More on restructuring

Readers might recall that five weeks ago I visited the nagging issue of restructuring and tried to explain it with the parable of the elephant and a group of blind men. The blind men who stumbled on the elephant touched it individually from different angles and defined if as they felt it. Obviously they were […]

Readers might recall that five weeks ago I visited the nagging issue of restructuring and tried to explain it with the parable of the elephant and a group of blind men. The blind men who stumbled on the elephant touched it individually from different angles and defined if as they felt it. Obviously they were all wrong, until one clear-eyed man came by the way to give them the complete picture. The issue of restructuring has been having this kind of treatment for many years in this country. It has been inchoate submissions all around making it difficult to collectively arrive at sensible solution. Yet the issue has refused to go away.

Last week there were reverberations of it in Lagos at the venue of the Abraham Adesanya memorial lecture. Prominent proponents of restructuring, former Secretary-General of the Commonwealth, Emeka Anyaoku and Prof Seth Akintoye were at their eloquent best appealing to our lawmakers to heed the call for restructuring as a best avenue for the realization of the Nigerian dream. Also in the same week a group of southern and middle-belt leaders led by Edwin Clark met the Senate President to canvass for a revisit to the devolution of power to prevent further drift into ethnic crisis.

During the week I also received a paper prepared by Ibrahim Ida, an elder statesman. He prepared the paper at the instance of the Northern Elders and Stakeholders Assembly (NESA). Ibrahim Ida had served the Katsina Central constituency as Senator from 2007. Ida, a well-rounded public officer had a brilliant career as a banker and thereafter came into the Federal Civil Service as Permanent Secretary. He served in key ministries, retired as Permanent Secretary Ministry of Defence and threw his hat into politics. He participated as a member in the 2014 National Conference.  

Ibrahim Ida’s paper starts with tracing the background to the agitation for restructuring going back to the early 1950s. He gave a general definition of the term pointing out that what stands out about the debate is the lack of consensus on what even the term actually means and entails. He then gave us his observations on the attitudes, stands and opinions of different groups particularly of northerners that he had made a close study. He ends the paper with specific recommendations. The paper is a formidable 4600 words and I can only share with my readers today two aspects; Ibrahim Ida’s thinking on what formats restructuring would take as well as his recommendations to the committee. For the uninitiated, his paper could even be the ABCD – Z of restructuring. Please read on:

Any contemplation of restructuring Nigeria will have to take one or a combination of the following formats:

Political Restructuring: a review of the structure and architecture of the federating units, including the creation of more states and the decision whether or not local governments should constitute a part of the federation units. Decision might also be taken on the establishment of State Police and the removal of control of land resources from the government to individuals by the repeal of the Land Use Act.

Devolution of Power: Review of the second schedule of the constitution to transfer some functions from the exclusive to the concurrent lists so as to reduce the over concentration of power at the centre and to make the lower tiers of government more functional. A review of revenue allocation formula will be necessary to allow more financial flex to the lower tiers to enable them meet the demands of the additional functions to be devolved.

·Resource Control/Fiscal Federalism: Review of the provision that vests the ownership and control of all mineral resources on the Federal Government. This should allow some leverage to states and local governments to keep revenues associated with the exploitation of such resources and only pay taxes to the Federal Government.

True Federalism: A review to allow the lower tiers of government to handle functions that relate directly to the people with the higher tier confining itself to such bigger functions of defence and foreign relations. 

I believe that restructuring the country in one form or the other is not undesirable and that is why I make bold to proffer the following suggestions to the committee:

True Federalism: It is a myth to talk of true federalism. It is a thought for a utopia, because types of federal systems differ in texture and complexity from one country to the other depending on the circumstances under which the federal system was introduced. For this reason, the committee is advised to ignore any call for anything in the garb of true federalism. Perhaps what could be negotiated could be devolution of power which could bring about an equitable and constitutional distribution of functions between the federation units with consequent effect on the allocation of revenue from federation account.      

Form and Structure of Government: maintain the Presidential System albeit with some modifications, for example review the structure of government at the centre to cut the cost of governance. Also maintain the current structure of the federation whereby states and local governments constitute the federating units. Indeed the existence of local governments, as integral part of the federal structure and as autonomous entities should be clearly provided for in the constitution.

·Devolution of Power: The concentration of responsibilities on the federal government can be curtailed by divesting some matters to states and local governments such as involvement in post-primary education, primary health care, agriculture and the control of water resources.

Local governments: It will not be justifiable to delist local governments from the First Schedule of the Constitution. They should be incorporated as the 3rd tier of government and should be given financial autonomy.

Revenue Allocation: It is suggested that concomitant with the devolution of power should be a review of the revenue sharing formula, to give states and local governments proportionate share of the federation account so as to enable them discharge additional responsibilities.

Resource Control: The power to control mineral resources should continue to be vested on the federation of Nigeria and the provision of the extant constitution regarding the share of the federal revenue to be given on derivation should be amended to read: ‘not more than 13%’, instead of the current ‘not less than 13%’. 

·Land Reform: The Land Use Act should remain part of the constitution, but should be reviewed as the situation demand.

Security Architecture – State Police: The Federal Police should remain as the only police sanctioned in the constitution. Certain limited powers should however be given to State Governors as the Chief Security Officers in their States to be able to deploy the police with in their states in times of emergencies. Also a community policing system could be introduced albeit with sufficient constitutional guarantees and safeguards.

Quota System and Federal Character: The prevailing quota system and the constitutional provision on federal character should be maintained and even extended to provide for equitable distribution of national infrastructure and other economic opportunities.

Creation of New/Additional States: I do not object to equal number of states between the south and the north but this should follow the provision of section 8 and 9 of the 1999 constitution (as amended).

Senator Ibrahim M. Ida, CON.

(Danmajen Katsina)