Topics:
The reality of South-East marginalization
Truly, who is marginalising South-East?
______________________________________
The reality of South-East marginalization
President Muhammadu Buhari's first media chat since assumption of office on May 29, 2015, held on Wednesday, December 30 with its high and low points. The programme was well anchored and the president's performance was somehow good. I commend the panelists for asking probing questions on security, economy and disobedience of court orders in the case of former National Security Adviser (NSA), Col. Sambo Dasuki (rtd) and Nnamdi Kanu, the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) and Director of Radio Biafra as well as the South-East marginalization by past and present Federal Government.
I would have been disappointed if the session had ended without a question on Kanu and South-East marginalization, which is also regarded as Igbo marginalization. I salute the esteemed members of the team for their professionalism, especially Ibang Isine of Premium Times, for asking questions that provoked the response that led to this article.
I want to take the president on his pretence of the legendary South-East marginalization since after the Nigeria-Biafra war in January 14, 1970. Buhari wants to know who is marginalizing the South-East (Igbo) and the extent of such marginalization. He also said that his administration has not marginalized the zone in appointments by naming some of his ministers from the South-East and South-South to justify his claim. This is my humble attempt to prove to him that past administrations, including his current one, have marginalized the South-East zone.
The history of South-East marginalization started with Gen. Yakubu Gowon's creation of 12 states to weaken Gen. Emeka Ojukwu's resistance to his regime in 1967 before the declaration of Biafra and the commencement of the bitter Nigeria-Biafra war that lasted from 1967-1970. Though Gowon's 12 states structure had a sense of equity between the North and South of Nigeria at six states per zone, it denied the South-East majority states in the Eastern region as was the case for Hausa and Yoruba in the Northern and Western regions respectively.
At independence in 1960, the nation stood on three regional arrangement or tripod of the North, East and West. The North has Hausa as its major tribe, the East, Igbo, and the West, Yoruba. Upon attainment of Republican status in 1963, the Midwest region was created by Act of Parliament.
Nobody complained about the regional structure in which the entire North was one region while the South was divided into three regions probably because it was an era of true federalism where each region controls its resources and pays a stated proportion of its revenue to the central government.
The regions were almost semi-autonomous unlike the present unitary federalism, a hang-over of military despotism. While the Hausa remains the only major tribe that was in one region, the Yoruba and Igbo had the misfortune of having members of its stock in the North and Midwest regions respectively.
Even under the extant six geo-political zones structure, the Yoruba and the Igbo are the only major tribes with tentacles in North-Central and South-South. There are significant number of Yorubas in Kwara and Kogi States and Igbos in Rivers and Delta states.
Gowon's 12 states ensured that the South-East, the heart of Biafran revolution, was lumped into one state called the East Central State, while the Eastern Region minorities were carved into two states of Rivers and South Eastern State. This was the beginning of the marginalization of the South-East (Igbo).
Gowon did not stop there. He ensured that some oil-bearing Igbo areas were ceded to Rivers State. When the late Gen. Murtala Muhammed carved Nigeria into 19 states in 1976, the South-East became two states of Imo and Anambra. Thus, Muhammed gave the South-East one out of the seven states he created. It was Gen. Ibrahim Babangida that rose to address the South-East marginalization by giving us additional two states of Enugu and Abia out of eleven states he created. At that time, the zone needed three states to level up with others. The late Gen. Sani Abacha also gave the zone one state, Ebonyi, when he created six states. Therefore, the South-East has suffered undue marginalization in the state creation structure of Nigeria because at each epoch, it will be less than the other zones. Under the present 36 states structure, which ought to give each zone six states apiece, only the South-East has five and the North-West seven.
In the arbitrary distribution of the nation's 774 local governments, the South-East has the least. The entire North had 419 local governments while the South had 355. The zonal distribution of local governments is North-West (186); North-Central (115); North-East (112); FCT Abuja (six); South-West (137); South-South (123); and South-East (95). Why was the South-East given 95 when other zones got over one hundred?What is the name of this lopsided structure of Nigeria if not marginalization? Since appointment of ministers, recruitment into the civil service and security agencies and admission into unity schools, federal higher institutions and revenue sharing is based on states and local governments the South-East has been overtly marginalized due to having the least number of states and local governments in the federation. How many Police Commissioners and Military Commanders are from the zone?
Take a look of former heads of government of Nigeria and how many are from the South-East and for how long? If the 36 states structure is based on equity, the South-East would have six ministers from Buhari as constitutionally guaranteed. The South-East has no presence in Buhari's other appointments despite promises of balancing. In fact, there is no South-East presence in Buhari's government despite the fact that some of them staked their lives for his election.
The South-East is not in the security apparatus of the present government as represented by heads of security agencies. It is not among Buhari's 39 appointments. If these do not represent marginalization, what else? Can the government name any industry or military institution that is located in the zone? The federal roads in the zone are in their worst state. The second Niger Bridge has been on the drawing board of all administrations since 1999. What has happened to the River Ports in Onitsha and Oguta? Can Buhari address the infrastructural lacuna in the zone? There is no way Nigeria can develop with the structural injustice against one zone. The 2014 national conference made far-reaching recommendations to address the South-East structural marginalization and others in the country.
