advertisement

obenox@hotmail.com Italy

ANNOUNCE THIS ARTICLE TO YOUR FRIENDS

NIGERIA: PHONEY FEDERALISM BLUES

Restructuring the federation to sustain democracy and stimulate growth is a debt Nigeria owes herself and the rest of the world

autious optimism! That is the picture painted by some dyed-in-the-wool optimists of the current democratic dispensation in Nigeria. Of every five black persons on planet Earth, one is supposed to be a Nigerian. It was therefore not out of place that at the on-set, the rest of the world placed a lot of political credit on Nigeria's lattest experiment on democratic governance. Why?

In the African continent's struggles to overcome ethnic rivalries that often degenarate to outright conflicts, Nigeria's success as a democracy given its diverse ethnic and cultural configurations is supposed to serve as a reference point on unity in diversity. Democracy, many demand, must not fail again in Nigeria. Or if it does, the devastation may not just be stunning to the country alone, a lot of the nascent democratic experiments in the sub-Saharan Africa may be doomed. The ethnic conflicts and the attendant refugee problems are better not immagined. To avert this is a huge debt Nigeria owes herself and the rest of the world.

But Nigeria, the cynosure of the world's eyes is plagued, according to many Nigerian patriots, by some big defects; among them: an over-centralised governing structure that vested enormous, if not monstrous powers on a winner-takes-it-all central government; a tilted and unworkable federal structure that has continued to stifle meaningful attempts at Nigeria's unity and subsequent development.

And for years, these well-meaning Nigerians have been canvassing for a sovereign national conference to, among other issues, restructure the federation along governable lines; but the governing class objects to such a conference insisting that there is a sovereign government in place hence the illegality in convocating a sovereign national conference; voices from sections of the country believed to be benefiting from the existing federal structure maintain that the conference may end up in a serious national conflict that may even lead to the break-up of the country.

advertisement

However, these days, hardly a day passes without the mention of Nigeria in foreign parliaments and media as a nation on the brink, no thanks to the fall-outs from an unworkable unitary structure of government in practice in a country of numerous nationalities. The system leaves the rest in the federating units as pawns in the hands of the few who are able to grab power be it by bullet as it is often done, or rarely, by ever-disputed ballots. And to get to the exalted positions, it does not matter if morals are thrown to the garbage can and merit becomes a strange phenomenon.

The flawed system and the inherent instability it portends ensure that politicians of sound ideological persuasions and technocrats who can lift the country to higher pedestals are naturally sieved off from participating in the nation's politics. Today we are burdened with a federal structure that distorts the cardinal principles of true federalism: regional diversity is rarely and only recognised when and where it does not run contrary to the aspirations of the rulers; the life-line of the federating units remains the monthly doles from the 'almighty' central government which often dictates to these units; true federalism dictates, rather, different sources of revenue for the central government and the federating units.

And not spared is the apex organ of the judiciary - the supreme court- which may find it difficult to yank itself off the executive arm and assert its universal role of the great umpire. In our flawed federal structure, leaders of the legislature are often shuffled like school masters through the strong arm tactic of the executive. Talk of a rubber stamp legislature.

The distortions in our federal structure create the unending uncertainties surrounding the future of Nigeria. These in turn beget, or rather, institutionalize unpatriotism, the mammoth corruption and the square-pegs-in-round-holes syndrome that often characterise daily life in Nigeria. These factors negate the provision of basic infrastructures that catalyse economic development. They rather favour the perennial capital flight, unemployment that has led to the rising insecurity of lives and property, brain-drain and the emigration of the young and productive. In desperate attempts to cut costs while fleeing their fatherland, large numbers of Nigerian youths yearly perish in the Saharan desert, Aegian and Mediterranean seas en-route to Europe. Usually unidentified, (often travelling without or false identity to evade repatriation to Nigeria) they are normally unaccounted for.

Nigeria has acquired the international reputation as the only African country whose young women in their hundreds of thousands beat the side-walks of Europe, Asia and other African countries searching for lucre. These emigrants are normally contented with the mere fact that they are living in functional societies. Nigeria for most of them remains a State where life is not just brutish but of very short expectancy for the overwhelmingly poor majority.

