Egbe Omo Oduduwa Memo To APC Committee on True Federalism. The questions posed by the Committee are underlined.
PREAMBLE:
When different Nationalities and Ethnic Groups live in the same country, it is imperative that they each let the others know what their special interests are, in order to make living with each other worthwhile. If all of them are to live in peace, they must each know what is of paramount concern to each and every Nationality. Given the fact that the Yoruba Nation also extend beyond Nigeria, she has the obligation to preserve her cultural heritage and way of life within Nigeria and elsewhere where she has a sizeable community.
In a situation where the Yoruba Nation share a common country with some other Nationalities either with feudal tendencies or conformity by coercion, this can be stifling to the fullest development of the Yoruba. It is therefore in the interest of the Yoruba Nation to have as much Autonomy in their Region as a Truly Federal arrangement would demand. This means that more power will be with the Nationality, where, with a True Federal set-up, planning and execution of social, economic and other services that meets the aspiration of Yoruba Nationhood will be possible.
As this current exercise shows, there is a serious question mark on Nigeria as a Federal State. This has led to current agitations and permutations as to correcting this fundamental defect. In considering current developments, certain areas that need to be thoroughly examined have been identified. Specifically, a Truly Federal Nigeria in which the Constituent Nationalities will possess a reasonable degree of Autonomy will require clear understanding of the impact of the following on the Nigerian Union: (1) The development of social and economic relationship between the various Nationalities within Nigeria and their Diaspora; for the Yoruba Nation, that will be Brazil, Cuba, the U.S, the West Indies and South America without the overriding legislative power of the Nigerian Union. (2) The ability of the Nations to pursue micro and macro- economic policies (3) Regional Command of the Armed Forces, taking cognizance of the fact that a country’s defense is linked to its foreign policy and vice versa.
ENDORSEMENT OF CONSTITUTIONS: (1) Endorsement of Regional or Nationality Constitutions through Referendums within the various Regions or Nationalities only. (2) Endorsement of the Negotiated Federal Constitution through a country-wide Referendum.
It is within the above context that this submission to your Committee is made, more-so when conflicting or different ideas from a Nationality or Federating Unit can only be resolved by a Referendum within the Unit itself.
(1) Creation/Merger of States: (a) Should Nigeria create more states or not;
(a) NO. For Nigeria to create more states is to assume that Nigeria is already a FEDERATION; which it is not. States, in the current configuration, serve administrative purposes. On the other hand, States as Federating Units in a federation implies that such a State will be wholly responsible for its own internal organization, meaning it could decide to further divide itself into smaller states or local administrative centers. This will define Federalism in its fundamental nature, that is, a co-operation between two centers, sub-national(state) and national(country). Therefore, an existing country cannot simply be dividing itself up and calling such division a federation. That is the problem Nigeria is currently facing. The military started this program of state creation only because it(military) was in power and controlled the purse strings such that the states became almost permanently dependent on the Center for its existence. Creating more states under this circumstance would be reinforcing the centralization that this Committee is trying to address. And when the case is made that the current states are now a reality which we cannot run away from, the short answer to that is, Yes, we can run away from it, in the sense that the political and economic circumstances that make for their creation is the root cause of Nigeria’s problems today, such that their retention or changing can only be by the Peoples affected themselves and not by fiat from the Center. Thus, for example, the Yoruba Nation may decide to make every Yoruba town or city an administrative center—that will be our choice based on our economic and political imperatives.
(b) Should states be merged, if so, what should be the framework and guidelines?
NO. There is no need to “merge” current States. In the first instance, True Federalism for Nigeria is about the PEOPLES of Nigeria and NOT a question of administrative entities, such as States. To deny this is to deny the peoples themselves thus negating the essence of Federalism. Any question as to how the Peoples are to be governed must be decided by the Peoples themselves. In the First Republic, whose experiences are still relevant today, especially when the Regions provided the reference point to today’s issues, the Regions were not equivalent to today’s states; they were an aggregation of the peoples in the regions and there was a provision to have more Regions but for the fall-out of political brinkmanship that was introduced mid-way into the exercise. Furthermore, who will decide which states to be merged? The Federal Government? This cannot be so, since one of the issues being addressed is the NATURE of the Federal Government itself, otherwise we would not now be pursuing True Federalism. In short, a deficient federal Government cannot be expected to produce a fruitful merger of States. The peoples living in the current States? Yes-but with a caveat; they cannot be asked to decide on a merger IF they cannot be asked what form of government they want for themselves; this cannot be possible if they are not able to decide whether they want to be part of Nigeria or not and this will not be possible if they are not recognized as a PEOPLE. Therefore, the first principle is in this recognition as a PEOPLE who can now be expected to determine their preferred forms of political administration.
