Curbing elite greed is the restructuring Nigeria needs

Restructuring. This is the newest buzz word that is trending now in the Nigerian political firmament –   albeit with daily increasing intensity of expression, and unmistakeably ominous portends. For the past couple of months there seems to be an unprecedented spike in the clamour for restructuring of Nigeria on an expanded scale whereby even […]

Restructuring. This is the newest buzz word that is trending now in the Nigerian political firmament –   albeit with daily increasing intensity of expression, and unmistakeably ominous portends. For the past couple of months there seems to be an unprecedented spike in the clamour for restructuring of Nigeria on an expanded scale whereby even many hitherto complacent citizens, have joined the call for a new political arrangement for the country. In various parts of the country the call for restructuring had remained at the level of mere agitation until the dramatic intervention by Nnamdi Kanu – the self styled Supreme Leader of the secessionist Independent People of Biafra (IPOB) movement , when he called for the May 27th 2017 sit-at-home protest by Ibos, in all of what he and his co-travellers referred to as ‘Biafra land’. The qualified success of that sit-at-home protest by his supporters manifested in the disruption of normal businesses and closure of markets in major Ibo and some non-Ibo towns on that day. 

This development generated sharp reactions across the country which included the issuance of an ultimatum by a pro-Northern youth group calling on all Ibos to leave the Northern part of the country on before October 1st 2017.  These two developments seemed to have unleashed the hitherto, relatively restrained league of forces arrayed against the continued existence of Nigeria under the aegis of unity in diversity. As if acting on cue, the various lobbies for re-arranging  the Nigerian nation simply jumped out of their closets to tear at the country, each pulling in a different direction.  

While the call for restructuring is rising in decibel on a daily basis, the main challenge associated with the dispensation remains the lack of uniformity in intentions and advocacy for restructuring. For instance, some are calling for a Sovereign National Conference (SNC), where the country will negotiate afresh, terms of co-habitation by the constituent ethnic groups. Meanwhile, others are asking for amendments to the existing structure based on the operational 1999 Constitution. Yet others are asking for restructuring models that are at variance with the afore-mentioned. As a high point of the restructuring campaign, even the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) recently caved in under pressure to restructure the country, and set up a committee for that purpose with governor of Kaduna State Nasir el Rufai as its Chairman. 

Ordinarily, calls for restructuring of the country cannot in any way qualify as intrinsically obnoxious. Given the history of the formation of the country – courtesy of the administrative enterprise of Lord Frederick Lugard in furtherance of British colonial interests, especially with respect to the lack of consultation of and consensus among the federating units over their willingness to co-exist in a single country, its foundation is therefore expectedly defective. Hence, while Nigeria may have been launched in 1914 with a full complement of weaknesses, which are associated with contradictions and even paradoxes that derive from extant political and economic polarities among the constituent ethnic groups, the situation does not necessarily dictate that the best outcome of that dispensation, is a nation that is perpetually at war with itself. 

Besides, when after over a century of existence of this country, with deep seated intermingling by elements of its constituent groups, the same concerns and fears are expressed by succeeding generations of its elite, the situation constitutes a paradox of ontological dimension. After all, why must the same worries of imperfection of the Nigerian federation as expressed by politicians in the 1950s remain unchanged throughout the 1960s, 1970s, 1980s, 1990s, 2000s, and even today in 2017? This is even as the rest of the world has been marching on with rapid turnover of significant transformations of critical determinants of daily living such as in demography, technology, business and politics, to name a few?

That is why a proactive focus of discourse on the circumstances of change in the Nigerian situation needs to gravitate beyond the traditional premise of blaming the hangover of British colonial rule, with respect to enthronement of ethnic based politics. Rather more tenable is a focus on the circumstances of the succeeding indigenous leadership community in the years since the country’s independence in 1960. If adopted, this approach betrays the stark reality that the perennial stagnation of the Nigerian society enjoys a direct correlation with the rape of the nation’s common patrimony by elements of the political elite. Succinctly put, the story of Nigeria is simply that of how successive leaders under-developed their own country, by looting its resources under their watch, in a mindless play-out of greed.

It was the great Mahatma Ghandi of India who once said that “the world has enough for every man’s need but not enough for one man’s greed”. Even if he did not say so, his observation acutely captures the Nigerian sordid drama of wilful decimation of the country by the very elite to which the citizenry have entrusted their collective destiny.  Just think of the several instances of diversion of public funds to private pockets, with the culprits not bothered in the least about the consequences of the outrageous enterprise.  The latest instance in the endless outrage of theft of public funds is the case of Mrs Diezani Allison Maduekwe. This former Petroleum Minister is reported to have just forfeited through court order, exotic properties worth billions of naira. Yet there is no tarred road to her home town Nembe in Bayelsa State, even as she also left the nation’s petroleum sector in tatters.

 With respect to the deafening clamour for restructuring, the APC administration has acted commendably by setting up the El Rufai committee to address that challenge. However when viewed in the light of the humongous scope of restructuring which Nigeria needs, the El Rufai committee has at best been floundering, with little promise of offering value to the country.  Given that its mandate borders on a mission that is central to the evolution of a new, more functional Nigeria, the least that was expected of them was to hit the road running. But that seems not to be even as Nigerians await them to lead the charge.

The El Rufai committee can still acquit itself if it identifies with a wider context of the restructuring imperative as being beyond the political dimension,  and thereby make the processes of Nigeria’s democracy reflect the voice of all Nigerians. When the Nigerians freely get their voices, they will determine what is best for the country, outside the narrow prescriptions of the greed of the high and mighty. 

Tall order one may say!