Category: Issues

Buhari vs Jonathan: Beyond the Election

Buhari vs Jonathan: Beyond the Election

[Dr. Chukwuma Charles Soludo, a former Governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) has been a visiting scholar at the International Monetary Fund, the University of Cambridge, the Brookings Institution, Swarthmore College and University of Oxford. All Progressives Congress website, http://www.allprogressivescongress.org, while not agreeing with the opinions expressed by Professor Soludo. APC hereby publishes this article to encourage mature debate on the Nigerian situation before the Presidential elections and would happily publish a counterpoint or similarly reasoned presentations of issues facing Nigeria.    Dr. S. Okechukwu Mezu]

 

Buhari vs Jonathan: Beyond the Election
by Charles Soludo

I need to preface this article with a few clarifications. I have taken a long sabbatical leave from partisan politics, and it is real fun watching the drama from the balcony. Having had my own share of public service (I do not need a job from government), I now devote my time and energy in pursuit of other passions, especially abroad.

A DUTY TO SHARE CONCERNS

A few days ago, I read an article in This Day entitled “Where is Charles Soludo?”, and my answer is that I am still there, only that I have been too busy with extensive international travels to participate in or comment on our national politics and economy. But I occasionally follow events at home. Since the survival and prosperity of Nigeria are at stake, the least some of us (albeit, non-partisan) must do is to engage in public debate. As the elections approach, I owe a duty to share some of my concerns. In September 2010, I wrote a piece entitled “2011 Elections: Let the Real Debate Begin” and published by This Day. I understand the Federal Executive Council discussed it, and the Minister of Information rained personal attacks on me during the press briefing. I noted more than six newspaper editorials in support of the issues we raised. Beside other issues we raised, our main thesis was that the macro economy was dangerously adrift, with little self-insurance mechanisms (and a prediction that if oil prices fell below $40, many state governments would not be able to pay salaries). I gave a subtle hint at easy money and exchange rate depreciations because I did not want to panic the market with a strong statement. Sadly, on the eve of the next elections, literally everything we hinted at has happened.  Part of my motivation for this article is that five years after, the real debate is still not happening.

FOR BUHARI OR JONATHAN: A PYRRHIC VICTORY

The presidential election next month will be won by either Buhari or Jonathan. For either, it is likely to be a pyrrhic victory. None of them will be able to deliver on the fantastic promises being made on the economy, and if oil prices remain below $60, I see very difficult months ahead, with possible heady collisions with labor, civil society, and indeed the citizenry. To be sure, the presidential election will not be decided by the quality of ‘issues’ or promises canvassed by the candidates. The debates won’t also change much (except if there is a major gaffe by either candidate like Tofa did in the debate with Abiola). My take is that more than 95% of the likely voters have pretty much made up their minds based largely on other considerations. A few of us remain undecided.

MAJOR CHALLENGES AHEAD

During my brief visit to Nigeria, I watched some of the campaign rallies on television. The tragedy of the current electioneering campaigns is that both parties are missing the golden opportunity to sensitize the citizenry about the enormous challenges ahead and hence mobilize them for the inevitable sacrifices they would be called upon to make soon. Each is promising an El-Dorado. Let me admit that the two main parties talk around the major development challenges – corruption, insecurity, economy (unemployment/poverty, power, infrastructure, etc.) health, education, etc. However, it is my considered view that none of them has any credible agenda to deal with the issues, especially within the context of the evolving global economy and Nigeria’s broken public finance.

The UK Conservative Party’s manifesto for the last election proudly announced that all its programs were fully costed and were therefore implementable. Neither APC nor PDP can make a similar claim.  A plan without the dollar or Naira signs to it is nothing but a wish-list. They are not telling us how much each of their promises will cost and where they will get the money. None talks about the broken or near bankrupt public finance and the strategy to fix it. (more…)

THE FUTURE OF THE NIGERIAN NATION

THE FUTURE OF THE NIGERIAN NATION:
Structure and Governance System for Nigeria’s Six Zones
by Dr. S. Okechukwu Mezu

Abstract:

The Igbos of the Lower Niger River, like the Hausas in the Upper Niger stretching to Niger, Chad and Sudan, Fula in Guinea, the Yoruba in the West of the River Niger extending to Benin Republic, like other ethnic nationalities, existed and had a structure and governance system  before the Berlin Conference of 1884-1885, where Europeans, in a scramble for Africa, partitioned and destroyed African nations’ respective self-governance and autonomy leading in 1914 to the Amalgamation by Britain of the Southern and Northern Protectorates to create an unstable entity that is called today Nigeria.

