Thorny issues as confab winds up by GEORGE OJI, WOLE OLADIMEJI and OMEIZA AJAYI After about four months of political horse-trading, the plenary session of the National Conference drew to a close last Monday, but effectively adjourned till August 4 to take a final look at its resolutions. GEORGE OJI, WOLE OLADIMEJI and OMEIZA AJAYI examine some contentious issues thrown up by the conference. Following the completion of debate on and adoption of resolutions from reports of the 20 committees set up to consider critical issues at the National Conference, its chairman and former Chief Justice of Nigeria, CJN, Justice Idris Kutigi, fixed the next plenary session for August 4, when delegates would reassemble to consider and approve the final reports of the conference for presentation to the Federal Government. Having been inaugurated on March 17 by President Goodluck Jonathan, the conference was mandated to discuss all issues concerning the country and proffer the way forward. The only no-go area, according to the President was negotiating the division of the country. Expectedly, the conference touched on many vexed issues which often caused tension and these vexed issues nearly brought the exercise to an abrupt end. The situation got so bad that delegates could not reach a compromise on the issue of derivation, a development which forced the conference leadership to recommend that the Federal Government be advised to set up a technical committee to address the issue, taking into cognizance some technical issues. Some of the grey areas touched by the conference are listed here. Political restructuring The conference recommended that Nigeria shall retain a federal system of government. Thus, Nigeria shall be a federation comprising of states and the Federal Capital Territory, FCT, and shall be a republic by the name of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. Interestingly, the core elements of the federation, as recommended by the confab shall be as follows: a federation (central) government with states as the federating units. Without prejudice to states constituting the federating units, the conference recommends that those that wish to merge may do so in accordance with the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. It added that a group of states may create a self-funding zonal commission to promote economic development, good governance, equity, peace and security in accordance with the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. The confab also recommended for constitutional re cognition of zonal structure of geo-political zones, as administrative units for co-operation, collaboration and the establishment of joint commissions as may become expedient among such states. Constitution for the states The conference is also proposing a constitution for the states as part of political restructuring. It said the executive authority of a federating unit shall extend to the execution and maintenance of the Constitution of the federating unit and to all matters with respect to which the legislature of the federating unit has for the time being power to make laws for but shall be so exercised as not to impede or prejudice the exercise of the executive authority of the federation or endanger the continuance of the Federal Government of Nigeria. The caveat however is that if any article of the said federating unit constitution or any other law is in conflict with the national constitution, the national constitution shall prevail and that law shall to the extent of its inconsistency be null and void. States as federating units In trying to restructure the existing system of government and to devolve power from the centre, the delegates agreed that since regionalism, as pushed for by South- West geo-political zone delegates was defeated, the states as federating units should be given more power and responsibilities. Such power includes: power to be able to control their own police, power to dispense with cases by having something similar to the supreme court, power to control their own prisons and even build theirs, instead of concentrating everything in the hands of the Federal Government where things are left undone because of red-tapism or bureaucratic bottleneck. Curiously, while some delegates had been vociferous in their demands for the scrap of the State Independent Electoral Commissions, SIECs, the conference-in-plenary however resolved that the states should be allowed to conduct their own elections. States creation The conference also held that there shall be created an additional state for the South-East zone. The committee on state creation recommended: “We support the creation of more states in all the geo-political zones in order to resolve ethno-religious conflicts, ensure minority rights are protected and to ensure parity of states within zones.” However, when the report was presented to the conference, it was agreed that states should be created, but instead of creating one for the South East alone, states to be created should be increased to 18. Delegates believed that creation of additional states would give room for development. After very heated debates, the conference in its wisdom proposed that in the interim, one more state should be for the South-East geo-political zone of the country to bring the zone at par with the rest other zones. The recommendation of the conference in this regard has been greatly criticised for not taking into cognizance, the viability of most of the existing states in the country. It also came under attack because, it failed to consider the rigorous state creation processes contained in Section 8(1) of the constitution. Section 8(1) states that: An act of the National Assembly for the purpose of creating a new state shall only be passed if (a) a request, supported by at least two-thirds majority of members (representing the area demanding the creation of new state) in each of the following: (i) the Senate and House of Representatives, (ii) the House of Assembly in respect of the area, is received by the National Assembly, (b) a proposal for the creation of the state is thereafter approved in a referendum by at least two-third majority of the people of the area where the demand for creation of the state originated, (c) the result of the referendum is then approved by a simple majority of all the states of the federation, supported by a simple majority of members of the Houses of Assembly, and (d) the proposal is approved by a resolution passed by two-thirds majority of members of each House of the National Assembly. During the last constitution review exercise, a total of 61 requests were made by Nigerians for new states. Unfortunately, none of those requests, according to the Chairman of the Senate Committee on Constitution Review, Senator Ike Ekweremadu, met the constitutional requirement. Against that background and also against the background of that most of the existing states now are economically insolvent, it is doubtful if the recommendation of the National Conference on new states would sail through at the National Assembly. State police On state police, the Committee on Security recommended that there should be state police in order to effectively provide security for the people. It said police should be decentralised in such a way that states are allowed to run police on their own, but coordinated