That is the issue the Buhari administration should address and not the pretentious denial of South-East marginalization. The South-East marginalization is real. It is neither a myth nor a fiction. The zone's 45 years of marginalization is behind the protests by MASSOB and IPOB. Keeping Kanu in detention despite court orders for his release will further fuel the agitation than quench it.
What will solve the nation's myriad problems is the restructuring of the country and the need to run fiscal federalism and not the current unitary federalism. True federalism will take care of states and local government creation as well as population census that has always been problematic.
The South-East is not asking for any preferential treatment in Nigeria but for equity and a level playing ground for all the federating units. Nigeria can only develop and achieve its manifest destiny when merit is enthroned in its socio-economic spheres.
On this very sensitive issue, the questioner must have played into Buhari's hands, as he (Buhari) asked somewhat justifiably, "who is marginalising South-Eat?" an instant dismissal of the insinuation that he was personally responsible for the real or imagined short-changing of South-East zone. The questioner must have believed in the allegation of marginalisation, in which case, the facts must be on his fingertips. But by the time Buhari fought back, the questioner was left stranded despite the remarkable and indeed unprecedented guts at follow-up questions, which featured the television duel.
There are, however, two indisputable facts. First, marginalisation of South-East exists but second, Buhari or this particular administration cannot be held, especially solely responsible. Another way to put it is that for a zone, which completely opposed Buhari's aspiration to the presidency, it is part of the consequences of that undisguised choice not to expect much more than its current lot, especially so early in the days of Buhari's administration. Anywhere in the world, electoral choices have consequences.
Even then, listen to Muhammadu Buhari. Who is the governor of Central Bank? Who is the Minister of Labour? Who is the Minister of Foreign Affairs? Who is the Minister of Science and Technology? Who is the Petroleum Minister of State/Managing Director of NNPC? Who is the Education Minister of State? These are no favours from President Buhari but the statutory entitlements of South-East under the constitution, not denied that zone, despite the pattern of the results of last year's presidential elections.
This, however, does not mean South-East zone has not been marginalised over the years, for various reasons. More disturbing is the fact that for such marginalisation by the federal authorities, South-Easterners, mainly state governors, federal ministers and National Assembly members are unconscious accessories to that fact of marginalisation. For example, for some unknown reasons, moreso in a democracy, state governors are so scared of federal authorities, such that in any face to face gathering, all 36 state governors fidget before the President of the Republic. So far, there have been only two exceptions, more of enfant terrible - Orji Uzor Kalu under Obasanjo and Fayose under Muhammadu Buhari.
That was why, in particular, Obasanjo and Jonathan considered it confrontational for any state governor even to argue his (state governor's) cause for federal attention. Are state governors from South-East not members of National Council of States? How many of them (from South-East ever drew attention of the council of states to the terrible state of marginalisation - poor infrastructure, mainly federal roads - in South-East? Which single federal road in South-East is motorable for fifty kilometres or even less?
Again, should President Buhari decide for state visit to contiguous like Imo/Aba or Enugu/Ebonyi or Enugu/Anambra, all-out efforts in such two states, at least, a fortnight before such visit, will be geared towards cleaning the streets, patching up especially the very same poor federal roads to pretend everything is fine and comfortable for the August visitor. For such visit, in Imo State, for example, the unofficial waste dump site at Douglas Road would be cleared so as not to in curt the wrath of the President. If the visiting President drives through entirely make believe smooth federal roads, how would he ever appreciate the cries of marginalisation of South-East in terms of infrastructure? Even if such demands are ever made, the President's only memory from his visit will be that of good federal roads in South-East.
Instead host South-East state governors must make the President drive through federal roads in that zone as they actually are, unmotorable, pot-holed, completely broken down as Enugu-Anambra (Onitsha) purported expressway. Why not get federal authorities to simultaneously reconstruct Enugu-Onitsha and Lagos-Ibadan expressways. Where were South-Easterners when critics of the poor state of Lagos-Ibadan expressway refused to give up until second-term seeking President Jonathan awarded the contract for that road, which currently has gone beyond quarter of completion? That contract had to be hurriedly awarded in time before the 2015 presidential elections.
On the other hand, federal bridges spring up all over Nigeria over rivers, waterways and heavy traffic junctions. A fresh mandate-seeking President Jonathan, in 2011, pledged a new Asaba-Onitsha bridge to be completed within his first term in office. He failed to deliver. Yet four years later, South-Easterners with over ninety per cent votes (figures announced) again preferred the same Jonathan. The message sent by South-Easterners is that there is no consequence for failed election promises. What stops another electioneering President from taking South-Easterners for a ride with a similar campaign promise to be broken?
Like other parts of the country, South-East zone has minister and their advisers in the Federal Cabinet. Are they benchwarmers too afraid to speak up at budget sessions? What are their contributions in favour of South-East? Annually at National Assembly and cabinet meetings, estimates are passed without the insistence of South-East representatives on the very poor roads in this zone. That is why without any prejudice to her recently annulled senatorial election, Uche Ekwunife from Anambra central, must be appreciated for her distinction.
