Nigeria offers a classic case of how not to structure and run a State. While a lot of us are quick to blame the British Colonial powers for why things are the way they are, my take is that we are largely accountable for the rot. At Independence, the British allowed us a Constitutional Conference – the 1957-58 London Conference – where the ethnic nationalities came together to discuss their view of how a post independent Nigeria should be structured. Positions were taken and a Constitutional arrangement started to emerge. Noting that the interest of Minorities may suffer, the Wilkins Commission on Minorities issue was set up. Alas, the January and July 1966 Coups, which were both ill-conceived and driven by officers who were novices in Statecraft and ill-equipped for Governance took over. Since then, Nigeria has continued to jump from one mis-step to another with the repercussion being a descent into Ethic and Religious intolerance, a Civil War, the battle for resource control and the Militancy that arose therefrom and the lingering battle for the place of Sharia in Governance and the Religious unrests that has resulted therefrom, leading to Militancy and snowballing into Terrorism which was willingly embraced by vested interests as a platform for the negotiation for power.
WHERE DID THE MIS-STEPS COME FROM?
1. IRONSI’S UNIFICATION DECREE 34 OF 1966:
Military interregnum and the quest to manage diversity using the Military’s Command and Control Structure. It all started with Aguiyi Ironsi’s attempt at forging unity without consensus. Ironsi, looking at the way the Military runs – with a central command structure and units taking directives from the centre, promulgated the Unification Decree No. 34 with implication being that Nigeria, though still laying claims to being a Federation, automatically became a unitary state, as things such as fiscal federalism were thrown out of the window. So all the battle for resource control which were to come later had their root in the Unification Decree 34 of 1966 promulgated by General Aguiyi Ironsi.
2. MILITARY’S STATE CREATION WITHOUT RESORT TO CONSTITUTIONAL PROCESSES SUCH AS A REFERENDUM:
Originally seeking to wrest the control of Oil resources from the then Eastern Region, the Military, under General Yakubu Gowon, resorted to creating States and dissolving the inherited Regional Structure. Starting out with 12 States, successive Military Government soon saw this as a veritable way to assert their power with Murtala Muhammed creating 7 new States, taking the tally to 19, General Ibrahim Babagida initially creating 2 States taking the tally to 21 and later creating 9 others taking the tally to 30 and General Sani Abacha creating 6 new States taking the total to 36 States all within a space of less than 40 years! What is interesting to note is that all of these came without a Constitutional process and was imposed on a democratic order with Constitutions that also recognised phony Local Governments created by the Military. So all the issues of marginalisation and imbalance in the Political structure of Nigeria had their root in the arbitrary creation of States.
THE 49 WISE-MEN AND THE ISSUE OF SHARIA IN THE CONSTITUTION MAKING PROCESS WHICH LED TO THE 1979 CONSTITUTION:
Following the need to return Nigeria to Civil rule in 1979, the Military under the Murtala/Obasanjo regime set-up a Panel initially made up of 50 Men led by Chief FRA Williams, but with Chief Obafemi Awolowo dropping off, it became a Panel of 49.The place of Islamic law in governance was a major issue these 49 wise men had to deal with. Beyond the pragmatic way it was dealt with in the Constitution making process that led to the 1960 Constitution, the Debacle of 1979, resulting from the crisis which greeted the place of sharia in governance as debated in the constitution-making process of 1976-78 and the absence of a resolution up till date, accounts for the frequent religious uprising Nigeria has witnesses till date, with the result being its hijack by vested interests for political gains.
RESOLVING THE NIGERIAN QUESTION AND ENDING INSURGENCY:
Resolving the Nigerian question and ending insurgency are not mutually exclusive as our Politicians will have us believe. We need to address the fundamentals on which the Nation Nigeria operates for us to have peace. We may continue to use the Military option, but it is not a sustainable option and needless to state that we may continue to play the Ostrich at our peril.
Month: February 2015
ARE OUR LEADERS THINKING OF US, OR ARE THEY OVERWHELMED WITH THE SPOILS OF OFFICE AND THE LIES BY SYCOPHANTS AND HANGERS-ON?