from the federal level. It also posited that nomination and appointment of the Inspector General of Police, IGP, should remain with the President and the National Council of State, subject to confirmation by the Senate. Local government administration The conference reaffirmed Section 7 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), that a system of local government by democratically elected local government councils is guaranteed. It added that local governments shall at present not be the third tier of government. States that wish to, may create local governments, which shall be under the jurisdiction of the states. In this case, the number, structure, form and administration of local governments shall be determined by the states. It said: “Without prejudice to the existing local governments, states that wish to, may create or reduce the number of existing local governments, which shall be under the jurisdiction of the state.” The confab opined that the list of the local governments contained in the First Schedule of 1999 Constitution (as amended) be removed, and transferred to the states to be covered by a law of the state Houses of Assembly; and that the functions of the local governments as contained in Schedule 4 of 1999 Constitution (as amended) shall be transferred to the states subject to the power of the state Houses of Assembly to add or reduce the said functions of the local government. Local government funding The conference also recommended the scrapping of the Joint State/Local Government Account and in its place the establishment of a State Revenue Mobilization, Allocation and Fiscal Commission, SRMAFC, with representatives of local governments and a chairman nominated by the governor. It also recommended that all nominees of SRMAFC be screened by the state House of Assembly. Derivation and resource control Various positions have been canvassed on the issue of resource control and derivation. South-South delegates remained adamant on their position. Although they have been able to shift ground from their initial demand of 100 percent to 50 percent and now to 18 percent, Northern delegates remained absolute that there should not be any increment in derivation. After much argument, Northern delegates stated that should derivation be increased, then they too should be given five percent for reconstruction of Northern states. This issue has been the major bone of contention in recent times and the confab leadership set up a team of ’50 wise men’ to holistically look at the contentious issue and recommend to the conference. The 50 ‘wise men’ proposed some amendments to the recommendation of the Committee on Devolution of Power. The crux of the amendment is: “That there shall be a National Intervention Fund, NIF, which will be 5 per cent of the annual revenue accruing to the account of the Federal Government for the stabilisation, rehabilitation and reconstruction of areas affected by terrorism and insurgency, in the first instance in the North East of Nigeria and any other part of the country affected.” The North has however proposed its own amendment, which seem not to go down well with other delegates. Its amendment is: “That there shall be an NIF, which will be 5 per cent of the annual revenue accruing to the account of the Federal Government for the stabilisation, rehabilitation and reconstruction of areas affected by terrorism and insurgency, in the first instance in the North-East, North- Central and North-West of Nigeria and any other parts of the country affected.” Though the conference adopted the recommendations of the committee, it failed to take a conclusive decision on the issue of derivation principle and what percentage should be paid mineral producing areas. Conference chairman, Kutigi said on Monday: “I’m still of the view that the Committee that is handling the matter of coming to a compromise will still do their job. “We couldn’t have the meeting on Friday. So, I am proposing that we give them two hours to meet with us.” He thereafter invited the ‘50 wise men’, committees cochairmen, chairmen and deputy chairmen to meet now in “our usual place.” After five hours of close-door deliberation with the leadership of the confab, both the Southern and Northern delegates refused to agree on some of the issues thrown up in the initial meetings of some regional leaders. From the presentations of the leaders, three issues were raised during their discussions. The issues were: 18 per cent derivation for mineral producing area, five per cent for the development of solid minerals and five per cent for the reconstruction of states in the Northern region ravaged by insurgency and internal conflicts. The last seemed to have been the point of controversy as some of the leaders insisted that the intervention fund should be for the entire country where such was required. Conference shifts burden to the federal government The conference has now shifted the burden of deciding on the issue of derivation to the Federal Government ostensibly to avoid rocking its own boat. The decisions it took were: a) Review the percentage of revenue to states producing oil (and other resources) b) Reconstruct and rehabilitate areas affected by problems of insurgency and internal conflicts; and c) Diversify the Nigerian economy by fast-tracking the development of the solid minerals sector. Conference spokesman, James Akpandem, said: “The Conference also notes that assigning percentages for the increase in derivation principle, and setting up Special Intervention Funds to address issues of reconstruction and rehabilitation of areas ravaged by insurgency and internal conflicts as well as solid minerals development, require some technical details and considerations. “Conference therefore recommends that government should set up technical committee to determine the appropriate percentages on the three issues and advise government accordingly.” Unicameral Legislature One of the very controversial recommendations reached by the National Conference was the reversion of the current bi-cameral National Assembly, which comprises the Senate and the House of Representatives to a unicameral parliament. The implication of this is that, if finally implemented, the nation would have only one national parliament. Obviously, the logic behind this recommendation flows from the current perception of Nigerians that the bi-cameral National Assembly as presently constituted is serious financial drain on the national treasury. The National Assembly is perceived by many Nigerians as not only very corrupt, but constitutes high cost of governance in the current democracy. The proponents of unicameral parliament believe that this will enable fewer and more serious lawmakers to be elected to the National Assembly. This is not the first time such recommendations have been put forward in the country. Unfortunately, before such a decision would be taken, it is the lawmakers themselves that would do so. It is therefore doubtful, if the lawmakers, who would be affected by the new law will have the political and moral courage to lend their support to such a law. Indeed, as some political observers have noted, supporting such a proposal by the lawmakers would amount to committing political suicide. https://facebook/groups/paff.789/ Paffcomm paffcomm
Posted on: Thu, 17 Jul 2014 06:02:29 +0000
Trending Topics
© 2015