      Independence in 1960 added political instability to the centrifugal forces of geography and ethnicity. Rather than wish away one hundred years of an acrimonious marriage blessed with children, even if they are quarrelsome, Nigeria needs decolonization. To realize this, we start from the known and generally accepted to the unknown – the entrenchment of the Six Zone structure as a basis for a confederation and a transformation and renaming of “Nigeria” to create federating units based on the Zonal structure, with the Southeast Zone for example, transforming itself following a referendum to Ala Igbo (Igbo Nation). Other zones will have the right to exercise similar options. Nigeria, thus decolonized, ceases to exist, becomes transformed into the United Nations of Africa. 

    This leaves open the possibility of other African nations joining the Union.  This paper attempts to provide a structure and governance system for such an Igbo Nation (Ala Igbo) and further postulates that with a similar decolonization of other amalgams created by Europeans as perpetually warring states in Africa and their unending internal squabbles and civil wars, a real United Nations of Africa will be created that respects individual freedom and ethnic sensibilities while laying the groundwork – the vision of Kwame Nkrumah, Abubakar Tafawa Balewa, Sekou Toure, Patrice Lumumba, Nnamdi Azikiwe, Emperor Haile Selassie, Marcus Garvey, William Du Bois, etc. – for a United Nations of Africa for the glory of Africa at home and the diaspora.– Dr. S. Okechukwu Mezu

Click here to download full article

 

The Jonathan National Dialogue: Conflict Resolution or Conflict Insemination

The Jonathan National Dialogue: Conflict Resolution or Conflict Insemination

By Dr. S. Okechukwu Mezu

–

“Fellow Nigerians, our administration has taken cognizance of suggestions over the years by well-meaning Nigerians on the need for a national dialogue on the future of our beloved country. When there are issues that constantly stoke tension and bring about friction, it makes perfect sense for the interested parties to come together to discuss. In demonstration of my avowed belief in the positive power of dialogue in charting the way forward, I have decided to set up an advisory committee whose mandate is to establish the modalities for a national dialogue or conference. The committee will also design a framework and come up with recommendations as to the form, structure and mechanism of the process. The full membership of the committee will be announced shortly. I expect its report to be ready in one month, following which the nation will be briefed on the nomenclature, structure and modalities of the dialogue.”         President Goodluck Jonathan, October 1, 2013

The present Civilian Governments of Nigeria on the Local, State and National levels have failed the people woefully.  The hope that Nigeria’s civilian leaders would accomplish for the nation what military rulers hungry for adulation at home and meteoric respect abroad failed to achieve has been dashed…. Nigeria, once again is being buffeted by the very same pressures and centrifugal forces that led to the demise of the regimes of Abubakar Tafawa Balewa, General Aguiyi Ironsi, General Gowon, General Murtala Muhamed, Alhaji Shehu Shagari, Generals Buhari and Idiagbon, General Babangida and General Sanni Abacha.  Any Government that comes to power without the will and concurrence of the people is doomed to failure and for such a Government or collusion of State Governments to aspire  unilaterally (outside a national conference) to rewrite the Nigerian constitution, abolish or review the Local Government System, drastically change the fundamental, directive principles of governance and abiding way of life of the Nigerian people, is a dismal exercise in futility doomed to quintessential failure.  Dr. S. Okechukwu Mezu, May 19, 2007

After resisting for six years the persistent and unrelenting call for the restructuring of Nigeria to make allowance for its federal character and the diversity of the nationalities that have been “amalgamated in1914” to form the entity called Nigeria, President Goodluck Jonathan and. we assume, his PDP-led Government of Nigeria, are finally calling for a coming together to debate the future of Nigeria and how to guarantee peaceful coexistence. The curious questions that now arise include the following:

  • Why should any patriotic Nigerian oppose the implementation of this recurrent demand for a national dialogue?
  • Who should take part in this dialogue and how will the representatives be chosen? and finally.
  • How do you ensure that the agreements or the constitution emanating from this dialog represent the will of the people or are endorsed by the constituent nationalities or at least a majority of the nationalities?

Some of these questions were partially raised also when President Jonathan stated that the committee will  among other things consult with all relevant stakeholders, make recommendations to government on structure and modalities for the proposed national dialogue, make recommendations to government on how representation of various interest groups at the conference will be determined and  also advise government on a legal framework for the national conference and any other matters that may be related or incidental to the proposed conference.

The 13-member committee which has one month (now extended to six weeks) within which to complete its assignment, was inaugurated by President Jonathan on October 7 at the State House. The  members include  Prof Ben Nwabueze (who declined the appointment for health reasons), Dr. Akilu Indabawa, (Secretary), Prof. George Obiozor; Senator Khairat Gwadabe; Senator Timothy Adudu, Col. Tony Nyiam (rtd) and Prof. Funke Adebayo. Others are  Dr.  Mairo Amshi, Dr. Abubakar Sadiq, Alhaji Dauda Birma, Mallam Buhari Bello and Mr. Tony Uranta. The body is to be chaired by Senator Femi Okurounmu.

