FEATURE ARTICLE



Samuel Bayo Arowolaju  (EMAIL)
Friday, November 9, 2001


Sovereign National Conference: Poverty of ideas


A Rejoinder to 'The Ineptitude of Sovereign National Conference' by Justice F. O. Kachikwu

he Guardian Online of November 5, 2001 published for its World Wide Web readers, an article titled 'The Ineptitude of National or Sovereign National Conference". The title of the piece by Mr. Justice F.O. Kachikwu should draw attention from all lovers and enemies of Nigeria alike. Lovers as those unbending and unyielding or unrepentant advocates of the much talked about Sovereign National Conference (SNC) and enemies like Justice Kachikwu and others, who would not want to hear or almost pass out at hearing any thing 'conf�.ce' even if it is confluence.

I managed to read all the nine-page presentation of Justice Kachikwu not because it retained my attention and interest throughout as much as the title but because I was patiently expecting the alternative to his condemnation of the idea of Sovereign National Conference and its protagonists. At the end of the nine pages I found nothing except the poverty of his ideas. Justice Kachikwu posted what he called four 'grounds for opposing national conference'. I am going to expose each ground so that people in his court and other lovers of Nigeria and hence the idea of Sovereign National Conference will see that though his paper might be academically sound, it is morally and politically bankrupt and bereft of both rational idealism and realism.

His Four Grounds for Opposing SNC:

1. "It Is Unconstitutional"

Our learned Judge richly quoted from the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. Particularly in making the case for the unconstitutionality of the demand for SNC, he relied on Cap 1 Sect.1 (1), which established the supremacy of the Constitution. 'That its provisions shall have binding force on all authorities and persons throughout the Federal Republic of Nigeria' without exempting any person or authority from the binding force of the constitution.

Comment

Let me state categorically from here that I am not a lawyer or the son of a lawyer but that does not make me a fool. Without any apology to any body or institution I state that there is no political institution in Nigeria today that is constitutional, may be even Nigeria itself is unconstitutional. Our learned judge himself in defending the supremacy of the constitution said, "the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999, which came into force on May 29,1999". I almost lost my two frontal teeth while laughing Justice Kachikwu on this statement. Hello Judge, are you there? When was the presidential election that brought Chief Olusegun Obasanjo to power conducted? When were elections for the Senate and the House of Representative conducted? Hello oh, when were the elections for the Governorship and State Assemblies conducted and those for the thousands of local government councils? How many elected official in Nigeria today from the president to the last local government council in Omuo-Ekiti knew the provisions of the so-called 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria before their elections, let alone saw a copy. All of them fraudulently or falsely swore to uphold a constitution they never saw or knew its provisions. Not even the provisions that governed their elections. Common Mr. Justice F.O. Kachikwu, give me a brake!

Yes I no be lawyer or judge but I no dey craze. If your practice of constitution and constitutionalism is so transparently above board, what have you said and done about not only the unconstitutional (if there is a constitution in Nigeria) but also the illegal, immoral and unethical persecutions of innocent people in northern Nigeria in the name of sharia. If your submission is that, the call for the SNC is unconstitutional; my lord, I submit to you that, all the political institutions in Nigeria today from the presidency to the least local government council in Edo State are unconstitutional since they all came to being before the Constitution which created them was promulgated on May 29, 1999.

2. "It overlooks the gamut and purport of our present democratic machinery of federal system of government - This he called Pertinence of federation".

Justice Kachikwu in explaining this point said' "the system of government we have consciously chosen for the country is tripartite, viz.: the Executive, the Legislature and Judicature. Here he went on to state that any attempt to undermine any of the arms of government would be unconstitutional and intolerable. He also told his readers that similar institutions of government exist at the state and local government levels.

Comment

Let me confess that I lost every interest in this man and his write up after reading this second ground of rejection. How many of them consciously chose a system of government for Nigeria? I saw nothing relevant to the idea of SNC in the whole paragraph. Here comes the worst part of his thesis, his definition of a system of government. How could a man, who has the title of a Judge before his name, define a system of government as Executive, Legislature and Judicature? None of my students of Elements of Government will write that for me in the classroom without a sanction. My lord, you erred seriously on that. What you have defined is called arms or branches and NOT system of government. After all Nigeria in the First Republic had the three arms of government under a parliamentary system of government. Division of governmental powers in to three separate units is a product of what is called separation of powers as provided for by a constitution either written or unwritten. The system of government, which the military constitution makers wanted, was the presidential system - the American style- they however ended up with its caricature. Just like the type of constitution they wanted was Federalism, but again they ended up destroying every principle of an enduring federalism.

