The spokesman of the Arewa Consultative Forum, Mr. Anthony Sani, in this interview with ALLWELL OKPI, articulates the position of the North on the proposed National Conference
WHat is the position of the Arewa Consultative Forum on the national conference being proposed by President Goodluck Jonathan’s government? Is it a welcome development or a distraction, especially now?
The Arewa Consultative Forum has never opposed any national dialogue that can help strengthen the Nigerian project where people are socially diverse, economically empowered and politically active, peacefully. What has been disagreeable to ACF is routing the dialogue through a Sovereign National Conference that will amount to vote of no confidence on our democracy and its institutions. No group has the right to do that. As long as the national dialogue will not be in the form of SNC, it is a welcome idea, even if the timing is not apposite.
Going by the agitations among ethnic groups, do you think the conference will help the country to move forward or will it lead to a break-up?
I do not believe a mere conference is capable of breaking up the country. This is because despite the agitations in the polity, most Nigerians would not like the country broken. More so, national goals are sacrosanct, and only the methods of attaining such goals are open to discussions. And since progress comes from change through discourse or debate, the national dialogue can help move the nation forward.
Some people have said the North has not been in support of a national conference because it fears that it may lead to a break-up of the country. Is that true?
The North has not been in support of the National Conference not out of fear that the country will break up, but because the North does not believe the problems of this country have to do with the structure, form of government and the laws. The problems of this country are a result of collapse of national ideals, collapse in moral values and fall of social contract among groups and among individuals as well as the fall of our sense of right and evil.
The agitators for Sovereign National Conference claim it will produce a “people’s constitution” that will usher in true federalism. But we do not know of any two federal systems that are clones. The common mantra among federal systems is for the national government to be strong enough to keep the country one, but not too strong as to tilt the country into a unitary system.
Please note that the American constitution was drafted by 55 people and not by ethnic nationalities. It is only three pages with just about 29 amendments whereas Britain does not have a written constitution. In the case of Nigeria, it is a whole book that is observed more in the breach. These show that it is not matter of soundness of the laws but the problem of willingness to execute them.
I once said in a conference that a country with too many laws where the judiciary relishes technical justice instead of substantive justice comprises incompetent lawyers, and in the case of Nigeria, the Yoruba are more guilty. Femi Falana agreed with me but faulted my attempt to reduce him into an ethnic jingoist, which he is not. He may be right, but we cannot take from the Yoruba the dominance of the legal profession in Nigeria.
Some people believe Jonathan is bringing up this conference to score a political point, especially with 2015 presidential election in view. Do you agree?
How does he hope to score a political point where opinions are deeply divided on the need for the conference in the first place, let alone on the content, shape, scope and direction of the national dialogue?
What are the issues ACF would want the delegates to discuss? Do they include whether or not the 1914 amalgamation should be undone.
Few countries are not artificially created. I think in the whole Africa, it is only Ethiopia that has not been colonised. Also, most of these countries are as diverse as Nigeria, if not more. Take for example Germany that Von Bismerck was able to unite and the Germans were brought together to unleash their synergy. President Julius Nyerere did the same thing with 120 ethnic nationalities in Tanzania. Belgium comprises Germans and French people in distinct areas, yet the country remains united under one roof.
Similarly, many countries are going through hard times. And in almost all these countries, the difficult times bring about national grandeur, purposeful leadership and the best in everyone. Nigerians are not inferior physically, mentally and spiritually to a level of allowing transient challenges to set the national agenda. Like President Clinton once advised, Nigerians should shape events instead of allowing events to shape the nation.
As to issues by ACF, when the issues are raised, we will address them. This is because while we do not object to any dialogue, we never canvassed for it.
For now, I can only say we should address how to rewire the politics, reengineer our sense of justice, make mercy smarter and hope more strategic. That is, we need cultural renaissance.
What will be the position of the North on resource control, revenue sharing formula and rotational presidency should they come up for discussion?
ACF is not opposed to derivation in the revenue sharing as long as derivation is to reward efforts and compensate for environmental degradation. ACF will like the abolition of onshore/off shore dichotomy revisited, precisely because off shore exploration is not result of efforts, neither does it degrade any environment. Proceeds from off shore should not feature in the calculation for derivation.
I have observed the oil communities are agitating that their share of derivation be given to them directly, precisely because revenues from derivation are being used to build flyovers, airports and five star hotels in state capitals to their chagrin. And instead of improving the management of the current revenues from derivation judiciously, there is the talk of Host Community Fund in the Petroleum Industry Bill.
We believe the wide disparity in incomes between oil producing states and non oil producing states is not good politics nor good economics because it makes Nigerians live as if they are in different continents.
The issue of rotational presidency has never been canvassed by the North, but by the South which used the annulment of election of June 12 and morally blackmailed the North into accepting the politics of power shift and rotation, or zoning as the case may be. But when it was the turn of the North, the South started to shout about constitutionalism and meritocracy. Nigerians passed their verdict in 2011 when they voted President Jonathan against existing arrangement. That is, the South wrote the requiem for politics of rotation and Nigerians did the funeral burials. We said, so be it, and still stand by the fact that we should be for democracy premised on triple foundation of liberty, justice and common decency.
From the North’s point of view, how should the representation be done? For instance, should all ethnic nationalities be represented by equal number of delegates?
When people talk of conference of ethnic nationalities, it is laughable not only because promotion of cleavages along ethnic lines is not desirable, but also because we do not know the number of ethnic nationalities. I want to believe representations on equality does violence to Aristotle’s concept of justice. He said injustice is not only when equals are treated unequally, but is also when unequals are treated equally. I do not see any justice in any submission that the Igbo and the Idoma in Benue State should be represented on the basis of equality, or that South-East and North-West should be represented equally at the conference. Somehow, it is our considered opinion that those who clamour for equality in the representations are trying to reinvent the wheel or redefine democracy to mean minority should prevail.
Does the North have any objection to the composition of the committee set up for the conference, with Sen. Femi Okorunnmu as the head?
The North has no reasons to object to the composition of the committee, since the debates in the conference, however defined, will be on the issues raised and not on who presents them.
What are your objections if any?
ACF cannot reasonably react at this stage, since the name, content, scope, shape and direction have not been made public. I believe when the reports of the Advisory Committee are submitted and made public by the government, ACF will react appropriately.
Going by the outcome of previous national conferences and the influence of the Federal Government on them, do you think Jonathan is sincere with this and would he allow the conference produce the true position of Nigerian people?
We hope the conference will enjoy free hand and the treatment of the outcome of this one will differ from those convened in the past.
Do you think the centenary celebration is necessary considering the many challenges the nation is facing?
We see nothing wrong in the centenary celebration, especially when regard is paid to the waning sense of nationhood among some sections of the country. There is need for inching up sense of nationhood into popular consciousness. More so, that the centenary celebration is not expected to be a sandbag on the path of consciously directed efforts at our collective challenges for common good.
Punch
No comments:
Post a Comment