Confab: Politics taking off the shine

[Mirror]

FELIX NWANERI writes on the politicking, which is gradually eclipsing the proposed national conference despite the consensus that there is an urgent need for a restructuring of the country to save it from imminent collapse. The euphoria that greeted the proposed national conference by President Goodluck Jonathan seems to have been overshadowed by politics, given the slant the debate on the issue has taken of late. While the 13-member committee headed by Senator Femi Okurounmu is yet to come out with its recommendations regarding an agenda; structure and modalities; representation and timeframe for the conference, the Federal Government and some stakeholders are presently locked in a war of words over the proposal.

It will be recalled that most Nigerians have against the backdrop of persistent demands for a Sovereign National Conference, SNC, to address imbalances in the system, described the President's initiative as step in the right direction, but there are doubts by some over the timing, sincerity as well as the capability and credibility of the Jonathan administration to deliver a genuine national conference.

The suspicion stems from the fact that nothing concrete ever came out of similar previous gatherings of the past. Whether initiated by the military or civilian administration, such gatherings ended up as jamborees of elders-in-council, gimmicks, pilgrimages or packages for loyalists.

For instance, the 2005 Political Reform Committee by the administration of former President Olusegun Obasanjo was the eighth attempt to bring Nigerians together to deliberate on issues affecting them, particularly fashioning a befitting constitution since 1922. There have been several conferences including the 1966 National Conference authorised by General Yakubu Gowon's regime to help find a solution to the national crisis then.

Representatives came as regional delegates from the then four regions- East, West, Midwest and North, while 26 prominent Nigerians joined them. After intense discussions and negotiations that were leaning towards a loose confederation, Gowon and his team stepped in against such arrangement and foisted their style of "federation" under the guise of keeping Nigeria one. There was yet another attempt: the now famous or infamous Aburi Conference, this time, of Nigeria's leaders themselves, in January of 1967. This time, Gowon himself was present, a participant. The transcripts of the meeting are clear on the agreement: Loose confederation.

But before the ink had dried on the agreement, Gowon was to renege on it. This set off the fuse that finally lit the Biafra-Nigeria War. Other conferences that ended up like that are the 1975/76 Constitutional Conference; 1988/89 Constitutional Conference; 1994/95 National Political Reform Conference as well as the Constituent Assembly in 1977/78 and 1988/89.

It may have been against this backdrop that the former governor of Lagos State and leader of the main opposition political party – All Progressives Congress, APC, Asiwaju Bola Tinubu, insisted that the "national conference is too critical to be left to the flip-flopping presidency of Goodluck Jonathan." Expectedly, the comment has stirred wide reactions for and against, though the Presidency was quick to describe it as purely conjectural and speculative.

Tinubu's stand

The APC leader, who ironically had been in the vanguard for a sovereign national conference, had on his return from a medical trip abroad, dismissed the proposed confab, describing it as a diversionary step taken by a sinking ship. He said: "How do you develop the agenda? It's a diversionary tactic.

How long have we been talking about this? Why suddenly? Now, there is something in political and social history. They say we have Greek gift. Two crumbs of poison that will survive the trappings of the onus.

Let us first of all ask ourselves some questions, I am yet to consult with my party, but I see a contradiction here. I see a diversion here, I see deception here, I see lack of honesty and integrity here, I see a state of a sinking ship that needs no raft any longer; allow it to sink, build a new life, move the nation forward." He later provided more insight to why he is opposed to the proposed national conference, saying the Federal Government must answer some fundamental questions about the timing, sincerity as well as the capability and credibility of the President to deliver a genuine national conference.

He said: "Though I remain an unrepentant supporter of a genuinely Sovereign National Conference, I am suspicious of this present concoction because it is halfbaked and fully deceptive. Government's sincerity is questionable, the timing is also suspect.

Now that this government is sinking in a pool of political and economic hot water of its own making, it seizes hold of the national conference idea as if it were a life jacket." "I will not take anything I have said back on the proposed national dialogue by this present administration.

I say beware of the Greek gift; let us first of all, ask a series of questions. The core questions to ask are: How credible, reliable and capable is the current President to be able to midwife a critical conference such as this? Will this President be sincere enough to let all the issues that are on the agenda be exhaustively discussed at the conference? Will this President have the guts to implement fully all final resolutions of the conference without fear or favor or any pandering"?

Presidency responds

The President, through his Senior Special Assistant on Public Affairs, Dr. Doyin Okupe, however described Tinubu's assertion as nothing more than an individual opinion. Okupe, who spoke at a news conference in Abuja, last Monday said Tinubu 'spoke for himself,' and his opinion should not be misconstrued to be that of the Yoruba nation. He argued that Tinubu's assertion that there was an ulterior motive for the conference was surely conjectural and speculative, adding that such a position had no foundations in any reasoning or logic.