3. "It is tantamount to sheer and unjustifiable blackmail of the Executive and the Legislature - this he also called, vesting of executive powers".

Here Justice Kachikwu relied again on the provisions of Section 5 (1) of the Constitution, which defines the powers of the President, and how he exercises his powers as the head of the executive. With relish he gave his readers what to me looked like "an eye witness account" by the way he described an incident during the presidency of Woodrow Wilson of America between 1913 and 1921. All to prove the executive nature of the powers of the president.

He also alluded to the 'formidable numerical strength of elected representatives of the people' about 9,273 at all levels of government, executive and legislative all of who are 'democratically elected' representatives of the people of Nigeria. He went ahead also to explain the legislative powers of the National and State Assemblies as provided for in Sections 4 (1), (6) (8) and 5 (2) (a) and (b) of the 1999 Constitution.

Comment

It is perfidious to say the least for Justice Kachikwu to devote a whole page to what he called, "SOME lessons from the American system", in his attempt to prove his grounds against the SNC. It is also dishonorable for our honorable judge to want his readers to see the beauties of American system which is the paradigm and paragon of true federalism while he and his likes are killing the spirits and letters of federalism in Nigeria. It is purely hypocritical on his part to want to pretend ignorance that all what the protagonists of SNC has been calling for, is the practice of true federalism in Nigeria as it is done in America from where he has quoted so richly. If it is a fact of ignorance, Justice Kachikwu should surrender his law certificate and any instrument that made him a judge.

I don't know why he specifically joined issues with Mrs. Lawani, the Executive Director for Women for Democracy and Leadership for speaking the mind of the silent majority of Nigerians about the making of the 1999 Constitution. Mrs. Lawani had said, "Nigerians are unhappy about the 1999 Constitution as a whole. Reason being that in its making, the 'people' had no input". Apart from this, Mrs. Lawani had raised other issues like the need for true federalism, resource control, and religion among others. Concluding Mrs. Lawani said, "Nigerians are almost in agreement that we must sit together and discuss these issues which are the sources of conflicts and unrest in the country. Some have argued that such a forum should be a Sovereign National Conference where the outcome of the deliberations will have the force of Law and binding on the government".

Mr. Justice Kachikwu declared the word 'Sovereign as a 'misnomer' whatever that means to him, defining the word as meaning 'supreme' that is highest in authority. Good enough the judge quoted the Austin's definition of Sovereignty as, "If a determinate human superior not in the habit of obedience to a like superior, receive habitual obedience from the bulk of a given society, that determinate superior is sovereign in that society, and the society (including the superior) is a society political and independence." Justice Kachikwu interpretation of Austin's sovereignty is that "in Nigeria, sovereignty is vested in the government of the Federal republic of Nigeria personified or if you like, headed by Chief Olusegun Obansanjo, the President". He said the idea of the SNC is 'preposterous, unconstitutional and almost treasonable'. According to him, 'this derogates and undermines the legislative powers of the federal and state assemblies'. This he also called 'sheer naked and unjustifiable blackmail of the Executive and the Legislature, which have been doing their best within the past two years and five months'.

Comment

Here very cleverly but fraudulently, Justice Kachikwu has put words into John Austin's mouth, as Austin never used the word VESTED. Justice Kachikwu did this to defend President Obasanjo's own theory of Sovereignty, which he propounded early this year at a civic reception at the Liberty Stadium, Ibadan in Oyo State. I personally did not comment on Obasanjo's theory that time, because I knew that as an ex-General he was neither trained nor competent nor proficient to proffer any theory on sovereignty. I therefore just dismissed his statement as the blabbing of an intruder into the field of intellectualism. The only problem I had with the president was that, he used the ground of liberty to defile and defame liberty. The case for some body who wears the tag or bears the tittle of a judge is quite different; if 'Justice' is not just part of his first name as some one who merely bears Lucky.

