Connect with us

Opinion

The Oracle: Why Nigeria Needs Restructuring (Pt. 6)

Published

on

By Mike Ozekhome

INTRODUCTION

Schmitt, C, in his book ‘Constitutional Theory’, insists that for the Constitutional-making process to be considered to be fully democratic, it must pass through five stages. According to him, all previously constituted authorities must first be dissolved, followed by a popularly elected or acclaimed assembly with a sovereign power. The assembly then begins to function as the government on a provisional basis. Next, a new Constitution is drafted and offered to the people to be ratified in a national, popular referendum. As soon as the draft Constitution is finally ratified, the constituent assembly will be dissolved and a new government will be duly formed under the new Constitution. On this note, we are concluding our series on this vexed issue.

A SOVEREIGN NATIONAL CONFERENCE?

We believe that this is what is borne in mind by those calling for a Sovereign National Conference (SNC). It is understandable why this call is loudest among those in the opposition, while those in power tends to turn a deaf ear to it, because if this is implemented, they are going to lose their positions.

The truth of the matter is that if Nigeria truly wants to continue to be one indivisible entity and silence the various agitations for self-determination, it cannot shy away from the Sovereign National Conference. There is no amount of amendment of the present Constitution that can truly address the discontent and mutual distrust between the various ethnic nationalities. There must be an avenue where the people can meet and freely decide the way they want to stay together in a nation and be governed. Call it a Sovereign National Conference, Constitutional Conference, Constituent Assembly or simply National Conference, but the body must have the full power (sovereign power) to enact a new Constitution which can only be ratified by the people in a national referendum, devoid of any interference by any governmental authority. This is the only way we can stop running in a circle as a nation.

A NEW CONSTITUTION: HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVES

Nigeria needs a new people-driven Constitution. It is not rocket sign. It has been done before by other countries.

IRAQ

THE CONSTITUTION OF IRAQ AND REFERENDUM

The first Monarchial Constitution of the Republic of Iraq came into force in 1925 and existed till the 1958 Revolution which established a Republic.

The current Constitution was adopted on September 18, 2005, by the Transitional National Assembly of Iraq, and confirmed by a constitutional referendum, held on October 15, 2005.It was published on December 28, 2005, in the Official Gazette of Iraq (No. 4012), in Arabic original, and thus came into force.

IRAN

THE DECEMBER 1979 IRANIAN CONSTITUTIONAL REFERENDUM

A proposed new Constitution which would make Iran an Islamic Republic, introduce direct elections for the presidency, create a unicameral parliament and require any constitutional changes to go a referendum was proposed by the Iranian Government. To bring this about, a constitutional referendum was held in Iran on 2ndand 3rd December, 1979. The new Islamic constitution was approved by 99.5% of voters at the Referendum.

BANGLADESH

THE 1991 BANGLADESHI CONSTITUTIONAL REFERENDUM

constitutional referendum was held in Bangladesh on 15th September, 1991. Voters were asked “Should or not the President assent to the Constitution (Twelfth Amendment) Bill, 1991 of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh?” The amendments altered the existing Constitution and reintroduced of Parliamentary system of government. It also abolished the position of Vice-President and provided that the President be elected by Parliament. 83.6% of Bangladeshis voted in the referendum, with a turnout of 35.2%.

ERITREA

CONSTITUTION MAKING IN ERITREA

The Eritrea’s Proclamation 55/1994 established a Constitutional Commission which organized popular participation in the process of a new Constitution.

The Commission members and more than four hundred specially trained teachers instructed the public on constitutional issues and related political and social questions using local vernaculars. The process took three years to solicit the views of a broad cross section of Eritreans. The participation of a majority of Eritreans gave the people a “sense of ownership of the Constitution”.

THE AMERICAN EXAMPLE OF A PEOPLE’S CONSTITUTION

As a great contrast to the 1999 Nigerian experience, when America became independent from Britain in 1776, it held a Constitutional Convention under the leadership of George Washington, between May 14 and September 17, 1776, in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. 55 delegates represented the autonomous Confederates, with a view to creating a “more perfect union”. Broad outlines of a new union were proposed and hotly debated. This was how the American people achieved a federal system of Government, separation of powers among three branches of Government (Legislative, Executive and Judicial); bicameral, legislature; an Executive presidency; and Judicial Review. The Constitutional draft was signed by 39 of the 55 delegates on September 17, 1787; and thereafter released to the States and the American people to debate and ratify. It was this people’s Constitution that threw up great founders, such as George Washington (first president); Alexander Hamilton, James Madison and John Jay (the Federalists), Thomas Jefferson, etc.

