National Conference: So Far, So Good?

NEARLY four months after the National Conference was convoked, and following weeks of deliberations, horse trading and compromise, the country is getting set to have a new TEMPLATE, though, the people’s seal, in form of referendum, is actually needed to give it the blueprint of claiming the sobriquet, The Peoples Constitution.
Over the years, bad governance and institutional failure have characterised the country. And those involved in this ring of failure have done everything possible to maintain the situation by ‘misusing religion, regional sentiment and ethnic parochial propaganda for selfish interest’.
Since independence on October 1, 1960, the country has been in captivity, no thanks to the all-too-visible political class that has raised corruption to a national ethos. The ‘unholy advent’ of the military in national politics, in 1966, finally brought the country closer to ‘oligarchic capitalism’, with government office as the surest ‘passage’ to national fund.
The numerous crises and the spate of ethnic, religious and political violence threatening Nigeria’s democracy and corporate existence, no doubt, are rooted from the socio-economic and political activities, which promoted corruption, impunity, electoral fraud, irresponsible leadership and total collapse of ethics and values with failure of institutions.
The call for a national dialogue revolved around the reality and issues in the country, and the means to forge ahead: how new ideals and principles towards living together could be worked out, and the need to accept the fact that there exist injustice, structural defects in the federation, which all the previous administrations refused to acknowledge.
In the past, Nigeria had witnessed defects in constitutional conferences. In 1978, there was problem of ‘no go area’, which led to the Northern delegates to walk out of the conference. The 1994/95 was regarded as farce because of the boycott of the South West, while the South South delegates walked out of the National Political Reform Conference of 2005.
Thus, when President Goodluck Jonathan announced the convocation of National Conference, there was a preponderance of hope that Nigeria could be fixed. In fact, a lot of people believe that a new Nigeria can emerge from the conference that can serve the interest of the citizens.
The administration of late President Umaru Yar’Adua favoured the Electoral Reforms Committee approach to resolving the political crisis, but even the recommendations of the committee headed by Justice Mohammed Uwais, a former Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN) were not fully adopted.
When it was announced, many did not take the conference seriously. So vehement was the opposition that was spearheaded by the All Progressives Congress (APC) that it seemed the kite would not fly. First to raise the opposition was the party’s National Leader, Senator Bola Tinubu, when he came back from his medical treatment abroad. By the time Governor Adams Oshiomhole of Edo State had altercation with Col. Tony Nyam (rtd), a member of the steering committee, who eventually resigned, it was obvious that the opposition did not want to key into it.
A delegate, who spoke with The Guardian, said the divisions in this country are as wide as ever and the cracks in this country are deepening, and if concrete steps are not taken to establish a solid foundation of equity, justice and fairness, the development craved for would be lost.
Though some of the delegates came with hate, ethnic and religious chauvinism with no little interest to save Nigeria and Nigerians from socio-economic and political destruction and manipulation, right now, antagonists and protagonists are getting united under a common purpose to actualise the conference.
Before the convocation of the conclave, preparatory meetings held in almost every geo-political zone, in fact, every region had its own agenda.
The Southeast said secession must be part of the issues to be tabled for discussion while Southwest wanted true federalism (regionalism). Though the North did not categorically state its own position, after the elders of the region met, Northern members were urged to boycott the conference if issues that threatened national unity came up for mention.
Jonathan stated while inaugurating the conference on March 17, 2014, that there is need to engage in this discussion, and he committed himself to supporting and promoting whatever thing that will be done to implement the decisions.
For supporters of the president’s decision, a national conference to resolve issues that currently caused friction in the country underscored the need for a fundamental change in Nigeria’s administrative and governance structure.
The basic agenda for these people was first a reconciliation of all Nigerians, as currently there were doubts about the continued existence of the country. Beyond this, a key concern was economic restructuring. The conference should discuss and resolve the character and nature of the economic system that could ensure sustained improvement in the material lives of the ordinary people.
The current skewed federal arrangement should be restructured with power, resources and responsibilities duly devolved to states and local levels. Nigeria must be able to operate true federalism where principles of derivation are adopted in the sharing of national wealth as it was done in the past before the discovery of oil.

An unencumbered Nigerian federation should allow federating states to control their resources based on the principle of 100 per cent derivation with taxes paid to the central government.
States should have full control of whatever natural resources that they are endowed with by providence. This will obviate the overt no-man’s-land mentality with which the national patrimony is viewed and engender a new form of production relations in the country.
Another agenda was that Nigerians must decide and agree on what the roles of the military will be in future, the powers and roles of the police force, the respect for human rights and the enforcement of the freedom enshrined for in the constitution, the implementation of equitable federal character /zoning, the enthronement of meritocracy, the issues of statism and citizenship, the respect for the rule of law and the empowerment of the judiciary.
AFTER three weeks of intensive committee work, the plenary session of the ongoing National Conference, in Abuja, resumed on Monday, May 19, with commencement of the consideration of reports of the committees assigned to handle critical national issues.
Determined to meet the mid-July deadline for the submission of its report to the Federal Government, the National Conference altered the modalities for considering the reports of its 20 standing committees.
At specific times within the three weeks, the Committees’ leadership met with the Conference Management comprising the chairman, deputy chairman, the secretary and the three assistant secretaries to rub minds on certain issues that facilitated their work.
It was during one of those meetings that the issue of time extension for committees from two to three weeks was discussed, agreed upon and implemented in view of the workload assigned each of the committees and the various national public holidays that followed.
The 20 sub-committees examined virtually every issue that troubles Nigeria without any hesitation or anxiety about being censored. The devolution of power committee made courageous and far-reaching recommendations. What is called the Gambari consultative report on devolution of power recommended the reconstruction of the Northeast.
After the item-by-item consideration of the 20 reports, and in line with the Order 13 of the National Conference Procedure Rules 2014, a final report of the conference will be drawn up and approved by the delegates.
The 19 committees debated and approved radical recommendations — pro-federal issues that attempt to demilitarise the constitution. The features of command and centralisation, which are said to be military ideas (The idea of every establishment having its headquarters in Abuja) are not in conformity with a truly people’s constitution. The present states that do not cater for the interest of the oppressed minorities comprising ethnic minorities, linguistic, social and religious minorities were looked at.
The conference also touched on security and policing. It recommended a multi-tier policing (State Police) for those that can afford it. Even viable enclaves such as Lagos Island can have theirs.
The Conference Committee on Political Restructuring and Forms of Government recommended the creation of more states based on merit.
In its final report, the committee attached a list of requests for additional 18 states and one for a change of name.
The committee resolved by consensus that “there shall be created an additional state for the South East geo-political zone.
“That all other requests for state creation should be considered on merit.”
The rapporteur of the committee, Chief (Mrs) R.I. Chris-Garuba, signed the “List of Proposals for State Creation”.
The recommendations of these various committees produced outcomes that were considered progressive and revolutionary, and if implemented, Nigeria will benefit from them. However, unless the reasonable compromise is achieved, the whole conference will be considered a jamboree, even by the opposition.