To read that word 'vested'in to the definition of Austin is to steal the entire sovereignty by trick. This is where Justice Kachikwu also demonstrated his intellectual bankruptcy and should not be left alone for the sake of those who are thirsty for true intellectualism. The core of the Austin's definition is that a sovereign is a superior person or body who receives obedience from all but gives no obedience to any one. Then who is this or who can this be. A brief excursion into the development of sovereignty might be germane. As this is so vast and wide an area of study, I shall take that which is relevant to the issue of Sovereign National Conference vis-�-vis whose decision should be final.

Jean Bodin, a French political philosopher, pioneered the modern theory of Sovereignty in terms of state power. His theory was contained in his book titled the "Six Books of a Commonwealth" (1576). Among others are Niccolo Machiavelli, Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, Hugo Grotius J.J. Rousseau, John Austin and A.V Dicey. There are different identifiable types of sovereignty such as Legal, Political/Popular, De Facto, De Jure, Internal and External. John Austin quoted above by our learned judge belongs to the school of legal sovereignty. In his work "Province of Jurisprudence Determined, he concluded that sovereignty in Britain resides in the British Parliament. Austin was concerned about the power to make laws and so when he said a 'determinate superior whose commands' he meant the sovereign power 'whose laws'. But even then the members of British parliament were elected by the people and therefore can be removed by the people. It was A.V. Dicey who provided the much needed solution in his "Law of the Constitution" where he distinguished between legal and political sovereignty. So, legal sovereignty resides with the legislature or parliament (in Britain), Congress (in USA) and National Assembly in Nigeria. The political sovereignty resides in the people who elect the members of these bodies in the various countries.

Ultimate sovereignty therefore resides in the people in who resides the political power. The principle does not require that all the people have to directly be involved in the day-to-day law making, law execution and law adjudication. This is why they have created the legislative, executive and the judicial organs or arms of government for these responsibilities, into which they periodically choose whom they want to be their representative in a free, fair and democratic elections. Yet the ultimate sovereign power to make and unmake lies with the people and NOT any president or lawmaker or a judge. This is the only body - the people - who meets the characteristics or attributes of sovereignty, which are permanence, absoluteness, comprehensiveness and indivisibility.

From the evidence above, we can see that in any decent democratic society, this sovereign is the PEPOLE. This is why after a democratically conducted election again in a decent society, you find the winner and the looser saying, THE PEOPLE HAVE SPOKEN. That is, the highest authority, the sovereign has spoken even if the looser is the incumbent president or the senate president or the speaker of the House or a judge where judges are elected. Therefore, sovereignty does not lie or reside in the president or executive or legislature or the Supreme Court or the judiciary, as the Kachikwus and Obasanjos of Nigeria will like the world to believe. All these organs or institutions of the state derive not only their powers and legitimacy but fundamentally their existence from the Constitution, which in turn derives its source or existence and powers from the PEOPLE. The problem Nigeria is that we have got so used to illegal Constitutions, which derive their existence from the military boots, and guns. It has always been democracy by the will of the guns and not the will of the people. It is therefore a tragedy to hear a judge saying that the sovereignty of a state or society resides in a president who tonight is and may not be in the following morning by the power of the people exercised through the ballot or a popular revolt. I am not talking of a military coup now but true peoples' revolt, where the military itself takes orders and command from the people.

To really know the type of person Justice F.O. Kachikwu is, hear what he said of Adams Oshiomhole the president of the Nigerian Labor Congress. "The man (Oshiomhole) is a force to be reckoned with. He is remarkably highly intelligent, altruistic, fearless, courageous, out spoken, selfless, indefatigable, reasonable and responsible". This is Oshiomhole who after hearing the allegations against General Abdulsalam Abubakar before the Justice Oputa's Panel described the Panel as "a medium for disgruntled elements to rubbish former head of state General Abdulsalam Abubakar". He went on again, claiming to be speaking for the Nigerian workers and said, "we at the labor repose our confidence in him (General Abubakar) and restate our respect for the person of Abubakar, no matter his mistakes."

