Sovereign National Conference: The issues, the fears

Tension mounts gradually
Civil society, section groups push for reorganised structure
Jonathan gives in
National Assembly kicks

By Richard Ihediwa

Last week, President Goodluck Jonathan caved in to the continued pressure from several interest groups seeking him to convene a Sovereign National Conference (SNC) in which Nigerians, based on strategic groupings are expected to meet and on their own, determine what political structure the nation should take.
The President, in giving his consent after receiving some national leaders at the villa said though the Presidential Constitution Review Committee (PCRC) headed by former Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Alfa Belgore has been mandated to collate views from Nigerians, a larger body would meet on issues that are still controversial for a national consensus but failed to give details on the nature the "larger body" will take.
Those calling for the conference are insisting that the nation cannot achieve the much desired political stability needed for economic growth except people from the different ethnic nationalities meet on equal terms to negotiate and reach a consensus on several contending issues on how the nation should be administered.
However, there are fears that at the center of the new agitation is the muffled move towards demand for the balkanisation of the country along sectional groups. Those agitating for the conference are already aggrieved along sectional lines and may be nursing for the negotiation of the unity of the nation.
This is especially against the backdrop of the protracted religious and ethnic based killings in some parts of the country culminating in the calls by ethnic based militant groups for non indigenes of particular places to leave.
While the dreaded Boko Haram sect issued an ultimatum directing that non muslims should leave the north, the Niger Delta Egbesu boys also issued its own ultimatum that northerners should leave the south. Though the threats remained largely shadowy, there is palpable fear among the people and many Nigerians relocated recently along ethnic lines.
Within some states, like Plateau, Benue, Taraba, Ebonyi among others, there have been pockets of violence and killings over indigene and settler dichotomy with some tribal groups claiming ownership of the land.
Fundamentally, the proponents of the general meeting hold firmly to the claims that the current Constitution is replete with fundamental defects inhibiting sections of the people from benefiting from it even as they argue that true federalism would remain a mirage till the constitution has the backing of the people.
This will not be the first time the country will embark on such general meeting. In 2005, President Olusegun Obasanjo convened the National Political Reform Conference which had no go areas and ended up a wild goose chase as the recommendations could not become operable in the face of the Constitution.
Already, tension is gradually mounting as the new agitation appears to be reflective of bottled up anger from certain sections of the country which feel marginalised by the letters and operation of the current constitution.
Last week agitators of the SNC led by Prof. Ben Nwabueze (SAN); Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN) leader, Chief Audu Ogbe; former Finance Minister, Chief Olu Falae; Alhaji Balarabe Abdulkadir Musa; Olorogun Felix Ibru; Prof. Pat Utomi; Tony Uranta, and former President of the Institute of Directors (IoD), Dr. Chike Nwanze met in Lagos and asserted that running away from the national parley, amounts to "postponing the evil day."
However, despite the agreement by the President and some eminent Nigerians that there should be a general meeting of Nigerians ahead of further amendment of the Constitution, the National Assembly is completely averse to the demands saying the legislature, which is representational of the peoples mandate remained the only legitimate platform for any national discourse.
Already the National Assembly, which is planning another round of Constitution amendment is feeling threatened by the idea and is apparently prepared to frustrate the moves.
In any case, the proposed meeting will however come with its own series of challenges. These include what criteria to be adopted for the selection of delegates. Will it be along tribal and ethnic or religious lines? Will it be based on states? Will it be based on regional political leadership? Who constitutes the leadership of the conference and who determines its scope and mode of operation?
Who coordinates the choosing process? Will there be election of delegates? What law backs such up? Will the National Assembly approve a budget for the conference? What manner will it take? Will its resolution be binding on the nation? Will it replace the Constitution? These and many more are questions begging for answers.
Issues
Though there appears to be a consensus on the indivisibility of the nation, the major issue for which the proponents of the SNC seem to be the issue of fiscal federalism to pave way for the complete control of resources by states.
Other issues agitating their minds include those of equality of states and local governments among the six-geopolitical zones, state police, citizenship issues and other federal character issues among others.