Greed and not service seem to be the underlining motive for going into government in Nigeria. Let me give you three scenarios that bring my thesis to life:
1. HOW MUCH DOES IT COST TO FEED A PRESIDENT?
From the 2015 budget estimates, it will cost 4 Billion Naira to feed the President, his household and guests in 2015. That amount will provide more than 312,000 packs of Indomie Noodles daily, for one year. That is enough to feed the Children in the displaced people’s camps in North-East Nigeria for one year. I would reckon that if our leaders were thinking about us, just a quarter of that amount is more than enough.
2. HOW MUCH DOES IT COST TO HOUSE A VICE PRESIDENT?
Initially, the amount budgeted for the building of a new residence for Vice President Namadi Sambo was 7 Billion naira but given the need to accommodate the lifestyle of the Vice President, the first plan was altered leading to a cost over-run of 9 Billion naira, bringing the entire cost to 16 Billion naira. 16 Billion Naira will build at least 2 standard Primary Healthcare Centres in each of the 36 States of Nigeria at an average cost of 200 Million Naira. Why do we need a new House for a Vice President? Should that truly be a priority if our leaders are serious?
3. WHAT IS THE SALARY OF A NIGERIAN SENATOR?
The Economist magazine revealed that Nigeria federal legislators, with a basic salary of $189,500.00 per annum (N30.6m), are the highest paid lawmakers in the world. It looked at the lawmakers’ basic salary as a ratio of the Gross Domestic Product per person across the world. According to the report, the basic salary (which excludes allowances); of a Nigerian lawmaker is 116 times the country’s GDP per person of $1,600.00. In another report, the 469 federal lawmakers (109 senators and 360 members of the House of Representatives) cost Nigeria over N76 billion on annual salaries, allowances and quarterly payments. Each member of the 54 standing Senate committee, receives a monthly imprest of between N648 million and N972 million per year, while, a member of the House of Representatives receives N35 million or N140 million as quarterly or yearly allowances; which means conservatively the 25 per cent of the overhead of the nation’s budget goes to the National Assembly. Aside from their scandalous wages, kept from the public consumption, their intended imbedding pensions for life for its principal officers into the Constitution; and now the Federal government’s reports that the National Assembly have spent N1 trillion from 2005 to 2013, really makes non-sense of the meaning of service. If only they had cut their wages and allowances in the last 10 years by a half, we would have been able to deliver basic infrastructure which can stimulate growth in the domestic economy.
WHILE AN AVERAGE AMERICAN PRESIDENT AGES IN OFFICE, OURS GET FATTER. WHILE AN AVERAGE BRITISH POLITICIAN RIDES THE TRAIN, OURS RIDE PRIVATE JETS. Little wonder why Nigeria is not working for the good of all?
A NATION CANNOT RISE ABOVE THE PERSPECTIVE OF IT’S LEADERS:
Its time for a new vision. It’s time for a different agenda. It’s time for a fresh perspective to the problems of Nigeria
CHINA OFFERS US A GOOD EXAMPLE:
China may not be a Democracy sensu stricto, but because the Communist Party of China runs an hierarchical system, it is possible to discern distinct generations of Chinese leadership. There is usually a 10 year cycle before new leaders who have been groomed and prepared for the role are given the mantle of leadership. Over the years, there has been changes in the leadership of China across generations and each generation, in defining its own vision, comes to the table with a distinct extension of the ideology of the Communist party.
THE FOUNDERS GENERATION, DEFINED BY THE IRON RICE BOWL – MAO ZEDONG AND THE ERA OF BIG STATE AND SMALL ECONOMY:
The first generation, from 1949 to 1976, consisted of Mao Zedong as core, along with Zhou Enlai, Liu Shaoqi, Zhu De, Chen Yun, Peng Dehuai, and later Lin Biao. This was the era of the Iron Rice bowl, when the State was everything and directed everything as China was purely Communist and was directed by a stiff State policy which frowned at individualism and capitalism and pursued a communal posture and communist ideology. With the death of Chairman Mao, the weakness of this perspective as seen in the high level of poverty based on low aggregate production because the State guaranteed the iron rice bowl (in literal parlance – job security) to all its citizens regardless of whether they were productive or not, forced a new vision by a new generation.
THE SECOND GENERATION – 1976 – 1992 – THE MOVE FOR A LIBERALIZED ECONOMY
The era began with Hua Guofeng as the successor to Mao, but his position was soon eclipsed by the ascendancy of Deng Xiaoping as the paramount leader, in which position he remained at least until 1992 when he resigned from his leadership positions. This era saw the implementation of structural reforms aimed at raising China’s economic fortunes. It saw the move for the control of population growth, labour reforms and the move for a better management of economic resources. This generation saw the smashing of Chairman Mao’s Iron Rice Bowl and the move towards a liberal economy.
