In search of more powers for Character Commission

This is considered necessary because the Nigerian Federation has experienced more than a fair share of ethnic and sectional agitation, public outcry and disenchantment over issues of distribution of projects among the various federating units. It is worthy of note that the FCC was primarily established as a panacea to the mounting concerns of the […]

This is considered necessary because the Nigerian Federation has experienced more than a fair share of ethnic and sectional agitation, public outcry and disenchantment over issues of distribution of projects among the various federating units.

It is worthy of note that the FCC was primarily established as a panacea to the mounting concerns of the various federating groups to implement programmes designed to ensure fair and equitable distribution of posts at all levels of government as well as socioeconomic services, amenities and infrastructural facilities.

Sponsored by Rep. Kaka Kyari Gujbawu (PDP, Borno), the legislation, according to Gujbawu will provide for an equitable distribution of government projects across the country.

During debate on its general principles and merits on the floor of the Green Chamber Gujbawu argued that the legislation, if passed, will prevent public officers from using their offices to unfairly allocate disproportionate amount of budgeted fund to projects located in their constituency, state or geopolitical zone.

Expressing support for the bill, Rep. Betty Apiafi (PDP, Rivers), said the House should go further to stipulate penalty for breach of the Act as the ones listed were outdated.

But Rep. Zakari Mohammed (PDP, Kwara) called for the rejection of the bill saying there were enough provisions in the 1999 constitution to take care of the amendment sought. But majority of the MPs threw their weight behind it which explains why it was referred to the House Committee on Federal Character for further legislative input.

Proponents of the new legislation contented that it would enable the commission to effectively enforce the principles of equity and fairness in the location and distribution of federal government projects by ensuring that public officers comply with rules and regulations issued by the FCC with respect to projects for any given budget period.

Despite being confronted by a society inherent with inequalities in various ramifications, it is a public knowledge that projects in Nigeria are largely distributed on the basis of influences from heads of government Ministries, Departments and Agencies (MDAs) as the “who syndrome” is the order of the day.

Ineffeciancy of the FCC to enforce its mandate as government watchdog in identifying and addressing inequalities is increasingly worrisome to Nigerians.

A cursory look at the Act establishing the commission reveals that it is laden with contravention of the 1999 constitution as regards section 4 subsection 1a which states thus: “To work out an equitable formula, subject to the approval of the President for distribution of all cadres of posts in the public services of the Federation and of states, the armed forces, the Nigeria Police Force and other security agencies, bodies corporate owned by the Federal or state governments and Extra-Ministerial Departments and parastatals of the Federation and states,”.

This clause is in sharp contravention of the constitution in the Third schedule, part 1, section 8 which states inter alia, “work out an equitable formula subject to the approval of the National Assembly for the distribution of all cadres of posts”.

Now, the argument here is that where the President is to approve whatever formula the commission comes up with then the supreme law of the land is being violated because as the saying goes, “he who owns the piper dictates the tune”. The President appoints the FCC chairman and its commissioners and where they give him a formula and he changes it apparently they cannot do otherwise. Since the extant Act is predicated on the discretionary powers of the President to approve equitable formula proposed by the commission, this explains why no equitable formula is ever adopted for distribution of infrastructural facilities in Nigeria.

The proposed amendments read thus: “Funds of the federal government designated for projects shall be appropriated in a way that each state shall be entitled to such percentage of the fund as it receives under the prevailing revenue allocation formula as adopted by the Revenue Mobilisation Allocation and Fiscal Commission without prejudice to the power of the federal government to undertake and supervise the execution of approved projects”. The same amendment is also proposed for the states and companies in which government has 40 percent or more share holding interest.

To ensure compliance, section 6 is being proposed thus: “The annual budgetary proposals by any ministry, extra-ministerial department or agency for provision of socioeconomic services, amenities and infrastructural facilities shall be made in consultation with the commission for the purpose of compliance with the provisions of this bill”.

As a penalty, chief executives of agencies who violates the law in appointments or budgeting, the commission upon conviction is mandated to recommend dismissal of such chief executive to the President and where the President fails to act within 14 days the affected person shall be deemed to have been dismissed.

If this law becomes effective, it will hardly matter to any ethnic group or section of the country which controls the central government or any ministry, department or agency since their appropriate share of resources is not only guaranteed but also protected by the proposed law.

The inclusion of the word “unequivocale” in the new alteration, according to its proponents, “is to remove ambiguity in the existing law” as to what is “even distribution” of national resources since the present formula of revenue allocation used by the Revenue Mobilisation Allocation and Fiscal Commission (RMAFC) will be used to allocate resources evenly among the 36 states of the Federation.

There is also a historical perspective of why the different ethnic groups in Nigeria tussle to control the Federal Government. It is generally believed that fear of being marginalised in the apportioning of Federal Government resources and employment on the civil service.

Groups also battle for so called “grade A” ministries and agencies so as to take advantage of citing government projects in their regions.

Today, there are many government agencies in which some states do not have a single staff working not because there are no qualified and competent people from those states but simply because the law is set aside for selfish and personal interest. Definitely, no society can achieve greatness and social cohesion in an atmosphere of such grave inequalities.

This legislation, if passed by the National Assembly, its promoters believe, will be a suitable measure to realise the intention of the Federal Character principle in this regards as it would enable actual prescription of enforceable rules and regulations for equitable and fair distribution of socioeconomic services in Nigeria.