Okupe added that it was wrong for Tinubu to cite the non-implementation of the Justice Muhammed Uwais committee recommendations on electoral reforms as a basis for his action.

He recalled the conduct of governorship elections in Edo and Ondo states, where the ruling Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, lost to the opposition, was hailed by the majority of Nigerians, including Tinubu, wondering the mischief that he (Tinubu) intended to play by the alleged non-implementation of reports of the Justice Uwais committee on electoral reforms.

On whether the President would be bold enough to implement the outcome of the conference; Okupe said this was the first time a Federal Government had taken a bold initiative to call for a national conference without no-go-areas, as demonstrated by the power given to the advisory committee to determine its nature and or structure. Okupe also dismissed the claim by Tinubu that the President was organising the conference at a time the PDP was embroiled in internal crises, saying: "The APC leader, as usual, is completely off target.

Desperate politicians and self-seeking political leaders tend to believe that their quest for power or insatiable appetite for wealth accumulation through politics is superior to the genuine desires and innate aspiration of the ordinary Nigerians. While the Tinubus of this world focus only on the 2015 general elections, most patriotic ordinary Nigerians are more concerned with the emergence of a united country based on equity and justice."

Pessimism and fear

The sceptics fear over the proposed conference apparently stems from experiences of the past, especially the fate of the recommendations of recent exercises – the late Gen. Sani Abacha Constitutional Conference and former President Olusegun Obasanjo's Political Reform Conference.

The Abacha conference of 1994 and 1995, headed by eminent jurist, Justice Adolphus Karibi-Whyte, it will be recalled recommended among others, rotation of the presidency between the North and the South; a single term of five years for the president and the governors; and the federal system of government.

That of Obasanjo, headed by another renowned jurist, Justice Niki Tobi submitted a six-volume report recommended the use of electronic voting to stem electoral fraud; restructuring of the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC; participation of Nigerians in the Diaspora in elections and review of the revenue sharing formula. These far-reaching recommendations that would have strengthened the polity were never implemented by the administrations concerned or their respective successors till date.

Further heightening the apprehension was Jonathan's declaration last week that the report of the proposed dialogue would be forwarded to the National Assembly for ratification and subsequent assimilation into the constitution review process, further heightened the fear of the pessimists the conference may go the way of others before it.

The President, who spoke at the Presidential Villa, Abuja when Muslim faithful resident in Abuja, led by the Vice-President Namadi Sambo paid him the traditional Sallah homage, said: "This national dialogue is critical and is coming at the right time because the National Assembly is thinking about how they will amend the constitution. So the results of the discussion of course will be passed to the National Assembly."

No to NASS ratification

A cross section of Nigerians, including eminent lawyers who reacted to the President's position rejected the plan to send the conference's report to the National Assembly for ratification. Constitutional lawyer Prof. Itse Sagay (SAN), said any plan to send the report to the lawmakers will amount to insincerity or ignorance. "We're talking of a conference, which will result in a new constitution, which will then be approved by plebiscite, by referendum, so that it becomes a constitution made by Nigerian people.

"What we're saying is that this cannot be a proposal for the amendment of the constitution. So, in my view, either the President doesn't understand what he is doing by convoking a conference, or he's deliberately putting poison into the process to kill it from the beginning.

"To say you're taking it to the National Assembly, which doesn't have the capacity or the jurisdiction or the authority to make a new constitution, is to say you want to kill it. The House has a vested interested in the status quo."

The chairman of the Ikeja Branch of the Nigeria Bar association, Onyekachi Ubani, in a similar reaction said the President demonstrated that he did not understand what he set out to do with the setting up of a committee to fashion out the modalities for a conference. His words: "Not a few expressed scepticism about the intention of this present government in the volte face, agreeing for a talk after years of resisting it. For the sceptics, be assured that your fears were well founded.

From what spewed out from the President's mouth on Monday (last week) that the recommendation of the talk will be taken back to the National Assembly for consideration, it is obvious that the talk is dead on arrival. "Which National Assembly? You may ask.

This President has once again taken us for a ride. Does President Jonathan really understand what Nigerians are asking for? I feel so sad being here, I am totally devastated and depressed. I was one of those who expressed cautious optimism about this conference. I am bruised." Similarly, the Conference of Nigeria Political Parties, CNPP, averred that the confab is dead on arrival and that whatever decision reached at the conference would not give the nation the much-desired solution to its numerous problems.

The group in a statement signed by its National Publicity secretary, Mr. Osita Okechukwu, said: "Whereas we support national dialogue; however, it is our candid opinion that any national conference that is not sovereign, where the outcome of the conference is subjected to a national referendum at this point in time is a sheer waste of resources, time and hence diversionary."