The 1999 Constitutions lacks these. It is not autochthonous or indigenous Being imposed, it worsened the unitary nature of government, and concentrated enormous powers at the centre. While the 1979 Constitution had 67 items on the exclusive legislative list, and 12 items on the concurrent list, the 1999 Constitution increase this to 68 on the exclusive list, but retained only 12 items on the concurrent list. This indicates an unacceptable unbearably strong centre and very weak federating units.

OUR CONCLUSION

The unity, development and peaceful co-existence of Nigeria as a country are currently imperial. Our diversities in area of culture language, tribe, and religion, must be seen by all as a Dolly Parton’s Coat of Many Colours, blessing and not a curse, because variety they say, is the spice of life. Concerted effort must be put in place by formulation of policies and reforms that would help promote national integration and peaceful co-existence. However, one of the strategies that must be pursued to ensure a far-reaching national integration and peaceful co-existence are to create a meeting point that would ensure and enhance integration between one ethnic nationality or tribe and another. One of the ways by which this noble idea can be achieved is by putting up a strong advocacy and support for intertribal and interreligious marriage.

Philosophers, many say, have understood the world, but the problem is to change it. Albert Einsten’s dictum is apposite here: “we cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them” Hippocrates the father of medicine once told us that desperate diseases requires desperate remedies. An economy based on oil and other depleting natural resources is fast becoming obsolete. The global economy is already in the 4th Industrial Revolution or digital age, dominated by Robotics, Artificial intelligence, Machine learning, Virtual reality, Augmented Reality and others. At the moment, Nigeria is largely bypassed and still grappling with the most basic aspects of the old economy.  But given its geographic- demographic conundrum, Nigeria has to leapfrog the industrialization value chain or stagnate. Yet its institutions are those woven around the distribution and consumption of oil rents and the old economy.  A system designed for consumption cannot be expected to become efficient for competition and production in the 21st century. Sadly, many people miss this point. As Professor Claude Ake once put it, Nigeria operates a disarticulate economy, where we produce what we don’t consume and consume what we don’t produce.

For a change since the military incursion into our body politics, let us sit down and craft a new Constitution that not only provides for a stable, equitable and just polity but even more so focuses on the incentive structure to usher a competitive and productive economy of the future.

Reforms at the meta-level would entail either embracing our discarded Prime Minister system of government or dismantling and recoupling several of the institutions that help or hinder us, including a serious re-examination of the 36 state structure as federating units vis-à-vis their fiscal/economic viability or their consolidation into six or more regions with economies of scale and higher investment rates; multiple vice-presidency representing respective regions other than the region of the president, each with supervising powers over certain ministries to ensure equitable representation at the federal cabinet (the Central Bank has four Deputy Governors for instance); principle of equality of regions; multivariate judicial systems with state/regional appellate courts up to regional supreme courts while the federal supreme court becomes the constitutional court— and this is to decongest the centralized system and guarantee speedy dispensation of justice; introduction of commercial courts for speedy resolution of commercial disputes; institution of merit and equal opportunity principle; etc. This will carry the majority along.

Devolution of functions between the central and federating states/regions should be guided by the principle of subsidiary. According to the European Charter, subsidiary means that:  “Public responsibilities shall generally be exercised, in preference, by those authorities which are closest to the citizen. Allocation of the responsibility to another authority should weigh up the extent and nature of the task and requirements of efficiency and economy“. This principle is not observed in the 1999 Constitution. For a Constitution that proclaims a federal structure, the exclusive and concurrent lists constitute an atypical concentration of powers at the centre. Currently, the federal government is burdened with hundreds of parastatals and agencies trying to inefficiently micro manage the entire Nigeria, with the recurrent expenditure of the federal government exceeding total federal revenue. Every penny of capital spending by the Federal Government of Nigeria (FGN) is borrowed, and its fiscal position is precarious. Put starkly, not one kobo of oil money is invested in infrastructure by the FGN: it is all consumed by the obtuse federal bureaucracy. The federal government should loosen its hold on policing, electricity (power), railways, ports, aviation, business incorporation, taxation powers, regulatory functions, etc. This will generate the economy.