Such mistakes may be really costly like spiting not just Justice Oputa, but the government and peoples of Nigeria by refusing a legal summon to appear before the panel. Like presiding over the murder in detention of Chief MKO Abiola. Like looting millions of dollars within the shortest possible period in Nigeria. Let the readers judge if the two (Kachikwu and Oshiomhole) will not be jolly good fellows.

Mr. Justice Kachikwu ended his nine-page paper with a public acknowledgment of the 'unparalleled and unbeatable' records of President Obasanjo in women empowerment and the 'remarkable' interest of Chief Mrs. Stella Obasanjo, the First Lady, in the welfare of women in Nigeria. While not faulting those achievements, I don't see how such 'unparalleled, unbeatable and remarkable' achievements of the President and First Lady should be part of grounds for opposing national conference or points to prove "the ineptitude of National or Sovereign National Conference".

Mr. Justice Kachikwu has every right to want to curry favor from President Obasanjo with the support of Oshiomohole; I have no problem about that. My advice however is, if he wants any political or judicial appointment from President Obasanjo either now or in the future, which he has every right to aspire for, he should not destroy others to achieve his ambition. After all one can still get what he wants with objectivity, some levels of dignity, credibility and some sense and sensibility.

The Sovereign National Conference (SNC).

In the last article by this writer on this Web page, titled "The 'Talibans' of Northern Nigeria", I said I was no longer interested in discussing the issue of the SNC, especially when the Hausa/Fulani does not believe in it. Why? Because I have discovered that talking to them about it is like talking to the deaf and dumb which is just a waste of time. Instead, I suggested that all those who believe in the SNC should just get themselves together, discussed, take some mutually agreeable decisions about their future and form a new union of states under a new name and a new God. Then those who does not like it should also get themselves together and form their own new nation under their new or existing name and under their God. P E R I O D!

It is however unfortunate that they have converts in the Obasanjos and Kachikwus and Okadigbos of the south. It is sad that those who should champion the course of their brothers are the ones now selling them deep and deeper into slavery. That may not be strange as the Biblical Joseph's brothers whose hands should care and love him sold him into slavery in Egypt. But one thing is sure, as the dreams and hopes of Joseph never died with him, so the hopes and dreams of those of us asking for a change and reconstruction of Nigeria polity and economy will never die. You can detain people, kill and crush them, but their ideas will leave as long as people leave after them. So it is with the Sovereign National Conference. Say what you may and do what you can the idea will leave on, until it is done one way or the other, Sovereign or National.

For the purpose of education and information of the enemies of Southern Nigeria and its peoples; and those who doe not want to hear anything about the Sovereign National Conference, let me re-state my case for the SNC. One thing is sure; the SNC is not for the benefits of the Hausa/Fulani but for other tribes and ethnic groups who have been under the yoke of oppression of these people for years now. They prefer the status quo, which has been making them to reap where they never sowed. They will naturally want to retain and maintain a system, which has made them insatiable consumers of bread while the breadwinners languish in hunger and poverty. This is why an average Hausa/Fulani will prefer to spill his last drop of blood than see the dream of a SNC come to true. On the other hand that is why it hinges on treason for an average southerner to oppose this unavoidable conference. I say unavoidable if the geographical entity called Nigeria today will serve tomorrow. Any way it has never been and will never be my prayer and wish that it survives, as long my people continue to suffer in midst of plenty while others swim in an unmerited affluence.

Why Do We Need the SNC? To correct the wrongs and ills of the past.

What Are the Wrongs or Ills of the Past?

Here is just a tip of the iceberg but we can not discuss the wrongs and ills of the past without going to the past from where it starts. The problem with Nigeria is that our so-called messiah-leaders always strive to treat the effect of our problems without the least considerations to the cause. No way, it cannot work and that is why nothing works as we have all seen in the last 40 years. I will try to be brief but if in the likely event I am not, bear with me for the sake of educating those southerners who like doubting Thomas's does not yet see the importance and urgency of a SNC. Faith, the Bible says, comes by hearing and hearing the word of God, in the same way, if our people hear and know more of the reasons for the SNC they will have faith in it.