Pan Yoruba group, Afenifere, through its National Publicity Secretary, Yinka Odumakin, told National Mirror that the National Assembly had no business with the outcome of the national confab. "The comments by the President that the decisions of the conference would be sent to the National Assembly confirms the view that we have no institutional memory to fall back on as far as a national conference is concerned.

"The President may be thinking that this would have the status of a constitutional conference. This is why it is good he did not rush us to a conference without setting up an advisory committee on the modalities for the conference as this may also be a learning curve for all of us.

"When the principals of corporate Nigeria are going to the table to draft their memorandum of understanding and articles of association, such documents cannot be subjected to any ratification by their agents who are current managers of the corporation." The Arewa Consultative Forum, ACF, on its part said the development shows that the President is only trying to satisfy some interest.

The group's National Publicity Secretary, Anthony Sani, who said they have been vindicated by the president's position, added: "Mr. President's clarification as reported in newspapers vindicated the wisdom of those who have said the proposed national dialogue/conversation cannot reasonably be a Sovereign National Conference as this amounts to vote of no confidence on our democracy and its institutions, considering the sitting government has been elected by Nigerians and not by ghosts.

"It also proves right those who submit that the National Assembly could as well go through recommendations of past conferences together with what they get from their public hearings and use them to inform their constitutional amendments. We want to believe this government is pandering to the hankering by some groups for conference in order to calm nerves and enable the nation to move forward."

NASS, others back president

As expected, the National Assembly through tha Deputy Senate President, Ike Ekweremadu, said the President's position was in order and constitutional. According to him, there was no other legal option to whatever would be the resolution of the dialogue other than getting the sanction of the National Assembly in accordance with the rule of law.

"Nigerians said they want to dialogue. President said you should go and do that but whatever you decide will not be binding unless it is legislated upon by the National Assembly. We didn't set up any conference. We don't have problem with the process so far," he said.

The chairman of the Senate Committee on Media, Enyinnaya Abaribe, who later confirmed the position in a statement, said the President stated the obvious, when he said the National Assembly would decide the final outcome of the National Conference. Abaribe said the Senate was consistent with the fact that it welcomed national dialogue of any kind, but that in doing that provisions of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria as amended must be taken into cognisance.

He said: "For the President to declare that the final outcome of the proposed national conference would be subjected to National Assembly's ratification is in recognition of the fact that there cannot be two sovereigns at the same time."

Second Republic Deputy Senate President, Senator John Wash Pam, who also spoke on the issue, told National Mirror in Jos, the Plateau State capital that President Jonathan's submission was in order.

He said: "I think President Jonathan's submission was in order but there is a little confusion there. Don't forget that the National Assembly is currently working on the amendment of the constitution and we just hope that the outcome of the conference does not conflict with the constitutional amendment especially since we don't know yet the form which the conference will take eventually; whether sovereign or just dialogue or whatever, that is the confusion."

Referendum option

In the middle of the debate over who ratifies the recommendations of the proposed confab, some analysts are of the view that the Federal Government should subject the report to a nationwide referendum and not the National Assembly's ratification. The Director of Communication, Catholic Archdiocese of Lagos, Monsignor Gabriel Osu, said that forwarding the outcome of the conference to the National Assembly for ratification will defeat its purpose.

He said: "If the National Assembly were up to the task, doing their work as they should do, there wouldn't be any need of national discussion, but because people have lost faith in them. We need peoples' opinion, a plebiscite or a referendum." A Senior Lecturer at the Centre for Entrepreneurship Development, Yaba College of Technology, Lagos, Imam Lukmon Abdulraheem, said the outcome of the conference should not be subjected to fresh debate.

"For us to reconcile it within the present principles of the constitution and the law, whatever the people decide should now go to the lawmakers for ratification procedurally, not that they will change the content. The reason is that the people at the grassroots know what they want and also know where the shoe pinches.

The President of the Centre for Change, Dr. Joe Oke-Odumakin, also backed the option. To her, the outcome of the conference must not be tinkered with, except through a referendum.

The chairman of the confab's advisory committee, Okurounmu, who has already opted for the referendum option, is of the view that the overall objective of the exercise would be achieved once the decisions of the people are respected after the conference. "It is not the name that matters; a name does not make a king. If you say sovereign status, what does sovereign status mean? Sovereignty, in any nation, will rest with the people. As long as the final decision rests with the people, that is sovereign enough.

"Once the conference meets and takes decisions, and the decisions are subjected to a referendum by the people, what more sovereignty do we want? So, once the people have approved the decisions at the conference and the decisions of the people are respected, that should satisfy anybody," he said.

While disagreement is normal in a democracy, the consensus of most Nigerians on the proposed confab is that the political class should ensure that national interest overrides that of individuals by seizing the present opportunity to chart a way forward for the country.

Source: Confab: Politics taking off the shine