The greatest challenge is how to get some of the elite whose privileges are provided by the existing system to support its dismantling into a system that is potentially beneficial to ‘society’ but perhaps disproportionately harmful to their interests in the short term. In other words, we are faced with the same kind of conundrum as some western countries with their welfare system. Having designed and implemented it for generations, it has grown into an unsustainable octopus of inefficiency but reforming it is not easy.  In the US, millions of voters are hooked to the feeding bottle and its government keeps postponing the day of reckoning by borrowing to keep the system alive (the US, with the global reserve currency can afford to borrow for a while from the rest of the world but Nigeria cannot). Everywhere, such a distributional system has acquired a huge and powerful constituency, and the political cost of dismantling and recoupling is not trivial. There is also an intergenerational issue involved. The present beneficiaries don’t care if the same benefits do not extend to the future generations: they just want to have their share and go, and let the future generations take care of themselves. Nigeria cannot continue to share the national cake without caring how it is baked.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Opinion

When Architecture of Policy Meets Architecture of Connection

Published

on

By

By Shakirat Akintola

For many political observers, the proposition of an Atiku-Momodu ticket represents a fascinating answer to Nigeria’s complex governance puzzle. The conversation is rapidly moving past the two personalities involved, evolving into a broader debate about national cohesion, credibility, and the precise qualities required to steady a fractured nation.

Atiku Abubakar, having recently emerged as the presidential candidate for the African Democratic Congress (ADC) following a fiercely contested and highly scrutinized nationwide primary election, remains one of the most resilient figures in Nigeria’s democratic journey. His institutional memory is vast. As the Vice President who chaired the National Economic Council during one of Nigeria’s most consequential eras of economic restructuring and privatization, he understands the levers of state policy.

Yet, in a nation fractured along regional, religious, and generational lines, policy blueprints alone are no longer enough. The opposition faces a distinct hurdle: Nigerians already know who Atiku is. The challenge is not building recognition, but establishing a genuine, empathetic connection with the deep frustrations of the grassroots. This is precisely where Aare Dele Momodu enters the equation.

To view Momodu strictly through the glamorous lens of Ovation International is to misunderstand the deliberate philosophy behind his media empire. While critics might initially mistake his chronicling of high society for elite insulation, his career has actually functioned as a masterclass in breaking down walls. For decades, Momodu did not just document success; he demystified it, bringing the corridors of power and privilege directly to the gaze of the ordinary citizen. More importantly, this deep social capital was forged in the fires of grassroots defiance. Long before he was a celebrated publisher, Momodu was a pro-democracy activist who faced detention and forced exile during the dark days of the Abacha regime for standing with the masses. His ability to navigate corporate boardrooms today is not a sign of detachment from the struggle, but a powerful asset. It means the opposition gains a communicator who can walk into spaces of immense privilege, speak truth to power in their own language, and channel that access directly back into the service of Nigeria’s markets, classrooms, and farming communities.

A Referendum on Lived Realities

The ongoing security and economic trials illustrate exactly why a balance of institutional experience and cultural reach matters. For a parent deciding between school fees and healthcare, or a trader calculating the risks of interstate highways, governance is not a theoretical debate.

The next election will not be won by campaign slogans or aggressive social media strategies. It will be decided by trust. While the ruling party scrambles to convince a strained populace that their sacrifices will yield future rewards, the opposition must present a credible, steady, and comforting alternative.

Nigeria’s future will ultimately be shaped by leaders who look beyond political echo chambers and actively listen to the markets, classrooms, and farming communities. As the country continues its difficult search for stability, the political figures capable of building a bridge between sound policy and genuine human empathy will inevitably command the attention of a nation eager to move forward.

Continue Reading

Opinion

Why Dele Momodu May Be Atiku’s Smartest Running Mate Option Yet

Published

on

By

By Michael Abimboye

As the African Democratic Congress, ADC, gradually consolidates its coalition ahead of the 2027 presidential election, attention has inevitably shifted from the emergence of Atiku Abubakar as presidential candidate to the more delicate and strategic question of his running mate.

Several names have surfaced in political calculations and media speculation: Rotimi Amaechi, Emeka Ihedioha, and Dele Momodu, among them. Yet, beyond the noise of conventional political arithmetic lies a deeper electoral question: who among these options best expands Atiku’s coalition beyond traditional structures and into the modern political battlefield Nigeria has become?

Increasingly, the answer may well be Dele Momodu.

For years, Nigerian politics has operated under an outdated assumption that electoral victory is secured merely through governors, party leaders, and regional strongmen. The 2023 election disrupted that orthodoxy. The emergence of Peter Obi demonstrated that digital momentum, perception management, emotional resonance, and transregional appeal can significantly alter the political equation. Obi’s strongest weapon was not necessarily party structure. It was narrative dominance.

That reality has permanently changed Nigerian politics.

And in the current ADC coalition conversation, Dele Momodu may be one of the few figures who intuitively understands this new political environment.