By January 1st 1900 when the British Government took over the administration of what is now called Nigeria from the Royal Niger Company, there were four distinct administrative units of:

(a) The Colony and Protectorate of Lagos under a governor,
(b) The Protectorate of Southern Nigeria under a High Commissioner,
(c) The Protectorate of Northern Nigeria under a High Commissioner and
(d) The Egba United Government under the Alake of Abeokuta in the present Ogun State of Nigeria. The government with its Constitution and National Anthem existed as an indigenous sovereign state from 1893 until September 16th 1914 when they surrendered under what is now described as 'fraudulent diplomatic maneuver and duress' on the part of he British government.

We are all by now too familiar with the amalgamation of 1914 which has been appropriately but not sincerely described as the 'mistake of 1914' by the late Sardauna of Sokoto Alhaji Ahmadu Bello. The amalgamation produced the Colony and Protectorate of Nigeria, with Fredrick Luggard as the governor-general and two Chief Commissioners appointed to be in-charge of the southern and northern divisions. Let me however add that the amalgamation took place without any consultation with and consent or consideration of the interests of the people and leadership of the amalgamated units.

A big political development took place in 1922 when Sir Hugh Clifford replaced Luggard as the governor of Nigeria. He established the Nigerian Legislative Council only for the Southern group of Provinces, while the Governor retained power to make law for the north. To take advantage of the nascent participatory government, Herbert Macaulay and leaders from the south formed the Nigerian National Democratic Party (NNDP) as the first political party in Nigeria. The party in September of 1923 won three seats in the Legislative Council in Lagos. Please note that during this time when the south had started taking their destiny into their own hands, the north was still under the tutelage, legislative and administrative control of the Governor.

In 1933 the growing seed of democracy started to grow and gave rise to the formation of another political movement again in the south. This time, Vaughn Ikoli and Akinsanya formed the Lagos Youth Movement, which was changed to the Nigerian Youth Movement in 1937. The seed of political injustice and unfairness, which we have been reaping its fruit in violence, bloodshed and other political and economic woes, was sown on April 1st 1939. That was when another restructuring took place without consulting the people affected. The Southern Protectorate was divided into two, the Western and Eastern Provinces, while the north remained one unit again. Why, did you ask me? Because the people of the south had demonstrated intellectual equality and political sagacity to the chagrin of the colonial masters that to leave them united will be digging their (colonialists) own political and most importantly economic graves in Nigeria. To prove that they are a real treat to the colonialists political survival, another two southerners Herbert Macaulay and Dr. Nnamdi Azikiwe came together on August 26, 1944 to form another political party, the NCNC, which forced Governor Richard into another constitutional reforms by December of the same year. Macaulay as the president and Azikiwe as secretary of the party, led a national campaign for a general workers strike against Richard's constitutional reforms in March 1945. Please note that, for over 30 years, when the southerners had been participating in the political activities resulting to political reforms in Nigeria, the Hausa/Fulani were still hibernating in their harems unknown and unseen on the political landscape of Nigeria.

The direct consequence for the southerners' show of political enlightenment was for the colonial masters destabilized the southern political unity and solidarity with their introduction of regional political parties. Remember before now, all the southerners have been forming political parties and working together like Ikoli and Akinsanya of the NYM and Macaulay and Azikiwe of the NCNC. The colonial masters introduced the principle of divide and rule, which has now been perfected by the Hausa/Fulani. At the regional levels came political parties at the prompting the British, to further their aims and ambitions over Nigeria. The Action Group came in as the party of the westerners, the Northern Peoples' Congress did not had its intent and purpose to champion the course of the northerners with its name and motto which was 'North for the northerners'. The NCNC as led by Dr. Azikiwe after the death of Herbert Macaulay as a national party became the eastern party. All was according to the plan of the colonial masters. Now look at the leadership of the three parties. Azikiwe of the NCNC was an American educated intellectual giant of note; Obafemi Awolowo of the AG was a British educated and trained intelligent and erudite lawyer. Ahmadu Bello with all due respect was no match with the two southern political leaders in academic and intellectualism and the British knew this and they had their plans not to allow the best leader to rule Nigeria.