Our flawed federalism and the resultant centrifugal forces arrayed against Nigeria's unity are such that our rulers mostly spend their years in office seeking for counter measures to spare the nation from the forces of disintegration. The fundamentals for real national development therefore take the back seat or are totally compromised. Or how can we explain the central government's action of scattering troops in many of the oil-producing areas of the Niger Delta to ensure the uninterrupted flow of oil revenues? For how long does the central government intend to sustain this phenomenon? Is there any semblance of freedom and liberty for the peoples in this area as enshrined in the existing constitution of Nigeria? Why must some Nigerians be threatening secession from the federation? Or is the central goverment of the strong convinction it has the men, arms and ammunition to completely wipe out those floating the idea? Why must Nigerians rise, strike and kill their fellow Nigerians in their thousands on the streets of nothern Nigeria? Must Nigerians continue to be refugees in their own country? Why must there be the clamour for the rotation of Nigeria's presidency from one ethnic enclave to the other at the expense of merit and true democracy? Why must any Nigerian be branded a non-indegene in any part of Nigeria? And why has there got to be a round-the-clock military and police protections for many Nigerians before they can afford to reside and do business in places where they are deemed vulnerable to attacks from their hosts? It is only the people of Nigeria and not just the politicians that can resolve these issues and many others. Truth is that any nation infested with these vicious problems must continue to stagnate, the best of political leaders can never lead it to the promised land. Afterall, wealth can only be created in a stable environment.

Often, there is the erroneous belief among many Nigerians that only some foreign intervention, or put mildly, foreign investments to jump-start the economy can salvage the country. Truth is that any moment a stable political and economic climate (the precursor to security of lives and properties of the citizens) starts to exist in Nigeria, the savings and expertise of Nigerians in and out of the country ploughed back into the Nigerian economy is enough to put the shine on it. It is Nigerians and only Nigerians that must take the first steps toward salvaging Nigeria when they decide to. We must first put our house in order before we expect foreigners to step into it.

Putting our house in order? Realities on the ground today, more than five years into our new democratic dispensation depict that our warped federal structure must continue to obstruct that. If this present federal structure is allowed to co-exist with democracy, in the not too distant future we must be confronted with a single-party democracy (despite the existence of other rergistered political parties) and, of course, its perils. How? Our flawed federal structure has ingrained in Nigerians the penchant for always wanting to belong to the centre (the ruling party) where the national cake is been shared. Many cast their votes in the same manner. In this scenario, a villain who can work his way through to the party's topmost hierarchy ends up getting elected the country's leader.

Ever since this federal structure was imposed on us, we have witnessed a progressive retreat of the federating units into tribal enclaves with the sporadic ethnic massacres often coloured with religious uprisings. A closer examination clearly shows that behind all these ethnic resentments is the struggle for politcal power specifically at the over-bloated federal level. There is hardly any well-meaning Nigerian who does not know that given the multi-ethnic nature of Nigeria, the excessive powers being exercised by the 'almighty federal government' as is constituted today must continue to fuel inter-ethnic discords.

Attaining national stability apart, other gains of true federalism are numerous. Before the advent of oil and the subsequent imposition of our present federal structure, the comparative economic and social achievements of the then four regional governments are still legendary. If not, why are Nigerians still yearning for those yesteryears? Fact is that in a multi-ethnic country such as ours, the best, if not the only way forward is self-determination. The system today where if a federal highway, in Calabar or Sokoto, for instance, needs resurfacing, highly placed people from these areas must first go lobbying (begging) the central government to effect the repair does not show true federalism at play. In a true federation, the ODUA group could not have encountered such initial obstacles from the federal government in its quest to rail-link Lagos with Ibadan.

But how do we restructure the system without further upsetting the fragile stability already in place? One however, is not lending credence to those who at any turn would posit that restructuring would lead to Nigeria's break-up. This is very far from the truth. Rather, leaving the federation as it is today is like postponing the evil day. History teaches us that. Right from across the Urals to the many "stan" Repulics of north and central Asia and into the Baltic seas, the Russians held sway for close to seven decades in the fragile entity called the Soviet Union. But when the day of reckoning came, all the nuclear arsenals in Russia's stockpile could not deter all the other fourteen federating units (many without standing armies) from declaring their independence from the Soviet Union, nay, Russia. And the disaster that befell the former Yugoslav Republic is a solution any peace-loving Nigerian must dread.