(A) WHY SHOULD ANY PATRIOTIC NIGERIAN OPPOSE THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THIS RECURRENT DEMAND FOR A NATIONAL DIALOGUE?

Several patriotic Nigerians have serious reasons to doubt the sincerity of the Jonathan administration.

a)    Prof. Shedrach Best, Secretary to the Plateau State Government, sees it as an exercise in futility that adds nothing new to the existing body of knowledge about Nigeria.  Nigerians should join hands to make the country work. The constitution addresses everything including federal character; the way resources should be harnessed and distributed, the way our development should be pursued. It is all in the constitution. The constitution should be made to work and amended where necessary. If we want a referendum on anything, let us conduct that referendum.”

b)The Ijaw National Congress (INC) President, Senator Tari Sekibo suggests that “the fear that the nation will break up without the designation of no-go area is unfounded and amounts to sheer scaremongering. The various organs of government and the panel itself must trust the patriotism quotient in Nigerians to discuss all issues and arrive at practical and mutually acceptable solutions, terms and agreements of our nationhood.”

c)    Some officials of Labor have lamented the various socio-economic ills facing the country and doubt the sincerity and capacity of the Jonathan administration to hold a meaningful dialogue on a national scale.  The NLC Vice President, Comrade Issa Aremu, pointed out that the “current twin crises of three-month long strike by the country’s university teachers and Peoples’ Democratic Party’s internal war of attrition sadly, under the watch of President Jonathan put serious doubt on the capacity of the administration to successfully midwife a national conference”. He further insisted that “President Jonathan must come with clean hands on simple conflict resolutions before he can be further entrusted with national conversation of such importance since the President’s record with conflict resolutions through dialogue, either with ASUU, his ruling party or Nigeria Governors’ Forum has not been inspiring for him to engage in a bigger macro-national dialogue of any kind unless we are unwittingly going to fund national diatribe of unimaginable consequences for 165 million people. Continuing, the NLC spokesperson said: “A national conference against a background of unresolved avoidable sector crisis like the university lecturers strike is nothing but a conference of diversion, a cheap flight from good governance and above all a waste of scarce resources needed among others to resolve the education sector crisis.”

d)  Others like, Kaigama while welcoming the conference advise that issues to be discussed at the Conference should include “the basis of our unity and existence as a nation, the system of government and the power-sharing formula, our geopolitical and fiscal federalism, citizenship, the electoral and representative system, the cost of governance, security, corruption, boundary adjustment and foreign policy, freedom of faith and other fundamental human rights.”

e)    Gani Adams, the national coordinator of the Oodua People’s Congress (OPC), has drawn the attention of President Goodluck Jonathan to a similar effort in 2005 President Olusegun Obasanjo to convoke a national conference which failed because of Obasanjo’s selfish interests and illicit plan to use the conference to achieve his third-term political agenda. President Jonathan is therefore advised to distance his interest in the impending 2015

f)    Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu, while expressing his personal opinion, characterized President Jonathan’s proposed national dialogue as deceptive and diversionary and a poison apple just a few months before the 2015 national elections.

 g)Governor Sule Lamido was right when he stated that the proposed Jonathan national dialogue lacked constitutional backing and was a fragrant abuse of democratic principles insisting that the only solution to the country’s problems is good governance, due process, the rule of law and ethical leadership.

          In sum, the Jonathan administration appears to co-mingle the interests of the nation and that of his administration. For Jonathan, the committee is expected among other things to consult with all relevant stakeholders, make recommendations to government on structure and modalities for the proposed national dialogue, make recommendations to government on how representation of various interest groups at the conference will be determined and  also advise government on a legal framework for the national conference and any other matters that may be related or incidental to the proposed conference. By implication, such a committee will report to the Jonathan administration who will then issue a white paper on the nature, composition, terms of reference of the proposed National Confab  and ipso facto the proceedings of the Confab will be probably handed over to his government for discussion at the Executive Council level and a white paper (like under previous Military Governments) foisted on the people as the new Constitution for promulgation or for further deliberation at the National Assembly with concurrence of the State Assemblies. This would definitely not be a the Nigerian Constitution we want or deserve.

          Furthermore, contrary to the opinion expressed by some, the first step towards the making of a new constitution is not to repeal Decree 24 which brought into being the existing 1999 constitution. That constitution should be the template for the new constitution. All aspects of the constitution should be revisited except the indivisibility and integrity of Nigeria. It is after the promulgation of a new constitution by the people that the 1999 Military Constitution will stand repealed. (more…)