The next line of action was the imposition of a parliamentary system of government in which the parties with the greatest number of seats formed the government and rule the country. Then they - the British- gave Nigeria a population figure of 29 million for the 1952-53 census. They were already preparing for the first general election of 1954. From the figure they allocated 312 seats in the established parliament. Out of these, the north was allocated 174 seats, East 73, West 63 and Lagos 3 seats. By their magic pen they awarded 57.8% of the population of Nigeria to the north, 23.4% to the east, 20% to the west and less than 1% to Lagos. By their imposed political system, which ever party that won 157 out of 312 seats or 51% of the total seats formed the government and rule. We can all see from the above allocation of seats and census figures that the north even before any election had an undue advantage of 17 seats to win every parliamentary election and rule Nigeria. That is a whole 17 more seats it needed to win and rule; courtesy of British gerrymandering. My peoples are you there?

This was the root and genesis of Nigeria's political problems. This was how the British sowed the seed of Hausa/Fulani political domination in Nigeria. Why? Because they feared the academic, intellectual, political, economic and therefore technological competitions, which the southern domination or rulership of Nigeria will bring upon them. Revenue allocation formula was based on these fictitious population figures since then. It will be recalled that there was another census in 1962. The result gave Eastern Region 71% increase from the figures of 1952, West 70% and the north, a mere 30%, which completely reversed the obnoxious figures of 1952. The figure gave the north 22.5 million and the west and the east 23.1 million people. But for the fact that the west and the east combined was more than the north, it was rejected and a recount, which met the domination needs of the north, was accepted in 1963.

The 1963 figures gave the north 53.4%, of the population, which was more than the west and east put together again. This meant the political and economic domination in terms of political seats allocation in parliament and revenue allocation were back to the 1952 staged managed figures. Till today the figures from 1963 are the only officially acceptable census figures in Nigeria, all others are mere projections from it. One thing I know about population politics in Nigeria is this. If all the heads of goats, sheep, rams and cattle in the north are honestly counted with their human heads, they will still not be up to, let alone be more than the population of the south put together.

Anybody who knows the Islamic culture of the Hausa/Fulani will know that no census enumerator dare enter their harems for the purpose of enumeration; and the occupants would no come out. It is now the responsibility of the head of each household to come up with any figure previously distributed by the village head and that becomes the census figure for the household. And so it is for the whole village or town and the local government and the state. This is quiet unlike the practice in the south where the census officials will see eye to eye every body been counted. How long shall we continue to deceive ourselves in the name of one fictitious Nigeria?

It is only in Nigeria that population concentration or densities defile all reasonable demographic principles and standards. The south has all favorable geographic conditions including land fertility, good vegetation, climate, access to international waters and ports, earlier contact with western civilization, education, economy and prosperity. All these are concomitant variables to higher population density. Yet the south is said not to even be equal the population of the north with all its adverse geographic and climatic conditions. These include the dry Savannah vegetation, excessive heat and heat stroke, desert storm, desert encroached wastelands, land locked without access to the sea, late or lack of western civilization and education. By the time the Hausa/Fulani people were still living as savages, Lagos was already enjoying the luxury of electricity in 1885. When Captain Luggard was sent to the north on military expedition to stop tribal and cabal wars, a civilized modern government with a semblance of democracy was already in place in the south. Yet today as always they want to be the lord of the manor.

Because of the unjust census figures today the north has 59 local governments and three states more than the south. Consequently in the north, there are more senators and members of the House of Representatives, more state governors, assembly members, commissioners, state officials, local government chairman and councilors. Remember all these are paid from the resources, the bulk that is 98% of which comes from the south. This is unfair especially when we all know that all these have been acquired through unethical and foul means. There must definitely be a CHANGE and now is the time.

This leads to Resource Control which good enough has united all the southern states together, as another reason for the inevitability of SNC. It is not only inhuman but also ungodly for the producers of oil in Nigeria not to have portable drinking water or paved roads to walk or for their children to have no schools to attend. Yet an average Hausa/Fulani who have never seen what a drop of crude oil looks like, keeps millions of stolen petrol-dollar in fat foreign bank accounts! The time for CHANGE has surely come.

Now to religion and I will stop on reasons for SNC but there many more.

Today in the name of Sharia which Justice Kachikwu did not see as unconstitutional, I can not walk with my wife on the streets or ride in the same public transport system in the 'Taliban' states of northern Nigeria.