History also teaches us that from Sudan to Sri Lanka, from the Ivory Coast to Rwanda, the internal conflicts that engulfed and traumatised these nations could have been nipped in the bud if their leaders had promptly hearkened to popular agitations for political reforms and/or restructuring. But there are good examples to emulate when it comes to soothing the nerves of agitators for political reforms. One: a few years ago, fiery speaking Umberto Bossi and his numerous suppoters in the Nothern League party were on the verge of pulling northern Italy out from the rest of the country unless the government carried out the political and economic reforms they were clamouring for.

For more than a decade, the League held its secessionist rallies brandishing its secessionist flags and logos, its militia abundant and ever present. And all this time, Rome's army or police neither fired a shot nor arrested any of the League's officials or members for their agitations. Today, the secessionist flame has been extinguished from the Nothern League, thanks to the wide ranging political and economic reforms embarked upon by the Italians and backed by popular referendums.

Before taking up the restructuring exercise, the federal government must first embark on a massive enlightenment campaign to disabuse the minds of cynics on the scope of the exercise. The campaign has to emphasise that restructuring the lopsided federal structure and making the presidency less attractive is the only source of hope for Nigeria's unity and attendant accelerated development; highlight the numerous outstanding developments (universities, colleges, agricultural produce, peace and security, etc) made by the various regions during the First Republic; convince cynics that the conference is not just about resource control or curtailment of religious rights or beliefs, that it is a conference that should at the end pave the way for each of the various nationalities that make up Nigeria to set up its developmental objectives considering its cultural, environmental and religious dispositions; that in a true federation there should be no factors contrived to deter any of the federating units from its developmental objectives so long as they do not infringe on the country's constitution.

The campaign must also highlight the reality in the interdependencies that today exist between the north and south of Nigeria - the north is Nigeria's food basket and you cannot play politics having an empty stomach, the south is the major foreign exchange earner and is the nation's access to the sea - hence the need for coexistence under one nation.

At this juncture, one has to emphasise that there is the belief that because President Obasanjo is seen by many today as the most trusted link between the north and south of Nigeria is the the reason why well-meaning Nigerians are reinforcing their calls on him -while he is still in command - to water the grounds for a conference to restructure the country's existing, flawed federal structure. It is not by a mere coincidence that Nigerians expect President Obassanjo's role in the inevitable restructuring exercise to be both fatherly and decisive. He needs not be reminded that history, or rather, his antecedents have assigned this role to him.

Today, the Nigerian federation as is presently structured is apparently ungovernable, President Obasanjo must not downplay this dangerous phenomenon of popular discontent as mere 'human foibles', and neither must the kettle, lid and steam explanation suffice. Agreed, the President may find himself boxed-up by the calls for a sovereign national conference, but fact is that history has bestowed it on him to device a means to have Nigerians of all nationalities, religious and cultural leanings sit down together, negotiate and agree on the terms for co-existence under one Nigeria; and thereafter, draw up a popular constitution taking into consideration the cultural, religious, occupational and environmental factors prevailing in the diverse areas of the federating units.

The goverment's role must be limited to providing the logistics for, as well as maintaining tranquility among the conferees. And, of course, the decisions of the conferees must not be tampered with. It is politically incorrect to relegate this issue to a constitution review panel or to the national assembly where a lot of these varying nationalities, religious and cultural groups are not even represented, and some others over-represented.

Today, the public resentments following many supreme court judgements are indications that a constitution for Nigeria cannot be packaged by a military government and imposed on the citizens. In the twenty-first century Nigeria, the supreme court can only conveniently interprete a constitution satisfactorily drawn up and adopted by the citizens via a referendum. It may therefore amount to a gross act of political diffidence on the part of President Obasanjo if he decides to sweep this issue under the rugs in his office and only aspires to finish his mandate.