Restructuring Nigeria (II)

I have done more than taken a casual walk through the main report of the National Conference 2014. I wish to report that from what I have seen, it is an impressive piece of work. In breadth and depth, it may be difficult for another conference of its type to do a better job of unearthing the clutters that hobble our federalism and our national development. Nothing, however niggling or minute, escaped the eagle eyes of the members of the conference, including the 37-month pension arrears of military personnel. Splendid.

The members of the conference deserve the eternal gratitude of a nation that searches but can’t quite seem to find pragmatic solutions to its hydra-headed political, social, economic and religious problems. Sure, it would be naïve to think that the conference found all the missing needles in many of our haystacks. Still, in my view, it raises hopes that if we are honest and determined to put some of our most irritating problems behind us, we have a document that clearly points the way to our Eureka moment – if we dot the i’s and cross the t’s in the resolutions.

We are not all likely to agree with all or even some of its recommendations. But that is ok. I do not think the attendees believed that a three-month work made them King Solomon’s children. 

I had a brief attack of cynicism when I saw that the conference recommended the creation of 18 more states. Why, given the failure of leadership in at least 27 of the current 36 states? I thought I would pick issues with that but when I saw that Apa State the Idoma people have been agitating for is listed number as one on the list, I drank red wine to it. Yes, sir.

Still, I do not think this is a particularly wise decision; popular, maybe. It tells me we have no idea of the optimum number of states that would be ideal for managing our many tribes and tribal interests. The creation of states was a tool used by the military to win public support and applause after General Gowon’s sensible 12-state structure. But state creation has since degenerated into something like using sweets to appease a crying baby. 

The challenge we have is not any number of states; it is the proper administration of the states. As Chief Obafemi Awolowo once observed, the states have become glorified local governments. Would 54 states make a better country, a better people and a more united country than 36 states? 

The work of the conference is pretty detailed but it offers few radical recommendations. Most of them deal with administrative issues that were simply allowed to fester and became nasty problems. What I find interesting here is that the conference took time and care to expose these lapses and recommend ways to close the door on nearly all possible lethargy and inexcusable excuses.

Some of the recommendations rightly tackle some issues that have a long history. One of them is the question of independent candidates for elective offices. The conference recommendation for it to be enshrined in the constitution is sensible. It ill serves our nation and its democracy to continue to insist that candidates for elective offices must belong to political parties. This is part of the flaws in our flawed leadership recruitment drive. The best can never emerge so long as the whims and caprices of the party moguls hold sway in the political parties and they are thus allowed to determine other people’s political fortunes and misfortunes, for fat fees, of course. Independent candidacy, tough as it might be, gives the poor but committed man a chance to sell himself to the electorate and expand our choices.

I also welcome the resolution of the conference for a formal constitutional enactment stipulating rotational presidency between the north and the south and among the six geo-political zones. It recommends the application of the same principle at the state level with the governorship rotating among the three senatorial zones. They are sensible and address the marginalisation of minorities in some of the states. Benue and Kogi states are prime examples of this.

Perhaps, the most controversial recommendation by the conference deals with succession on the death or the incapacitation or the impeachment of a president. It recommends that in that event the vice-president should act as president for 90 days after which a new presidential election shall be conducted featuring only qualified candidates from the former president’s zone. 

It is a delicate approach to constitutional government but like affirmative action or federal character, it is a response to our peculiar problems in reference to the zonal locus of power. I am not prepared to hazard a guess as to how this would play in the public space. I would imagine that the zone where the vice-president comes from would be the first to throw the first stone at the recommendation. We would, certainly, do more than split hairs over this recommendation. 

The recommendation for the removal of the immunity clause would be popular. Its nebulous provision in the constitution has seen to a long line of camels sauntering through the eyes of the needle. We have had criminals run two terms as state governors when they should have been disqualified from contesting the election because of their criminal baggage in the first place.

As I said in this column last week, I consulted the conference report in search of its recommendations and resolutions on the restructuring of the country. This forms a major sub-heading in the main report. Some Nigerians are convinced that this new fangled buzz phrase is the solution to all our problems. I tremble at their fiery magisterial pronouncements to the effect that if there is no restructuring there would be no Nigeria. I believe that some of those who make this extreme statements are even blissfully ignorant of what it is all about.

I will tell you what the conference says about the political restructuring in the final segment of this series next week.