Unlike many career politicians whose influence remains confined to state structures or elite caucuses, Momodu operates in multiple political ecosystems simultaneously: media, diplomacy, youth engagement, elite networking, pan-African influence, and digital communication. In modern electoral politics, that multidimensional relevance matters enormously.

One of Momodu’s most understated assets is his continental reach. Through decades of media work, political engagement, and elite interaction across Africa, he has cultivated relationships with presidents, former presidents, business leaders, diplomats, and intellectual figures across the continent. His network is not speculative mythology. It is publicly visible and historically documented through his long-running engagements as publisher of Ovation International and participant in high-level African political circles.

At a time when Nigeria seeks to reassert itself diplomatically and economically within Africa, such soft-power capital becomes politically valuable. A vice-presidential candidate today is no longer merely a ceremonial electoral appendage. He must also communicate competence, cosmopolitanism, and international legitimacy.

Momodu fits that profile more naturally than many conventional politicians. There is also the geographical intelligence behind his potential candidacy.

Though widely perceived nationally as a South-West figure because of his strong Yoruba cultural identity and media dominance in Lagos and the South-West, Dele Momodu is fundamentally from the South-South axis through his Edo roots. Politically, this creates a rare advantage. It allows the ADC to potentially tap into two strategic regions simultaneously without provoking the sharp regional anxieties that often accompany vice-presidential selections.

Amaechi, for instance, undoubtedly possesses political experience and administrative depth. But his polarising history in Rivers politics, coupled with his own presidential ambitions, complicates the chemistry required of a running mate. Indeed, reports have repeatedly suggested Amaechi has little interest in a vice-presidential role.

Ihedioha, meanwhile, brings stability and technocratic moderation, but lacks the national media visibility and emotional connection necessary for a fiercely competitive national election. Elections are not won only by competence. They are won by energy, narrative, symbolism, and visibility.
Dele Momodu possesses all four.

Then comes perhaps the most important factor of all: communication.

The 2027 election is unlikely to resemble previous Nigerian elections. It will be heavily digitised, media-driven, youth-influenced, and psychologically contested online. The political establishment still underestimates how profoundly social media has altered electoral mobilisation. The Obi movement in 2023 proved that online enthusiasm can shape national conversation, pressure traditional media, influence undecided voters, and energise urban youth demographics.

Momodu enters this terrain with an already established digital infrastructure.

Unlike many politicians who outsource communication to media aides, Dele Momodu himself is a communication institution. He understands headlines, optics, timing, public emotion, narrative construction, and audience psychology. His social media platforms command enormous engagement across demographics that traditional politicians often struggle to reach organically.

That matters.

In a coalition environment where ADC must unify disillusioned PDP voters, attract soft Obidients, retain Northern numerical strength, and penetrate urban youth constituencies, communication sophistication becomes central to survival.

Momodu also carries an outsider-insider advantage. He is politically experienced enough to understand power, yet sufficiently detached from the toxic baggage of conventional Nigerian political warfare. He has not governed a state, which critics may see as a weakness, but which supporters may frame as insulation from corruption controversies and governance fatigue associated with many old political actors.

In an anti-establishment electoral climate, that distinction could become useful.

Perhaps most importantly, Dele Momodu brings cultural elasticity. He can comfortably engage traditional rulers in Kano, intellectuals in Abuja, media elites in Lagos, young digital audiences in Port Harcourt, diaspora professionals in London, and political moderates in the South-East. Very few Nigerian political figures possess that adaptive national reach without appearing artificial.

And politics, ultimately, is the management of coalitions.

Atiku’s greatest challenge is not merely winning Northern votes. He already possesses substantial Northern recognition. His real challenge is rebuilding emotional trust across sections of Southern Nigeria while simultaneously energising younger demographics sceptical of establishment politics.

A conventional politician may help him consolidate structures.

Dele Momodu, however, may help Atiku reshape perception. And in modern politics, perception is often the first battlefield victory.

Continue Reading

Opinion

Dele Momodu: The Bridge Between Politics and the People

Published

on

By

By Adeoye Inioluwa

Across the Nigerian nation today, conversations have become remarkably similar. Whether in the crowded markets of Lagos, the farms of the North, the commercial centres of the East, or the towns and villages of the South-West and South-South, many Nigerians are asking the same questions. When will life become easier? When will the economy improve? When will businesses regain stability? When will citizens begin to feel safer and more secure in their daily lives?

The concerns are understandable.

