The 2016 end of year festivities demonstrated in clear relief, the conundrum which armed conflict between the Nigerian military and militants in the Niger Delta can easily manifest as. Even under a siege by the Nigeria military who are supposedly in the area to safeguard strategic oil and gas facilities, several communities still found time to celebrate the yuletide season and mark the arrival of the new year with fanfare. Just as well, it was a common sight in many communities for soldiers and the supposedly restive community youth sitting side by side in beer parlours, and other theatres of revelry, to share the joy of the season. Interestingly, even the media reported a marked drop in skirmishes between the military and the militants throughout that period.
Yet how much of the gains from that break in fighting lasted into the new year remains doubtful with the resumption of hostilities soon after. And as if the problems there are not enough, the federal government deepened the quagmire with its seemingly inchoate approach to the situation. The latest dilemma of the government is its indecision over who represents the Niger Delta zone in peace negotiations and other vistas of interaction between the two parties. As reported, the administration may actually have found itself at sea over who to engage, in its dalliance with the region.
Until recently a body known as Pan Niger Delta Forum (PANDEV) comprising traditional rulers of the zone, former high profile public officers, militant leaders among others, had been at the centre of the interface between the federal government and the region. In November 2016 the group – many of which members enjoy a deeply historical association with the Niger Delta struggle for economic justice for the zone, presented a 16 point demand notice to the federal government. Up till the time of this piece the response of the government to the demand has left much to be desired.
However, whatever premium the government may eventually wish to deploy to its interface with PANDEV, not much gain is expected as the body is deficient in state actors and may therefore be vulnerable to manipulation by unscrupulous elements on the government side. The missing state actors are the legislators of the zone comprising the Senators, Members of the House of Representatives, Members of the State Houses of Assembly, and of course the local government Councillors who represent the smallest administrative units of the country. These actors are Constitutionally equipped to deploy legitimately, the force of law to the resolutions from dialogue between stake holders. The absence of their participation has imposed a pall of miasma on the peace process in the region, and cannot be seen properly in any other light, except as disappointing and unfortunate.
Given the state of affairs in the zone and the imperative for articulated and sustained advocacy from there, it is not out of place for different pressure groups to launch one campaign or the other in order to draw attention and commitment from the powers that be, especially given the tradition of successive federal administrations, to offer only indifference and at best lip service to the region’s plight. Even the present administration may have unwittingly justified the need for escalation of advocacy and militancy in the region through its hasty resort to military action, over a matter on which peaceful negotiations would have achieved better dividends.
Contemporary evidence clearly indicates that at inception the Buhari administration rightfully identified insecurity across the country as one key challenge it had to address, especially with the colossal scope of damage and loss of lives, limbs, property as well as livelihood of Nigerians from the outrages of the Boko Haram sect in the North East of the country especially. At the same time, it also misjudged the Niger Delta crisis as one that required a military solution, just like the Boko Haram debacle. But as political fallouts and battlefield scenarios are playing out, that consideration has proved to be erroneous as it is becoming clearer by the day that military action in any form, will not solve the Niger Delta issue, neither now nor at any time in the future.
It is therefore significant and welcome that the administration has adopted a turnaround and seems to develop a fresh interest in dialogue. But even in this regard, it seems to have run into a brick wall following a self-imposed challenge of identifying ‘credible’ representatives of the region with whom it will negotiate. Meanwhile, as long as the dialogue process remains bereft of active participation of the elected legislators from the zone, so long will peace building remain in suspended animation. That is why the government needs to reconfigure its strategy of sole dependence on whatever disparate advocacy groups, to a more realistic template that incorporates a definitive role for the legislative institutions at the various tiers of government. At least, these offer the advantage of harnessing the benefits of their statutory mandate for representation of any community in the country, including the Niger Delta region.
Judging from the country’s recent experience, the administration’s seeming relegation of the legislature in the Niger Delta matter actually constitutes another round of costly misadventure as it was with at least two previous instances; one each during the tenures of President Olusegun Obasanjo and Goodluck Jonathan in the name of National Conferences. Obasanjo’s National Political Reforms Conference (National Dialogue) was in 2005, while Jonathan’s National Conference held nine years after in 2014.
Beyond the differences in names of these two events, it is easily recalled that they were both carried out in blatant disregard of the legislature, at huge costs to the public till and with anticlimactic dividends, as the reports from them are still gathering dust on abandoned bookshelves in non-descript government offices. In the same vein, several observers fear that unless the government moves its engagement with the Niger Delta issue to the theatre of legislative intervention, whatever the executive arm settles for with the advocacy groups in the region, may be denied due administrative action, leading to future rounds of loss of faith between the centre and the region – and of course, more crises.
Interestingly, this period is the 2017 budget season with all the arms and agencies of government at every tier, engaged in making financial provisions for the execution of sundry projects in the course of the year. The period therefore offers invaluable opportunity to both the Buhari government and the advocacy groups of the Niger Delta region, for facilitating the inclusion of whatever envisaged development schemes and projects into the various budgets of the federal, states and local government councils of the zone. This is however only possible, if the legislature becomes an active part of the peace building and sustainable development efforts, whereby it can allocate funds accordingly, in the exercise of its constitutional powers over the public purse.
That is also if the Muhamadu Buhari administration demonstrates that its word in respect of its claim of commitment to dialogue, is beyond face value.
Join Daily Trust WhatsApp Community For Quick Access To News and Happenings Around You.