In the same so-called county a Pastor Samuel cannot decide to go to Kano and establish a branch of his Church as the state will not approve a license for it or approve a land for its site. Who can quantify in dollars the number of Churches already destroyed in the north in the last 20 years, each time the 'Talibans' of Northern Nigeria went mad, and there have been so many times with the least provocation or unreasonable excuses. Yet not a single mosque has been destroyed in the south and not even one incident of religious riot directed against the Muslims or the northerners. It is definitely time to say goodbye!

Because of the imposed irrational population figures, it is the south that produces the wealth of the nations but spent on and by the north. The south has thus been the bread bakers while the north has been the bread eater.

Because of their long undue advantage over political and military powers, they feel it is their birthright to rule. Remember their slogan, Born to rule.

Because of the humane and civilized approach to settling scores by the southerners, the northerners now think they have a monopoly of physical force and violence over the southerners that they now call and treat as cowards.

Because of their insatiable appetite for stealing public money, they have made every Nigerian even those who are struggling to have two meals, a laughing stock for corruption in the comity of nations.

There is a new dimension to reasons for taking the rest of us out of the Islamic Emirate of Northern Nigeria. That is the issue of global terrorism. Information has it that as part of the aftermath of the September 11 terrorist attacked on US, the celebrations and the pro-Taliban demonstrations by the northern Nigeria Muslims, Nigerians passing through international airports and boarders are now given SSS reception, that is Special Security Search, even without knowing. There are reports that Fayed Hamed, one of the terrorists who flew the hijacked plane into the Twin Towers had before the terrorism, visited and resided in Kano in Nigeria. The demonstrations and celebrations may therefore not be mere coincidence as there are fears that Osama bin Laden may have terrorists' cells in Northern Nigeria. Even bin Laden in his message from his hide out recently, sent his words of appreciation and thanks to the Muslims of northern Nigeria for their support for him. This is so frightening to me. My eight-year boy after we discuss that news, said to me dad, I don't want to be a Nigerian if bin Laden is identified with Nigeria, and I quickly said, me either. This is how far and how bad these people has ruined Nigeria and innocent Nigerians, and it has been for too long.

This should the last straw that will brake their Camel's back. It is time for every body to bear his/her true identity. 'Please call me a Yoruba before you call me a Nigerian' I told a friend over the telephone recently. Yes that is how far and fast Nigeria has lost its good name and pride of identity. Good name the good Book says is better than silver and gold. Some one said that was why President Obasanjo made the last visit to the White House, to plead before President Bush that not all Nigerians are lovers and admirers of the Talibans and Osama bin Laden. If that is true, thank you your Excellency, you need to do more renunciation and frontal attack of the 'Talibans' at home.

These are some of the reasons why there is a need for taking the south out of the present Nigeria. We are just not the same, we don't belong and they have been our beast of burden for too long. On thing is sure and that is, except we act and very soon, nobody will lift this burden out of our cracking and ailing shoulders. The Hausa/Fulani don't want to go. They are afraid of the high standard of kleptomania they have set for themselves, as they don't have the resources to match it. Besides, no parasite voluntarily leaves its source of living. Go they must and now is the time.

Last note on the Sovereign National Conference. Let repeat myself for emphasis. If the Hausa/Fulani and their Islamic states will not participate in the SNC, fine. Let all other national and ethnic groups who feel they have something that binds them together, without further delay come together, and discuss the formation of a new nation under a new God as there is no more any pride of identity with the name "Nigeria". We have to come together to save our children and ourselves from the 'Talibans' of Northern Nigeria. All others who doesn't like what we have done, are also free to come together under a new name if they want and under their God. If they choose they can go on with one Nigeria without the rest of us.

Will Nigeria break? One reader asked me recently. My answer is YES, if the enemies of Nigeria continue to block their ears to the vociferous voices of reason now shouting and calling for a Sovereign National Conference. The break up is as sure as the morning follows the night. Old Major in George Orwel's Animal Farm addressing his colleagues on their oppression on the farm predicted the coming of a revolution. He said, as sure as he saw the straw before him the revolution would surely come. But he added that if it did not come during their lifetime they should pass on the message to their children. A few weeks later the revolution came, so be it with the breaking up of Nigeria. It is not a question of if; it is a question of when? I pray it happens during my lifetime but if not and God forbid, I fall on the battle of freedom, my children will keep the flag of liberty flying until victory is achieved as the only alternative is death.