TENURE-ELONGATION AND THE NIGERIA SAGA

It sure feels good to blame it on the rain when you feel under-the-weather. To face facts, is this the first leader we have jettisoned on this count, in straight succession? When is a Christ to come? Let’s get real, is it then the persons in power that are to blame in a chain, or could it by any chance be that the fault may lie rather in a faulty system, or the lack of one?

To face broader issues of analysis, contemplation demands an assessment of possible root causes of fundamental basis which border on nation-building.
§ Nigerian Leaders
§ Nigerian Character
§ The Nigerian Constitution

NIGERIAN LEADERS

Persons under this group may be classified into two categories: leaders past and present.
PAST
Nigerian leaders of the past were men of steel-will, motivated by the conviction that a just cause for the nation was worth every drop of blood that coursed through their veins. Willing to dote their hopes on history, they pursued after justice, laying all on the line. They turned out whiter than snow. Yet, these men were mere flesh and blood: they had their shortcomings.

The preoccupation with self government which acted to forge interests under a common goal, came at a price under a smart suzerainty not too eager to leave. The ‘divide and rule’ regime dealt a hard knock on the rude upstarts, which left their heritage in reduced potentiality. Tribal-warlords was at best the status the British could afford their eager faces.

At their departure, ‘independence’ was the gift the colonial masters bestowed upon their ungrateful subjects, at the expense of open-eyed democracy. They were left a constitution—an ‘Independence Constitution’: an oxymoron of a rare sort. They were given a structure—a British structure of Government in an American setting. They were endowed with a system—with claims to power and upward mobility based less on credibility and more on sentiments and affiliation.

All these in place, the Nigeria nation was born a nation of English parenthood fashioned after Yankeedom. A pariah of nations, designed not to work. This didn’t quite seem contrary to their purpose: our patriots had us a raw deal.

CONTEMPORARY LEADERS

Contrary to popular view, our present leaders seem to have fared better under the mortgaged political terrain they inherited. Though less endowed with the zest to die, fortunately, armed with greater military intelligence to both survive and live large, they have taught us to do just that. Take the Three Wise Men as prototypes of the New-Age Nigerian leader: IBB, Abacha and Obasanjo. Happy reminders of the imposing statues of stability at the entrance to the City of Lagos, these men proved with buffeting strokes to be no less in mettle than their predecessors. All shared a common instinct to survive the power shift in perpetuity. Their virtues, which they chorused beyond the lizard that survived the Iroko fall, are too quickly forgotten by the hard-to-please Nigerian populace. These should be carved in stone for on-coming leaders to emulate as blue-print.

IBB—Concentrated on infra-structural development (Third Mainland Bridge/Calabar River-like gutters). Made significant cuts on Western influences and control mechanisms. Implemented noteworthy indigenization of multinationals and conglomerates, setting meager share holding standards and austere purchasing license for petroleum products exports. Promptly whittled down almost to nothing Nigerian importation of American wheat, flour and rice. Pursued a course of improving the per capita income of individuals. Improved trade alliances with East Bloc nations for cheaper products. Curbed inflation and strove to achieve self-sufficiency. Extolled the virtues of intelligence, choosing to identify with prominent members of the elite. Recognized the pivotal role of native chiefs. Left a nation with heightened social awareness.

ABACHA—Concentrated on tremendously improving Federal Reserves at all cost in a deficit period. Strove to counter the effects of abuse of the Naira. Significantly achieved a stabilizing effect on sliding exchange rates. Promoted a culture of military discipline and blunt sincerity. Aggressively clamped down on influx of funny money. Curbed crime meaningfully. Brought sanity and professionalism to journalism. Continued much of the noble works of his predecessor in etching Nigeria’s place in peace-keeping, while improving trade ties with the East Bloc. Sold Nigerian soccer to the world. Revived the Educational Trust Fund.

OBASANJO—Introduced contemporary telecom innovations (GSM). Made the boldest and most sincere exploitation of Nigerian human resource (home/abroad). Overhauled the despondent financial sector. Ignited the private sector as an active participant in community development. Re-engineered the ETF to yield enviable results. Initiated noteworthy strides for development of the Niger-Delta region through the NDDC. Brought professionalism into the civil service. Granted autonomy to universities. Improved Nigeria’s status and international relations greatly. Privatized, commercialized and conceded near-defunct parastatals. Brought sanity to counter the indiscriminate erection of structures in urban settings. Made active contributions in the stability of African nations. Instituted accountability in public service.

All three men fared well. In a country with the stubbornness to yield of a Rottweiler and the attendant impossible-to-please syndrome of a spoiled child, to accomplish these feats in the background of strong and disruptive external influences evince more than an ordinary zeal to achieve.

Greater index of success is in the recognition by Western powers that Nigeria, like South Africa, has come of age.

NIGERIAN CHARACTER

Two angles shall be taken of this topic:
§ Character of the Nation
§ Character of its peoples

THE NATION—The nation Nigeria is an epitome of paradoxes. At best, its existence was a ‘divine error.’ Its earliest organ, the Police, from which emanated the forces was a conception of the Royal Niger Company, to improve its administrative efficiency. This was adopted by approval of the Queen into a formal guard. Representatives of the Home Office were then sent, whose opinions were sought as to what was most convenient to safeguard British interests on the protectorate.

