudest in the recent times with the lean
financial resources of the nation, the failing security situation in the land,
glaring imbalance and injustice in appointments and the inequitable
distribution of national appointments etc.
However, for some the problem is way and far beyond the
constitution. For them, they actually question the continued unity of the
nation and demand the balkanization of the country. But when viewed critically,
what is clear is that even for this group of people, the reason they insist on
disintegration of the nation can still be traced to some of those issues raised
earlier. Meaning, if the nation was allowed to function with every stakeholder
having their fair share and guaranteed justice and equity these agitations
would not have come up in the first place. Hunt Sunday Igboho everywhere and
chase Nnamdi Kanu and his IPOB group as you may want, for as long as these
anomalies continue, there will always be agitations and cry of injustice as
well as calls for disintegration.
Last Wednesday, the upper chamber of the National Assembly
adjourned for two week for two-day public hearing across the six geo-political
zones on proposals to alter the provisions of the 1999 Constitution.
This is even as the President of the Senate, Ahmad Lawan said
that the National Assembly holds no predetermined position on any issue of
interest to Nigerians ahead of moves to amend the constitution.
Can Lawan’s statement be true? There aren’t enough reasons to
believe that. The National Assembly, under the leadership of both Lawan and
Gbajabiamila, has never given us any reason to expect anything radical from
them. It’s good to know that Lawan recognizes that there are fears that the
outcome of the exercise may have been predetermined, especially given their
recent reactions to some national issues, and more so their various outbursts
against the southern governors for placing a ban on open grazing and the call
for restructuring to address the various issues that agitate Nigerians amongst
others.
Lawan had accused the governors of retreating to regionalism to
address a national issue that should be collectively decided upon.
Gbajabiamila, on his part, said to end the security challenge,
all must ‘imbibe the spirit of oneness, togetherness, unity and love.”
Lawan said: “I believe that, as leaders, especially those of us
who are elected, should not be at the forefront of calling for this kind of
thing because, even if you are a governor, you are supposed to be working hard
in your state to ensure that this restructuring you are calling for at the
federal level, you have done it in your state as well.
“What you may accuse the Federal Government of, whatever it is;
you may also be accused of the same thing in your state. So, we are supposed to
ensure that we have a complete and total way of ensuring that our systems at
the federal, state and even local government levels work for the people.
“We should avoid regionalism. We are all leaders and we are in
this together. The solutions to our challenges must come from us regardless of
what level of government we are, whether at the federal, state or the local
government level. I believe that Nigeria is going to come out of these
challenges stronger”.
How these hypocritical leaders think they are more nationalistic
than those who call for restructuring beats one’s imagination. How they believe
Nigeria’s stunted development should remain as it is because it benefits them
today, make them more patriotic, I don’t know. By the way, does restructuring
necessarily means disintegration?
It took the National Assembly the meeting of the southern
governors in Asaba to suddenly realize that the constitution review assignment
they had all this while would need to go to the six-geopolitical zones for
public hearings. Is this meant to be a distraction, as some have argued, to
keep us away from the salient issues raised by the southern governors and the
resolve to implement the ban on open grazing?
Last Thursday, the Attorney General of the Federation and
Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami condemned the Southern Governors Forum for
banning open grazing. Malami was quoted to have said that the ban on open
grazing was a constitutional breach and also likened it to banning all spare
parts dealers in the Northern parts of the country and therefore
unconstitutional.
Malami’s pedestrian analogy and pathetic display of
clannishness, placed side-by-side with the lukewarm attitude of the national
assembly is not coming as a surprise, as it only exposes the inner workings of
the APC government. It also confirmed the fears that the federal government is
not unaware of the killings by Fulani herdsmen.
There is nothing in all of these proposals by the southern
governors that is novel or too radical to address. The truth is that the
country is not working and at a time as this we would require statesmen who
would rise above partisan and selfish interests to rejig the constitution. If
that is all we need to put the nation on the path of growth and development, it
is too much a sacrifice to make? Parochialism has condemned the nation to where
we are now and only a conscious and selfless effort by all can guarantee us an
egalitarian society where the life of every Nigerian would matter and where injury
to one would be injury to all.
If the political class in the north had dissipated half of the
energy they use now to condemn the southern governors, to pursue and track down
those that have been killing, maiming, raping and kidnapping people, we would
not have arrived as the sorry state we are now. If there had been equitable
distribution of national benefits to all, we would not be at the crossroads we
are now.
It is the intention of all Nigerians to live in one indissoluble
nation, but if to achieve that would mean that one section of the nation will
continue to lord it over the others, then it is better to take the alternative
route by going our different ways in peace; because according to John F.
Kennedy, “Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent
revolution inevitable.”
*Okoh is a commentator on public issues
No comments:
Post a Comment