Constitution review and remaking Nigeria

Indeed, Nigerians need not be reminded that we have come to a point where sobereity must prevail over narrow group interests to wade through dire circumstances which our jumbled federalism presents today. It is a federalism thoroughly unmade by successive military rule for reasons all of us know. But the “good” news is that the […]

Indeed, Nigerians need not be reminded that we have come to a point where sobereity must prevail over narrow group interests to wade through dire circumstances which our jumbled federalism presents today. It is a federalism thoroughly unmade by successive military rule for reasons all of us know. But the “good” news is that the repercussions of the long years of unmaking Nigerian federal arrangement have been so viciously visited on the nation in recent years such that even the ostrich has lost courage to bury its head in the sand. The sand has apparently become overbearingly heated by the combined forces of poverty, endless ethno-religious crises, and terror which have cheapened life and taken the nation to the fringes of Somalia. The substitution of fiscal federalism that ought to engender prudence and wealth creation with what Senator Ekweremadu sometime ago described as “feeding bottle federalism” have institutionalised indolence, ineptitude, corruption, and poverty. We are all paying for it.

However, the priority areas drawn by the Senate Committee on Constitution Review during its retreat in Asaba from the consolidated memoranda and submissions made by Nigerians in the 6th and the current National Assembly are clear indications that we are beginning to realise the imperatives of remaking Nigeria or risk leaving posterity with no choice than to spit on the graves of their fathers. God forbid. In fact, ours is the case of a rabbit smoked out of its hole of daydreaming and torpor with those little, vicious local peppers.

One must therefore salute the courage shown by the Senate in bringing to the fore critical issues such as awkward power sharing between the centre and federating units which has produced an “almighty” federal government that has largely failed to acquit itself creditably in managing over-bloated powers. The other is the creation of a state in the South East. This, I guess, is striking a middle-ground between avoiding states proliferation which has not been really been profitable to the nation and at the same time correcting the military-induced imbalances and injustice in states creation. Likewise, the upholding of the desire by Nigerians to rework the nation’s fiscal federalism without compromising the wellbeing of all constituent parts is at the heart of our survival and prosperity as a federal entity. It is also laudable that Nigerians now have the opportunity to decide if they would rather continue with “Indigene” in Section 42 of the 1999 Constitution which has been substantially blamed for the bloodletting and poor integration in the country or go for “Residency” which would give every Nigerian full right wherever he/she lives. It does not make sense that an Osun man born, bred, resident, and paying tax in Kaura Namoda cannot access the basic rights intrinsic in his being a Nigerian because he is an “indigene” of a far-flung state he knows so little about. Another critical matter is that of state police where Nigerians are now to decide whether our present security challenges have taught us any lessons or we are to continue with a federal monopoly that is always “on top of the situation”.

Importantly, I just rounded off a few weeks programme at the Sung Kyun Kwan University, Seoul, South Korea. I took up the issue of the 5-year single term with a respected Professor when I read about Professor Elaigwu’s proposition for a single 5-year term at the Senate retreat. South Korea’s adoption of 5-year single term was influenced by the nation’s antecedents in authoritarianism. The last of it, even though a benevolent one that literally transformed the nation to one of the world’s leading economies and No 1 in many other respects, was that of President Park. 5-year single term has made it compelling on South Korean Presidents to perform, with each successive regime building on the successes and foundations laid by predecessors. No one eye on governance and another on the next election which by the way leads Presidents to do or condone things they would not have done/condoned. There is no scrapping them to assert oneself only to beg for another tenure to “complete the good work.” Every good work must begin and end in 5-years or left for a successor to complete. But above all, Koreans wanted to build strong institutions in place of strongmen. A 5-year term, they believed, would check executive excesses, especially by not allowing Presidents enough time to weaken and exploit the institutions/system. And if a mono-ethnic nation like South Korea could settle for a single 5-year term, how much more an ethno-religious gunpowder like ours where a faster “Turn-by-turn Nigeria Ltd” appears the only assurance to oiling the wheels of stability.

Talking about building strong institutions, former Korean leaders who tried to exploit the system always paid the price. Former Presidents Kim Dae-Jung and Kim Young-Sam’s children went to jail for corruption. Former Presidents Roh Tae-woo and Chun Doo-Hwan were also jailed after it was discovered that they solicited hundreds of millions of dollars from the nation’s blue chip companies. In fact, former President Roh Moo-Hyun committed suicide by jumping off the cliff of a high mountain on May 23, 2009 after admitting to charges of corruption. He regretted in his suicide note that he “made the life of too many people difficult”. And looking at the fact that this natural resources bankrupt nation could leap into the league of developed economies and from a few US Dollars per capita in the 60s/70s to a USD20,000 per capita today, one cannot but agree that their 5-year single term is serving them pretty well.

For this round of constitution amendment, therefore, I would prefer to say that Nigerians are presented with a lifetime opportunity to remake Nigeria. All narrow group interests should make way for the larger interests of justice, structural balance and health, and indeed the good governance, justice, and prosperity of Nigeria. Instructively, the project enjoys the benefit of experience as Senator Ike Ekweremadu who not only chaired the last Senate Committee on Constitution Review, but has been largely credited with successfully driving the processes remains on the driver’s seat with a handful of “old-timers” like Senator Ndoma Egba. It also draws extensive public expectations, success prospects, impetus and credibility from the success of the 6th National Assembly in amending the Constitution previous serial failures.

Uche Anichukwu is a public affairs analyst, based in Abuja