FROM THE THIRD TO THE FIFTH GENERATION: OPENING CHINA TO THE WORLD AND TAKING CHINA TO THE WORLD
From 1992, when the third generation took the reins of power, we have seen China open up to the world by joining the World Trade Organisation, hosting the Olympics and getting involved with Africa towards driving its industrial growth agenda by aligning with resource rich Countries in Africa in exchange for infrastructural and technical support. The third to fifth generation have asserted China’s presence on the world stage not only as an alternate power but also a key economic bloc.
WHILE ALL THESE WAS GOING ON IN CHINA, NIGERIA HAS REMAINED STUCK WITH ITS SECOND GENERATION OF LEADERS
Nigeria has been stuck with the second generation of leaders who took over from the founding Fathers who have just been recycling themselves in the corridors of power instead of allowing a new generation of leaders to emerge. Little wonder then why Nigeria appears to be stagnating? Its time to change this trend.
POWER REFORMS AND PLUMMETING CAPACITY WITHIN THE NIGERIAN POWER MARKET
Nigeria’s Power Market seem to be failing to deliver on the promise of the reforms as we are witnessing a steady decline in capacity rather than a climb. As at April this year, capacity dropped to 1,714.89 Megawatts Hour/Hour (MWH/H) from 3,563 generated in December 2013. Furthermore it seems that the new players are rather slow in their reaction to a lot of the capacity issues in the industry. As we be…hold the interesting developments in Nigeria’s Power sector, with capacity continuously plummeting despite the power reforms, one critical question is: why are we not witnessing rapid industry transformation, as we saw with the privatisation of the Telecoms Industry?
CHANGING THE GAME – THE INDUSTRY NEEDS TO BE BETTER COORDINATED IN DEALING WITH FUNDING ISSUES AND COUNTER-PARTIES AGREEMENTS
Ordinarily, one would have expected that with the privatisation of the Electricity Market, the new industry players will be in their Capacity Upgrade Phase and would have started rolling out innovative offering with a consequent improvement in the delivery of value to electricity consumers, but funding seems to be a major problem. Another problem is the slow pace of putting together the requisite industry structures. While one would have expected that the industry will pull together in order to ensure the smooth take-off of the Transitional Electricity Market (TEM), the Power Purchase Agreements (PPAs), Gas Supply Aggregation Agreements (GSAA) and Gas Transportation Agreements (GTAs), which would have unlocked the potential of the market, on the contrary, what we are witnessing, is the slow take-off of the broad industry structures which would have helped eased out the old order and deliver the kind of game-changing dynamics we witnessed upon the liberalisation of the Telecoms market.
GOVERNMENT OR OPERATORS – WHO IS TO BLAME?
Even though government has not been up to speed in helping to oversee the transition from policy to practice, truth be told, the quality of players in the game, is hindering envisaged progress. My take on this matter is that we got the power reforms wrong from the licence bid stage.
IS FIGHTING CORRUPTION ALL ABOUT CATCHING THE CURRENT THIEF ALONE?
I am daily inundated with the wrong rhetoric on this whole issue of corruption. We were in this same Nigeria when some House Members embarked on a probe of the Power Contracts under Obasanjo, but and not come to the table with tangible facts on what went wrong and who was responsible, we saw a situation where ongoing Power projects were stalled and imported GE Turbines were left to gather demurrage at the ports while money exchanged hands between Power Contractors and House Members on supposed oversights. Same thing played out on the Petroleum Subsidy Probe, ending in a Televised Drama which had the protagonist stuffing his cap with Dollars to waive a charge against one of the beneficiaries of the said subsidy.
