By Prof Mike Ozekhome SAN
INTRODUCTION
The first part of this treatise commenced appropriately enough with a diagnosis of the problem, with an analysis of how we ‘lost it’ after which we considered the depth of the challenge, the critical situation which presently confronts us. Today, we shall x-ray the prognosis – poor leadership, lack of an autochtonous Constitution and the ambiguous status of local governments. We shall then consider whether peace separation is a solution or not. Please read on.
PROGNOSIS
So, what is the way forward? How do we achieve the Nigeria of our dreams? How can we make democracy work for us? To be sure, there is no fail-safe or fool-proof prescription which, when applied, will suddenly transform Nigeria into an Eldorado or utopia overnight. The cliché might be well-worn, but it is nevertheless, apposite: democracy is a journey, not a destination. Therefore, the challenge – our challenge, all of us collectively – is to commit to imbibing, applying or adopting time-tested ethical values or ethos which have worked for more successful democracies across the world, including some (like the Asian Tigers, Singapore, Hongkong, South Korea, and Taiwan) which – like Nigeria – were once (not too long ago) classed as developing or third-world countries. Indeed, at independence, some of them were arguably less developed than Nigeria. So, what did they get right and we got right? That is the question.
THE BANE IS LEADERSHIP
The answer to this all-important question lies in the socio-political environment in which those seeming miracles took place. While, virtually all those countries had their fair share of military dictatorships and non-democratic (or unelected) central governments, the unmistakable common thread or denominator that they all share is that their leaders were able to galvanize their people to focus on and pursue a common goal: national unity as a bedrock for economic prosperity and sustainable growth. In other words, LEADERSHIP is key. It might also be axiomatic, but a truly effective and pan-Nigerian, selfless, patriotic and committed leadership has been the single most problematic factor behind our nation’s woes. Without such leadership, any talk of transformation is simply a mirage.
Indeed, democracy itself might even be imperiled. This self-evident fact requires little elaboration, as it takes a patriot – a genuine, committed patriot – who prioritizes that nation’s well-being above petty, partisan, political or ethnic/religious interests to deliver on Nigeria’s promise and potential. In other words, a statesman who can see the big picture and envision a country that thrives on the basis of the supremacy of the rule of law.
THE LACK OF AUTOCHTHONOUS CONSTITUTION
This takes us to the next most important ingredient in the tool-kit: legal and/or constitutional reform, and its sub-text: electoral reform. I have spoken extensively about my belief in the shortcomings of the present Constitution. Those views have not changed. Let me reiterate my position that nothing short of a total overhaul of the military-bequeathed contraption called “the 1999 Constitution” (a mere Schedule attached to Decree 24 of 1999) will have the credibility and legitimacy needed to secure the legitimacy, credibility and acceptance (if not obedience) of the overwhelming majority of Nigeria.
We must fashion a brand new Constitution in the style of the independence (1960) Constitution which was negotiated by the then three regions, North, East and West through their elected leaders; as did America between May and September, 1787 in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Unfortunately, military adventurists did not allow that experiment to stand the test of time before truncating it along with the 1st Republic. A corollary to this constitutional overhaul is the (arguably even more important) issue of Electoral Reform. The tradition or practice of a 4-year review of our Electoral Act has not stemmed the incidence of pre-election and post-electoral disputation in courts and tribunals – and even violence. The challenge in his regard (like the other aspects of our multidimensional ills) has been – more than anything else – attitudinal: our political class and their foot soldiers should adopt and internalize the culture of good sportsmanship.
Electoral contests should cease being so bitterly disputed and, should, instead be replaced with the spirit of the winners being magnanimous in victory while the losers are gracious in defeat. Elections are not do-or-die affairs. No. Even in a party democracy where the winner takes it all, our electoral outcomes ought to reflect the spirit of our old-new national anthem so that its revival will be meaningful.
This prescription (coupled with the often-suggested establishment of an Electoral Offences Court as well as the reduction in electoral cases which go up to the Supreme Court) ought to ensure a perceptible (if not quite dramatic) drop in election-related cases – at least those which directly challenge the outcome or results of elections.
AMBIGUOUS STATUS OF LGAs
Still on legal/constitutional reform, a related issue is the ‘ambiguous’ status of the lowest tier of government: local governments. While the Constitution (under Section 7) has always recognized their autonomy, the experience (to everyone’s knowledge) is that they have always been hostage to State Governors who stage-manage their elections and – when the tenures of their ‘elected’ officials expire – replace them with hand-picked cronies who will do their bidding and condone the non-remittance of their statutory allocations directly to them.