However, their demand is coming when the National Assembly asserts that it is also considering such issues and wants all demands to be routed through it.
Fiscal federalism, Resource control and devolution of power
Already the campaign for complete resources control by states have penetrated the National Assembly and might gather more steam if the SNC is allowed to hold.
However, at the crux of the agitation is the new quest, not for an increase in derivatives, but a total overhaul of the system in such a way that states will be given perfect control of the resources in their localities from where they will be made to pay certain percentage to the Federal Government as royalties.
The 'cat' on the new agitation was let out of the bag by Chairman, Senate Committee on Works, Senator Ayogu Eze, who at a news conference in Abuja on Monday, October 31, 2011 canvassed in very strong terms that states must be allowed to control mineral finds in their localities and pay royalties to the Federal Government.
Critics are already divided over the new face of agitation for resource control. In fact, there are fears that the matter might also result in further national political squabbles especially if the proponents go ahead to introduce it in the next Constitution review.
This is especially against the backdrop of possible division in the National Assembly during the debates as lawmakers and powerful stakeholders from the North are said to be averse to it and may have started mobilising to shoot such move down if it surfaces.
While some analysts opine that the idea will widen the sectional and ethnic gaps already militating against national development, others tenaciously hold that it would rather cement them, arguing that it will result in mutual respect and healthy competiveness among the federating units.
Those who support fiscal federalism maintain that the problem with the country was over dependency on the federation account which he said has resulted in the inability of states to harness and utilise the mineral resources available in their territories in such a way that their comparative advantages are fully maximised.
At the same, such critics argue for the need for appropriate devolution of power in such a manner that states and local governments are effectively saddled with the responsibilities currently being handled by the Federal Government.
Those supporting the implementation of full fiscal federalism argue that though the nation is said to be a federation, the Constitution is basically unitary and must be reworked to reflect the federal arrangement.
It is suggested that under a fiscal federalism, states and local government should be made to handle issues that have direct impact on the people including, education, internal security, road infrastructure, power, health, Agriculture and water resources, youth development, internal finance, science and technology, state and local council election and so on while the Federal Government should be left to handle issues such as national defence, foreign policy, national finance, national security, boundary arrangements among others that do not have direct impact on the people.
Inasmuch as the idea appears to be noble, a school of thought fears that the nation is not particularly ripe for such as they are apprehensive that it might lead to bad blood among the governments and indigenes from the federating units, which many believe will further worsen the instability in the polity.
Citizenship
Another issue that agitators of the SNC are bothered about is that of the determination of citizenship in states. Though the current constitution grants Nigerians the right to live and work in any part of the country, it does not expressly give legal teeth to that right as regards citizenship of states.
Against this backdrop, there have been series of violent clashes over land ownership as well as issues of economic, social and political marginalisation based on perceived indigene/settlers dichotomy.
Those pushing for the SNC are demanding for a consensus on the issues of citizenship across the country especially in reflection of the recent violence and killing as well as the relocation ultimatum from ethnic based groups to persons perceived as settlers.
The agitators want the determination of what constitutes citizenship especially regarding right to vote, employments and appointments.
Freedom of worship
Also the SNC proponents want the issue of freedom of religion discussed and settled. This is coming against continued face-off between Christians and Muslims in some parts of the country. The agitators want the determination of the acceptable provision to guarantee freedom of worship in the country with stringent rules for defaulters.
Fears
Currently, there are fears that the SNC might weaken the precarious unity of the nation and pave way for events that might lead to possible disintegration along ethnic lines. There is already a perception that this might be the ultimate goal of some southern elements who might force discussions beyond the limits if their demands were not accepted at the general parley.
This is especially as agitators from the oil rich South South had always harped on the issues of deprivation even when the bulk of the nation comes from the region and may place very high demands at the meeting.
However, those seeking the SNC and other eminent Nigerians including those from the north have noted that rather than divide the nation, the conference, if well handled will further strengthen the unity of the country.
Commenting on the fears, leader of the pro-SNC elements, Ben Nwabueze, 82, said the conference rather than break the country will rather unify it. He maintained that there is no denying the fact that conveners and participants are true patriots and lovers of the country.