(2) Derivation Principle: What percentage of federal collectable resources should be given back to their sources, e.g. crude oil, solid minerals, VAT? Fiscal Federalism & Revenue Allocation: What are the proposed changes in the current revenue allocation formula? What should be the new sharing formula between the federal, state and local governments that will reflect their share of constitutional responsibilities?
Derivation implies a Federating Unit giving away some of its “collectable resources” and NOT the center “giving back” from what it collected. The question should be posed as to what percentage of a Federating Unit’s “collectable resources” should go to the Center? Our response is: not more than 30%. The reason for this is that since there will be more than 2 Federating Units, the combined totality of the “collectable resources” will be enough to maintain all of the activities of the Center; more so when such a Center need not be saddled with much of today’s spending.
(3) Devolution of Powers: What items on the exclusive legislative list should be transferred to the recurrent list to enable states have direct responsibility e.g. state & community police, prisons, etc?
Devolution of Powers DOES NOT equate to True Federalism. Devolution implies an already existing center that will “give up” certain powers just as posed in the question. But the question did not say that the center also retains the power to take back what is devolved; since this is already implied. Furthermore, where did an “exclusive legislative list” come from? Meanwhile, a DEFICIENT CENTER as Nigeria is, CANNOT devolve anything meaningful. Otherwise we will not even be asking for Memos on achieving True Federalism. True Federalism is an admission that what we have is not true; hence all efforts must be geared toward achieving the True Form which cannot be done via a deficient form. The starting point therefore is in having a NEW CONSTITUTION for a FEDERAL NIGERIA. This has absolutely nothing to do with “devolution of powers” but the definition of the POWER itself. Whatever items would be on recurrent or exclusive lists should be left for the FEDERATING UNITS to decide when they make their own Constitutions. Any items for negotiation would become the basis for a NEW CONSTITUTION for Nigeria.
(4) Federating Units: Should the Nigerian federation be based on regions or zones as units or maintain the current 36 state structure?
The Nigerian Federation cannot be based on current “states” since they were created out of some political expediency as a form of administrative convenience. Likewise, it cannot be based on the “Zones” since they also exist mainly as referrals for convenience purposes aimed at ameliorating the conditions that gave rise to cries of marginalization or inclusion that has characterized the operation of Nigeria since at least 1966. It has been shown that Language plays a foundational and crucial part in social and economic development where those countries deemed developed utilize their natural Languages in their production and reproduction of Knowledge thereby enabling a combined utilization of their social, economic and therefore cultural attributes serving as the basis for any relationship between one people and the other as well as within one people. Language should therefore be the basis for a Truly Federal Nigeria.
It is noted that Nigeria has over 300 Languages, the good news is that these Languages come with their natural territories thus making it easier to generate alignments without one necessarily negating the other. These Languages via their territories provides a good ground for a Union or Federation.
Therefore, as the late Anthony Enahoro-led PRONACO advised, the suggested number of Lingual-Territorial/Nationality Categories is 17, of which 11 will be mono-Lingual/Nationality Entities/Region (1) Ibibio ( 2). Ijaw ( 3). Igbo (4). Urhobo ( 5). Edo (6). Yoruba ( 7). Nupe.(8) Tiv (9). Gbagyi (10). Hausa-Fulani ( 11). Kanuri. The other six (6) of the Regions should be multi-Nationality regions, as follows: (i) Nationalities in Cross River and Akwa Ibom states (i.e. Eket, Annang, Oron, Ibeno, Efik, Ejagbam, Korop, Boki, Bakwara, Yakurr, Yala). (ii) Nationalities in Rivers and Bayelsa states (i.e. Ikwerre, Etchei, Ekpeeye, Engeni, Ogba, Eleme, Ndoni, Ogoni, and Andoni). (iii) Nationalities in Delta State (i.e. Ika, Ndokwa, Warri, Isoko). (iv) Nationalities in West Middle Belt, i.e. Zuru, Kambari, Bariba, Bussa, Karekare, Ngizim, Angamo, Bola, Funne, etc. (v) Nationalities in Central Middle Belt, i.e.: (a) Ebira Group: Ebira, Uku, Ebira-Ugu, Ebira-Panda, Etuno-Igarra, Ebira Mozun, Bassa-Nge. (b) Igala Group (c) Upper Benue Group: Alago Eggon, Gwandara, Mada, Kakanda, Mighili, Bassa-Komu, Ninzom, Arum etc. (vi) Nationalities in East Middle Belt, i.e. (a) Plateau Group: Ngas, Berom, Afezere Taroh, Goemai, Nmavo – Jukun, Amu, Pyem, Youn etc. (b) Taraba Group: Chamba, Jukun, Kuteb, Mambila, Kona, Kunni, Kaanab, Ndoro, Abakwa, Mumuye, Yububen, etc. (c) Savanna Group: Bura, Tangale – Waja, Bachama, Manghi, Kilba, Yungu, Mwanna, Bwazza Mbula, etc.