So soon after taking her seat, Uche Ekwunife succeeded in dragging Senate Ad-hoc Committee on works led by Bernabas Gamade on inspection of poor roads) in Anambra. What were the efforts of the remaining fourteen senators from South-East?
Another budget has just been passed by the National Assembly. What was the performance of South-East members in focusing on poor infrastructure in that zone, the main thrust of alleged marginalisation? How many of them spoke for redressing the poor situation in South-East? Such dereliction of duty is not new. I saw it at first hand as Chief Press Secretary to former President Ibrahim Babangida. I had to argue, during staff meetings for the federal government take-over of Owerri airport.
The case, as I argued, was straightforward. All airports in Nigeria are Federal-Government owned. Why, therefore, must South-East be the only one constructing an airport through community efforts?
Others would not agree with me on the ground that an Owerri airport would "kill" nearby Port-Harcourt airport. But I maintained my stand that instead, Owerri airport would only complement the Port-Harcourt airport either in an emergency or in coping with heavy air traffic during Christmas and New Year festivals.
President Babangida, swayed by any arguments, agreed with me and overruled the others. That was how federal government took over the construction of Owerri airport. Somehow, the story got to General Ike Nwachukwu, who on a visit to Dodan Barracks, expressed thanks because, as he put it, he was told that very often, I spoke for South-East cause.
I am not from South-East and if I could speak for that zone, why can't South-Easterners in strategic positions – federal cabinet or National Assembly – speak for themselves as much as they speak for other parts of the country? They should be bold and free to perform in such situations. The lot of South-Easterners in those positions is to champion Nigeria's overall development without fear or favour but initially or eventually for the development of their area. That is the basis of political representation.
There is also this mentality in South-East zone, of one man sabotaging group effort. Despite the current justified agitation against marginalization at least in terms of poor roads, all it takes is for the federal authorities to extend some largesse to a key figure, and he will opt out of the agitation. It was of course, even worse during the civil war. While Biafrans were attracting sympathy from the outside world and even from public-spirited figures like Tai Solarin and Wole Soyinka who, for their courage, were clamped into detention on the federal side, a South-Easterner was supplying arms on commercial basis to the federal authorities. At the end of hostilities, this same man emerged one of the leading politicians in South-East. Such would not happen in South-West, where, for life, that man and his family would be ostracised for life in all ramifications.
By the way, for all the controversy, which marked her tenure, ex-Aviation Minister Stella Oduah, now a Senator, elevated Enugu airport to international status, strictly on merit, along with others. She too must be appreciated for her distinction. That is how not to self-marginalise South-East. Enugu airport is one of the oldest, in Nigeria. Still on the television interview, President Buhari strayed into some controversies.
Obviously indignant at the sordid disclosures of misappropriation of public funds, Buhari could not have thereby directed that the bail granted by courts to the suspects be disobeyed. But there is no doubt from his utterances and body language that he agreed with continued detention of the suspects. In the process, he incurred avoidable public criticisms. There was a better explanation by the law enforcement agencies that Sambo Dasuki was re-arrested to arraign him for fresh charges. That is tenable even in a court of law. Without such a compelling reason, there could not be any justification for not obeying court order.
Meanwhile, Buhari's angry response drowned the fact that other accused persons - former Sokoto State governor, Attahiru Bafarawa, electronic media mogul, Dokpesi, and ex-Minister Ambassador Yuguda - had all been released on bail, as directed by law courts. Who are the others granted bail and are still being detained?
There is this other aspect. Even if Sambo Dasuki is still being detained on Buhari's order and in defiance of bail granted by the court, it is a clear case of interference with judicial process. Who is responsible for that? Definitely not Buhari.
Instead, those to be blamed are National Assembly members, and by extension, politicians. They cannot have the better of two worlds. Over two months ago, when it seemed apparent that Senate President Bukola Saraki would be tried by Code of Conduct Tribunal for alleged false declaration of assets, House of Representatives speaker Yakubu Dogara, publicly called on President Buhari to intervene and stop the trial. Dogara was taken up in this column on the danger of his desperate call on the executive (Buhari) to interfere in an ongoing judicial process.
If that was so, how could the same politicians turn round today to accuse Buhari of disrupting judicial process in the matter of bail granted to an accused standing trial? For Buhari, to have yielded to Speaker Yakubu Dogara by halting an ongoing judicial process is no better disobedience of court's power to conduct its statutory duties than not releasing an accused granted bail.
By the way, one other accused purportedly not released after bail granted by the court is the Biafran agitator, Nnamdi Kanu. He is even luckier than Sambo Dasuki. On being arrested on the precinct of the court after he was granted bail, law enforcement agencies indicated that the man was to face fresh charges. And truly, he was re-arraigned within a short time. But he declined both to enter his plea and being tried by the Judge, who instantly returned the charge file to the Chief Judge to re-assign the case to another Judge. Buhari can't be blamed for that or be accused of disobeying court order. It is up to Kanu to face his trial so that he can be considered for bail.
That was the explanation Buhari should have given instead of his macho posture that Kanu did not merit a bail that was NEVER.
No comments:
Post a Comment