He said: "It is a prelude to having an SNC, to have a people's constitution and agree on how this country is to live together as one. Anyone against SNC is an enemy of the people. The efforts have been thwarted for so long. We are now working on modalities to have one and to be presented to groups in a referendum.
Also commenting on the fears, National Democratic Coalition (NADECO) Chairman, Rear Admiral Ndubuisi Kanu (rtd), said such a conference had become a necessity following the challenges facing Nigeria adding that the dialogue will open up home truths that will unite the country instead of breaking it.
Kanu said NADECO believed that a national conference would help provide solutions to the country's socio-political and religious problems.
The former Lagos State Military Governor said, "Let it be known from all observable signals and assessments that what is being witnessed now will be a child's play if we do not quickly hold a national conference.
Kanu alleged that those benefitting from the rot in the country had been working against the convention of a national conference.
"The truth however is that the actions of the opponents of the conference can only lead to Nigeria's breakup," he said.
The agitators went ahead to present a list of countries including South Africa, which they argued succeeded in solving their national problems using a national sovereign conference and adding that Nigeria can borrow a leaf from them.
Senate kicks
However, reacting to the idea, the Senate came hard in the pro-SNC group. Senate's spokesperson, Enyinaya Abaribe said the National Assembly remained the only platform for any national discuss.
Abaribe urged those who were calling for the SNC to bring their demands to the National Assembly which he said composed of representatives of the people.
Abaribe said, "Our position is that we are already elected to represent all persons and citizens of Nigeria. If you look at the composition you are either represented by a House of Representatives member or a senator.
"We do not think there is any matter under the sun that we will shy away from. We do not understand the stand of those who insist that there must be Sovereign National Conference.
"For the avoidance of doubt, we are not against any group, association or persons meeting to discuss because that is to ensure democracy. What we are saying is that there cannot be democracy without democrats.
"Therefore if you want any alteration to the way of life in the country the vehicle is the National Assembly. If you want to change the constitution, bring it through the Representatives and the Senate."
Rather than calming frayed nerves, the position of the Senate increased the tempo of the agitation culminating in the visit to Jonathan by eminent Nigerians.
However, almost all pro-democracy and ethnic based groups disagreed with the lawmaking body. The Yoruba socio-political group, Afenifere; the Save Nigeria Group; the Congress for Progressive Change; Ijaw Republican Assembly; and a prominent constitutional lawyer, Itse Sagay (SAN), said the Senate was wrong.
Another lawyer and political activist, Dr. Tunji Braithwaite, said the Senate rejection of calls for national conference would not stop the project.
"Their rejection is a non-issue. It is the sovereignty of the people. The conference will come on stream for the sake of the nation and they cannot stop it because the people want to discuss their well-being. I am sure the executive arm will not be on the same page on this issue with the Senate," he said.
The groups insisted that even the Senate derive its legitimacy from the people and as such cannot stop the people from meeting on how they want to be governed.
However, reacting to the call for the SNC, a member of the House of Representatives, David Ombugadu (CPC Nasarawa) in an interview yesterday said nobody should stop Nigerians from having a meeting if that was their wish and aspiration. He said Nigerians have the right to discuss issues relating to how they want to be governed but added that such conferences must be done in line with laid down rules.
According to him, "this is a democracy and as such nobody should stop Nigerians to meet at a sovereign national conference if that is what they want or they believe will move the nation forward. That is their right but it must be done within the ambit of the laws of the nation".
The lawmaker however urged that discussions should center on issues that unites the nation as well as ways to improve on the nation's economy. He said discussions should enable each region to find ways of developing its potential in line with the laws of comparative advantage which will develop the regions and the nation at large.
He also urged that those in the discussion should consult widely especially with the National Assembly so as to carry all Nigerians along.
Be it as it may, Nigerians appear to have reached a consensus on national unity but have been groping for ways to retain and maintain the unity. Issues of leadership remains largely the problem of the nation. The paradox has been that of rich nation poor people and the solution for this puzzle has remained largely elusive.