Further reflection on Jonathan’s conference This Column, a fortnight ago, had cause to reflect on the just-concluded National Conference set up by President Goodluck Jonathan. A few developments have taken place since then. The conference has finally wound up and its report has been submitted to President Jonathan. Before the conference adopted its final report, there was a whimper from Northern delegates. They disowned certain procedures and aspects of the conference report. Their major worry resided in the draft constitution, which the conference was about to submit to the president. They said the draft document, if adopted, could pave way for an elongated tenure for Jonathan and some other public office holders. However, for some strange reason, they ate their words when it was time to cry foul. They developed cold feet and the report of the conference was adopted by a committee of the whole house without dissension. With that feat achieved, the battleground has shifted to the public arena. Some shrill voices of dissent have rent the air. Prominent among them is that of Rabiu Musa Kwankwaso, Governor of Kano State, and great defender of the North. Kwankwaso has told Nigerians to throw away the report of the conference because, according to him, it will not help the cause of a united and peaceful Nigeria. He also dwelt substantially on the draft constitution and its tenure elongation potentials. He, therefore, sees the acceptance of the report, as a recipe for crisis of immense proportions in Nigeria. Some other naysayers from the North are worried that the report, if accepted and implemented, would erase some of the age-old and institutional advantages, which the North has over the South. Kwankwaso, for instance, is particularly worried about his 44 local government areas, which he has been guarding jealously. One of the resolutions of the conference is the deletion of local governments from the Constitution. The implication of this is that the number of local governments that a state has will no longer be a factor in revenue allocation. Kwankwaso whose state has been benefitting unduly from the skewed allocation of local governments by successive military regimes is ill at ease with the emerging new order. Another source of worry to Kwankwaso and others like him is the recommendation of the conference on creation of new states. The new order, if implemented, will erase the advantage the North has over the South in this regard. Kwankwaso finds this very discomfiting. He feels that his Kano, which was purported to be more populous than Lagos by the 2006 Population Census, should be given a pride of place when new states are being created. Kwankwaso does not even believe that certain parts of Nigeria, particularly the South-east, deserve new states because of the land mass of the region. These and other recommendations of the Confab, which are supposed to make Nigeria a stronger, more united and equitable country, do not appeal to the Kwankwasos of this world. He is worried that the politically disadvantaged South is about to have a lifeline. But because it has become evident that the muffled outcry from a segment of the North will not achieve the desired result, the region is waiting in the wings for Jonathan to send the report of the conference to the National Assembly for ratification. There, it is expected that the North would use its dominance of the national legislature to destroy the good job that the Confab delegates have done. That explains why Kwankwaso does not want the government to settle for referendum as an option. He is afraid that the process would be manipulated by government. In the absence of a clear-cut way of dealing with the conference report, Nigerians have been speaking on the desirability or otherwise of sending the report of the Confab to the National Assembly. Those who know the issues and who wish Nigeria well are united in their position that the national legislature should be left out of this matter. But then, we need not overemphasise the issue. I would like to believe that the president, who put the conference together did not do so for the sake of it. He must have done so because he wanted a better Nigeria. Since it is obvious that the National Assembly will only destroy the plan and purpose of the conference, Mr. President does not need any counseling on the overriding need to leave the federal legislature out of the report of the conference. I do not know whether the aspect of the draft constitution that deals with the tenure of elected public office holders can, in any way, pave way for an elongated tenure for anybody. If it does, it should be tinkered with in such a way that it does not confer undue advantage on any person or group of persons. It will be in national interest to do so. It will equally be in the interest of the nation to ensure that those recommendations that will bring about equity and justice in the country are not toyed with. To achieve this objective, President Jonathan should involve the people for whom the constitution is drafted. This is where referendum comes in. Let the people decide what they want or what they do not want. It is legitimate and proper to do so. Pandering to the demands of those who want Nigeria to remain perpetually their fiefdom will defeat the lofty objective of the conference. I know that President Jonathan is wise enough to shun that retrogressive option.
Posted on: Thu, 21 Aug 2014 10:32:59 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015