FIGHTING CORRUPTION IS MORE ABOUT REFOCUSING THE SYSTEM
It was Nuhu Ribadu who said that “when you fight corruption, corruption fights back”. I reckon a lot of us did not weigh that statement carefully. What this simply says is that corruption will explore any loop-hole to cast a doubt in the mind of the arbiter either in the court of law or in the court of public opinion. When this happens, what you’ll find is a travesty of justice and not pure justice. It follows therefore, that anyone seeking to fight corruption must first address the systemic issues that cause corruption. These systemic malaise are captured in Mahatma Ghadi’s seven Social Sins:
1. Wealth without work.
2. Pleasure without conscience.
3. Knowledge without character.
4. Commerce without morality.
5. Science without humanity.
6. Worship without sacrifice.
7. Politics without principle.
WE NEED TO AVOID TREATING THE SYMPTOMS ALONE…
Except we fight the battle holistically and address the systemic issues which predispose people to corruption, we are going nowhere. At best, what you’ll have is a situation where you are merely treating the symptoms without dealing with the root-cause of the ailment. God Bless Nigeria.
NIGERIA: ARE WE A COUNTRY ON A DEMOCRATIC JOURNEY OR JUST A COUNTRY OF DRIFTERS?
In my discussions with a lot of informed analysts and commentators, one thing always seem to stand out – THE PAST ALWAYS SEEM BETTER THAN THE PRESENT. On the other end, it always seems like the future is vague and given that scenario, we usually walk back to the past.
NIGERIA’S POLITICAL DEVELOPMENT FROM SELF GOVERNMENT IN THE 1950″S TO INDEPENDENCE AND THE 2 COUPS OF 1966:
Following the argument over self-government in the build-up to Nigeria’s independence, it was clear that crisis was brewing as the political class in the then 3 regions had discovered the route to earning and keeping political power through THE MANIPULATION OF ETHNIC IDENTITY. This played out in the 1951 as the Yoruba members of the NCNC cross-carpeted to the Action Group in a bid to forestall the emergence of Nnamdi Azikiwe as the leader of government business in the Western Region and NCNC was soon to do same as Eyo Ita, a minority South Easterner was soon displaced by Nnamdi Azikiwe. a majority Igbo in the South East. The Coup of January 1966 also came under the Ethnic Identity periscope as 5 Majors – 4 of them from the South East – were accused of killing political gladiators from the North and South West, leading to the reappraisal Coup of July 1966, led by Northern Officers and the Pogrom which followed mainly in the North against South Easterners; leading to a civil war. In all of these instances, it was the manipulation of ethnic identity, by political / military players, that was at play here and not religious identity.
THE MANIPULATION OF RELIGIOUS IDENTITY – FROM THE 49 WISE-MEN AND THE SHARIA DEBATE OF THE 1970’S TO THE PRESENT BOKO HARAM INSURGENCY:
In 1976, when the Murtala/Obasanjo regime put together a Constitution Drafting Committee led by Chief Frederick Rotimi Alade Williams – dubbed the 49 wise-men, little did we know that trouble was soon to brew, until the status of Sharia in the soon to be delivered 1979 Presidential Constitution, came up for debate. While those largely from the Christian dominated South felt that the Penal Code in the Independence Constitution which recognised the role of Sharia in dealing with Civil cases and not criminal cases should be adopted, others, largely from the Muslim dominated Northern Nigeria felt that Sharia should be extended even for criminal prosecutions. The absence of a win-win resolution of this stormy argument was soon to lead to the Maitasine riots of 1980 – 81. Although, these riots were quelled, a new phase in Nigeria’s political development had emerged – THE MANIPULATION OF RELIGIOUS IDENTITY FOR POLITICAL ADVANTAGE. This soon led to several religious riots across decades, leading to the Boko Haram insurgence which started in 2009 and continues to rage till date.
GOING FORWARD WITHOUT MOVING BACKWARD: 2015 ON MY MIND
As earlier stated, what has tended to happen in Nigeria’s political development, is that, rather than address issues which affect Nigeria’s diversity, politicians always play up differences in Ethnic and Religious Identity to gain advantage and by so doing, politicians have surreptitiously socialised Nigerians into the evil of ethnic mistrust, hatred and violence. As we go into the 2015 Presidential debate, Nigerian’s need to ask the two major players what their plans for inclusion and integration is. Inclusion and integration need not necessarily involve turning Nigeria into a MELTING-POT, as Ethnic and Religious identities cannot be wished away as the Bolsheviks did in the old Soviet Union following the revolution led by Lenin. Nigeria’s must on the flip-side, look out for policies which recognises and leverages Nigeria’s SALAD BOWL status, where Lettuce is different from Carrot and Carrot is different from Cabbage and Cabbage is different from Cream but they all come together, in a symphony to build the salad bowl.
bolajiokusaga 