It will be the responsibility of each of these Lingual-Territories to, within a time frame, devise their own Constitutions for ratification by a Referendum within their Territories. Any negotiations inside and outside the structures of these Lingual Territories(Nationality) can be accommodated within such a time frame especially given the fact that “Restructuring” or “True Federalism” is not a new occurrence in Nigeria’s political experience. A Federal Constitution for Nigeria will be derived from these Constitutions and ratified similarly in the Lingual-Territories(Nationalities). This is not just a technical matter, as a Constitution, being the Grundnorm, the foundational essence of a society, reflects that society’s coming into being for itself, a precondition for social and economic development. It becomes, for the society, the expression of its freedom and a summation of its existential realities. We are aware of the way African countries’ Constitutions are treated with impunity by the rulers of these countries, all because the Constitutions neither reflected nor expressed the existential necessities of the Peoples. This is an opportunity for Nigeria to address this issue.
(5) (a) Form of Government: Should Nigeria continue with the current Presidential system of government or return to the Parliamentary system as practiced in the first republic or develop a hybrid of the two systems? (b) Power Sharing & Rotation: Should Nigeria have a policy of rotation of the key elected political positions on regional or zonal basis for national offices and by senatorial districts for state offices?
(a) Parliamentary System with a Federal Collegiate Presidency where each of the Federating Units will be represented by one Person elected or selected by the Federating Unit itself. The President, as the primus inter pares, will have a term of not more than 2 years. This will revert most developmental options to the Federating Units and the center will be the representation of the collective will of the Federating Units as befitting an independent people.
(b) The Central government of a Nigerian Union shall have no power to interfere nor intervene in the affairs of the Federating Unit save as shall be agreed to by three quarters of the members of the Region’s Parliament. Therefore, “rotation of key elected positions on regional or zonal basis for national offices and by senatorial districts for state offices” will not be necessary.
(6) Independent Candidacy: Should there be a constitutional provision for eligible citizens to contest elections without being members of registered political parties?
Persons shall be elected on the platform of the political party they represent or as independent candidates. There shall be no restriction on the number of political parties.
(7) (a)Land Tenure System: Should the Land Use Act be part of the constitution or not and what should be the right of states in the ownership and control of mineral and natural resources on and under the ground? (b) Resource Control: Should states, regions or zones be allowed to exclusively or partially own, exploit and tap the financial benefits of natural resources in their domain and just pay taxes to the Federal Government?
(a) Land Use Act should be removed from the Constitution. In its place, Customary forms of land ownership should be respected.
(b) Exploitation and ownership of mineral resources shall be the prerogative of the host community without prejudice to the right of the government of the Federating Unit to levy appropriate taxes for the welfare of her people and without prejudice to the right of the Federal Government to levy taxes.
(8) Local Government Autonomy: Should LGAs be independent of states and have direct revenue sourcing from the FG as the third-tier of the federation or should they be administrative units of states?
A Federation comprises ONLY TWO PARTS: the center(which is the outcome of the Federalising) and the Federating Unit which has given up some of its powers to the Center. Therefore, there is NO QUESTION of “Local Government autonomy” as the Federating Unit is the only competent authority to decide how it will govern itself, locally. As noted earlier, the Yoruba Nation could decide to make its localities its area of administration, which obviously will make a “third tier” immaterial.
(9) Type of Legislature: Does Nigeria need a bi-cameral or uni-cameral, part-time or full-time parliament?
As noted in item #5, the Central legislature would be unicameral and the parliament full time with the proviso that the members of Parliament shall be remunerated for their services, as shall be determined by law.