The cost of living remains one of the most dominant issues confronting ordinary Nigerians. Food prices have become a source of daily anxiety for many families. Small businesses continue to struggle with rising operational costs. Young graduates face uncertainty about employment opportunities. For millions of citizens, conversations about economic indicators and policy reforms often feel distant from the realities they encounter every day.

Alongside these economic concerns are persistent security challenges. While progress may have been recorded in some areas, many communities still desire greater stability and peace. For ordinary citizens, security is not merely a policy issue. It is the ability to travel safely, conduct business confidently, and live without fear.

These realities inevitably shape the nation’s political mood.

President Bola Ahmed Tinubu assumed office at a time when difficult economic decisions were already looming over the country. His administration has argued that several of its reforms are necessary steps toward long-term economic recovery and sustainability. Supporters maintain that difficult transitions are sometimes required to achieve lasting change.

However, politics rarely rewards intentions alone.

Citizens ultimately judge governments through their lived experiences. They assess leadership not only through policy announcements but through the practical impact of those policies on their everyday lives. As Nigeria gradually moves closer to another election cycle, public perception of the economy, security, and governance will inevitably influence political conversations.
This reality presents both a challenge and an opportunity for the opposition.

Among the leading opposition figures remains former Vice President Atiku Abubakar, a politician whose name has become deeply woven into Nigeria’s democratic journey. Over the years, Atiku has built a reputation as one of the country’s most enduring political figures, participating in some of the most consequential electoral contests in modern Nigerian history.

Yet the challenge before Atiku today is different from the challenge he faced in previous elections.

Recognition is not the issue. Nigerians know who Atiku Abubakar is. They are familiar with his political history, his public service record, and his positions on national issues. The real question is whether opposition politics can successfully connect with the frustrations, hopes, and aspirations of ordinary Nigerians in a way that feels genuine and convincing.

For many citizens, the next election may not simply be a contest between political parties or personalities. It may become a referendum on who best understands the realities confronting everyday Nigerians.
This is why politics must move beyond publicity.

In a period marked by economic pressure and public anxiety, voters are becoming increasingly resistant to carefully crafted political narratives that appear disconnected from their lived experiences. What they seek are leaders who understand their concerns and individuals capable of translating those concerns into meaningful political engagement.

For Atiku, this may require something more valuable than conventional image management.

It requires access to voices that understand the mood of the nation.

It requires people who can move comfortably between boardrooms and marketplaces, between policy discussions and community conversations, between political strategy and public sentiment.
It requires individuals who possess not only influence but perspective.

This is where Aare Dele Momodu enters the conversation.

Perhaps what makes Aare Momodu’s position unique is that politics was never originally his defining platform. Unlike many public figures who built their reputations entirely within political structures, Momodu’s journey was shaped through journalism, publishing, entrepreneurship, and public engagement.

For decades, he cultivated relationships across various sectors of society. Through his work in the media, he interacted with presidents, governors, business leaders, diplomats, entertainers, academics, professionals, and ordinary citizens. His network was built long before his deeper involvement in political affairs.

That distinction matters.

Because it means his influence extends beyond party structures and political loyalties. It is rooted in years of listening, observing, documenting, and engaging with people from different backgrounds and perspectives.

In many ways, Momodu represents an increasingly rare asset in contemporary politics: someone capable of understanding both elite conversations and grassroots realities.

Perhaps this explains why a man who was never primarily known as a politician now finds himself at the forefront of some of the country’s most important political conversations.

His relevance is not merely a product of political ambition. It is the result of decades spent building relationships, understanding public sentiment, and maintaining connections across different segments of Nigerian society.

As the political landscape begins to evolve ahead of 2027, such qualities may become increasingly important.

The next election will not be won solely through campaign slogans, social media strategies, or political advertising. It will be influenced by trust, credibility, and the ability to connect with citizens who are searching for answers in uncertain times.

For President Tinubu, the challenge is to convince Nigerians that current sacrifices will ultimately lead to meaningful progress.
For Atiku Abubakar and the opposition, the challenge is to persuade Nigerians that they offer a credible and compelling alternative.
And for those who operate around the corridors of political influence, the challenge is to ensure that leaders remain connected to the people whose lives are affected by every policy decision.

Nigeria’s future will not be determined by image management alone. It will be shaped by ideas, solutions, trust, and meaningful engagement with the concerns of ordinary citizens.

In a nation yearning for reassurance, leaders need more than advisers who can polish their public image. They need people who can help them hear the voices that matter most.

Those voices are not found in political echo chambers. They are found in the markets, the classrooms, the farms, the offices, and the communities where Nigerians continue to navigate the realities of everyday life while hoping for a better future.

Continue Reading

Trending