British interests were mirrored in successive constitutions up until independence. The erroneous culture of repeated trial and error legislation to find a perfect match was preserved as a political culture unto this day. The physiopathology of this syndrome has left the judiciary tucked into tacit acceptance of a legal anomaly, legitimized by practice.

As a result of a lack of consultation with the populace, which should have been a true reflection of the…’We the people of Nigeria,’ which begins every constitution, the non- representation of the will of the people bestowed upon them a placid participation in political affairs; thus separating a ‘political class’ from the followership class of the ruled. This further creates a want of a sense of belonging and a psyche of apathy from ‘them’ the ‘stakeholders.’

The lopsided political terrain proceeds to leave all nationalities marginalized by sectional interests of a ruling class. In a succession of culminating consequences, the country is left with but one qualification as an entity: proximity. Common geographical continuity remains her only claim to nationhood. The question arises: who stands to gain now in this quest for ‘divide and rule’ tendencies long after the exit of the British. We need to measure our mirror images against our shadows. What must be missing?

Are the leaders to blame or the situational evil of a void in the vesting of leadership? Why is it a lose/lose chance for the people, irrespective of fortune and outcome? Is there no better way forward? Who is to take the initiative?

Now is a good time to start: better late than never, when each nationality shall take its destiny into its own hands. Each with a say in issues of Government gives a sense of accomplishment. There will arise no need for compromises and ad-hoc legislation when all have political bearing.




THE CHARACTER CALLED A NIGERIAN

The average Nigerian out in the streets has a criminal tendency as well as an innate conviction that things aren’t meant to move in a straight path. He would beg, steal or borrow, never to pay just to get by. He acts impulsively out of a reserve of wrongly motivated reflexes. He very often justifies his means by his end.

He needs to tell a lie or two to himself to make a success of the only opportunity before him. He is of an irrefutable impression that God understands his actions and would have been stuck in his shoes.

He is made all wrong, from the crown of his head to the sole of his feet. He knows without a doubt he would get what is to come to him; yet, is not the type to hang around and wait for time. He makes things happen, briskly: he runs things. Friends and peer groups will celebrate his day. The enemy shall surely mark his strides from behind. In summary, he is stress-free and cleaned-up. It’s always harvest time with him. Someone’s home and he stands alone.

THE NIGERIAN CONSTITUTION

What passes today as the Nigerian Constitution is merely the latest in a series of legislations, of British and Nigerian origin. Like the woman of many husbands, the existing perusal lacks authenticity of a claim to supremacy.

From the Luggard Constitution right down to the Independence Constitution, the legal documents cannot possibly qualify as constitutions as they lack the participation of the natives. An occupying suzerain lacks the capacity to vest the people with a constitution. A constitution must be home-grown to be autochthonous.

From the Republican Constitution to the 1999 Constitution, there exists no legal Grundnorm for Nigeria. The military have been the source of efficacy in one and all. The military cannot be a source of law just as much as one can’t give what one lacks. Universal Adult Suffrage and Enfranchisement bestow the right to vote and be voted for. The military may vote but cannot be voted for, so lack franchise: they can constitute no source of law.

This is what it takes to have a Constitution:
A CDC (Constitution Drafting Committee)
A CA (Constituent Assembly)
An aware and participatory public to whom the debates of the Legislature on the Constitution is published for a prolonged period
A presidential ‘adoption’
This adoption process has never been followed not because the rulership do not know. Repeated promulgations by their plethora cannot by their multitude replace the efficacy of one document that is reflective of the character of the people of Nigeria. That character changes not. Have you known a people that changed their god? Look around you, how many nations have had so many as two constitutions?

At the rate of our frequency, by the age of the U.S., we shall have had approximately 30 constitutions! Would you know that in practice the courts still recognize the efficacy of the replaced constitutions in matters poorly addressed by the existing constitution: dig the mess.

The word ‘sovereignty’ is a god-like quality that hails from the ‘vox populi’—the voice of the people is the voice of God: the people are never wrong. The people surrender their popular sovereignty to the state. Since the state, though a legal entity, cannot speak for itself, the Constitution does. The supreme constitution speaks in graphic detail for the state prescribing systems and structures. The Constitution, though a legal entity cannot act for itself, so surrenders its delegated authority to the government. The authority of Government is a borrowed supremacy to be exercised within the limits of carefully stipulated ambit.

The complexity of Government exists in divided loyalty between the people and the state. Both equal allegiances often pull in two extremes. The interest of the state often calls for sacrifices from the people. Also the rich and powerful are represented by nominated members of the Upper House of parliament, while the electorates are by the elected Lower House: often characterized by conflicting interests. Good governance strikes a balance between both contending interests.

Our beloved country shall some day witness the beauty of harmony in the balance of power, now that we have for once achieved a notable civilian administration that has overcome the temptation of whistling for the boys in kreplin. You don’t so much as need to call for them, just display intemperance enough and oiled guns shall scratch out the Ouster Clause over the Supremacy Clause—Section 1. of the Constitution. And there we go again.