To his credit, the Attorney-General of the Federation, Lateef Fagbemi, SAN, has interviewed boldly through the pending case at the Supreme Court, which for that very reason, I will say no more.
PEACEFUL SEPARATION?
On a larger level, yet another elephant in the room, is the possibility of peaceful separation from those who desire it. I prefer a big, prosperous, united and stable Nigeria. However, where peaceful co-existence is not possible, what do we do? Kill ourselves? No. this is where I borrow the analysis of a commentator (Aminu Sa’ad Bali – amazingtimesng.com, June 19, 2021), who opined that separation is not necessarily about war. He cited the following as examples of Peaceful Separations:
In 1776, the USA split from the UK.
In 1830, Belgium separated from the Netherlands.
In 1965, Singapore split off from Malaysia.
In 2002, East Timor got split off from Indonesia.
In 1921, Ireland split off from the United Kingdom, and (possibly in the future) there will be secession of Scotland.
In 1944, Iceland split from Denmark with remarkable ease.
In 1905, Norway split from Denmark.
In 1905, Norway and Sweden also peacefully split ways.
In 1947, the British India Dominion was partitioned into India and Pakistan.
In 1971, Bangladesh seceded from Pakistan.
In 1992-93, the two parts of Czechoslovakia agreed to each go their own way, leading to two separate countries – the Czech Republic and Slovakia after what’s been named the “Velvet Divorce”.
About the same time, another kind of separation occurred, in Yugoslavia. Unfortunately, this was accompanied by bloodshed.
In 1965, Singapore split from Malaysia for reasons, which included religion (Malaysia is majority Muslim, Singapore isn’t), ethnic/racial (Singapore has a very large majority Chinese population) and concerns over the Malaysian Bumiputra policy, which was (and is) basically a form of “Affirmative Action” for Muslim Malaysians – who make up the majority population in Peninsular Malaysia.
Ethiopia and Eritrea, Sudan and South Sudan are now separate countries.
The old USSR (Soriet) is now broken down into several independent countries.
To the foregoing, I can agree only to the extent that separation is an avenue for healthy competition for development, as in the case of Singapore and Malaysia, India and Pakistan, Norway/Denmark/Switzerland, etc; but not for the sake of it.
In the case of Nigeria, I foresee a healthy rivalry among the original component parts, the North, West and South, each making useful progress while competing with the others. Accordingly, it is not about war; after all, there is nothing wrong for one to decide he is no longer comfortable with the union and wanting to opt out. We call it self determination – a concept recognized by the UNO Charter.
PERCEPTION OF PUBLIC OFFICE HOLDERS
Related to the question of attitude is public perception at the seeming insensitivity of our public officers. In this regard, a lot of disquiet (if not anger) was generated by the news of legislators earmarking the humongous sums of ₦160m to purchase SUVs for each member of the National Assembly. This development was particularly irksome against the backdrop of the lingering (often contentious) issue of a national minimum wage for public workers with government conceding a mere non-living wage of N60,000. This, coupled with other news of more humongous amounts of money – a minimum of ₦500m reportedly earmarked (in some cases, actually collected/received – as so-called constituency allowances by the legislators, contributes in no small measure in eroding public confidence in democracy – or at least our peculiar brand, if not practice, of it. What about two new presidential jets said to have cost a bleeding country like Nigeria a whopping billions of naira. Nigerians believe that the president and legislators should embrace the somber mood of the country and avoid lawlessness and ostentation.
Once again, it is a question of trust or perception that our leaders are either insensitive or simply out of touch with our common reality: the daily grind which is the reality of the common man, given the sheer (and rising) cost of living, rampant inflation and the ever falling nature of the Naira. So this is another issue that needs to be tackled if democracy is to remain attractive to the average Nigerian as a viable governance model: the insensitivity of our elected representatives to the public perception of their lifestyles and incomes/emoluments/perks of office as being out of sync with the hardship which is their lot, and which, has indeed become a new normal.
Our elected leaders must look inward, and do serious introspection and soul-searching by making conscious, deliberate choices which project them as considerate, frugal and sensitive to the economic realities of the time. They must address the popular belief that part of the pressure on the Naira is caused by their demand for foreign currencies (especially the dollar) which is publicly–perceived to be the currency of choice of the political elite, particularly public office holders. (To be continued).
THOUGHT FOR THE WEEK
“In politics, nothing happens by accident. If it happens, you can bet it was planned that way”. – Franklin D. Roosevelt.
Other Articles
