Independence Special
Niger Delta And Resource Control: A Post-Script
NIGERIA @ 55
Ben Naanen
The time was during Obasanjo’s presidency. We read a small non-headline story in the media. It was about an official engagement between the President and the state governors. After the meeting came the usual convivial banters. The President drew attention to the difference in the physique of two governors standing close to each other. One, a governor of one of the northern states who had nature’s gift of slimness. The other a Niger Delta governor with a robust appearance in his etibo and matching Niger Delta hat. In his trademark caustic humour the President exclaimed, “resource control”. In other words, resource control was responsible for the apparently affluent and overfed look of the Niger Delta governor and the presumed deprivation and hunger of his northern counterpart.
This allegory summarises the divergent interpretations of the term resource control in Nigeria’s post military political lexicon. To many Niger Delta politician it means personal enjoyment of the benefits of the black gold with which the region is endowed even at the expense of his constituents that he claims to represent. To the militant activist it means recovering by force of arms the control of the petroleum resources that had been allegedly expropriated by the country’s power elite through political manipulation. To many people outside the Niger Delta it means denying to the rest of Nigeria the benefits of federalism by insisting on the control and enjoyment of a natural resource which should be the patrimony of all Nigerians. To the masses in the Niger Delta it means environmental degradation, poverty and hunger in the midst of plenty. To the fashion industry it means a particular style featuring the etibo or senator, a matching hat with or without a walking stick accentuated by a touch of affluence and confident swagger.
Let us unveil the true identity of the controversial resource control issue. Irrespective of the multifarious interpretations the issue is intimately connected to the ethnic minority movement in Nigeria. The movement originally revolved around self-determination expressed in state creation as a means of empowering minorities and giving them a sense of belonging in the Nigerian polity. It predates Nigeria’s independence in 1960 and can rightly be traced to the immediate post- World-War II years. The minorities’ demand for the creation of states was rooted in the rise of ethnic nationalism in the country following the growing consolidation of the Nigerian colonial state, the introduction of regionalism under a federalist constitution in 1954 which gave residual powers to the regions, and the growth of political parties which seemed identifiable with the dominant ethnic community in each of the three regions. As independence drew nearer the fear of ethnic domination and exclusion among minorities in a post-colonial Nigeria grew stronger. State agitation intensified.
In the Niger Delta the first major gain of the ethnic minority movement was the creation in 1947 of Rivers Province from the Owerri and Calabar provinces. The new province comprised Ahoada, Brass, Degema and Ogoni Divisions with Port Harcourt as headquarters. From the 1950s three major state movements emerged among the Nigerian minorities. These were the Middle Belt state, The Calabar-Ogoja-Rivers (COR) state, and a mainstream Rivers State movement. Minority fears and agitation eventually led to the setting up in 1958 by the British authorities of the Minorities Commission, popularly called the Willink Commission. To the disappointment of the minorities the Commission did not recommend states creation on the ground that yielding to state demands could lead to endless agitation for states and the eventual balkanization of Nigeria. The Commission instead recommended the designation of the Niger Delta as a “Special Area” and the creation of the Niger Delta Development Board to address the special development challenge of the area.
State creation agitation intensified in the immediate post-independence years. When states were eventually created in 1967 it was not only for the minorities in the Niger Delta and the Middle Belt but the whole country was restructured into twelve states. The timing of the restructuring by the then Head of State, Lt Col Yakubu Gowon, was designed to serve a political expediency more than anything else. It was primarily to wean the eastern minorities from Lt Col Chukwuemeka Odumegwu Ojukwu’s threatened secession of the Eastern Region. Regardless, Ojukwu went ahead to declare the Republic of Biafra and the ensuing thirty-month civil war “to keep Nigeria one” ended with the surrender and collapse of Biafra in January 1970.
All through this period the ethnic minority movement did not espouse any specific agenda in respect of the control of resources or an economic programme. The resource control agitation can be traced to three critical developments. These were the shift in the centre of gravity of the Nigerian economy from an agricultural export economy to an extractive economy based on oil, the political centralization of the Nigerian state away from the principle of federalism, and the revenue allocation controversy.
The discovery of oil in the Niger Delta from the 1950s engendered the shift to a petro-economy which naturally raised the question of revenue sharing. From 1946 to the eve of independence in 1959 derivation dominated the revenue allocation formula. This was the period of post-world War II commodity boom when cocoa was king in the Nigerian economy, enabling the cocoa-producing Western Region under the progressive leadership of Obafemi Awolowo to undertake major social development ahead of the other regions. The derivation principle began to decline progressively in the post-independence years as petroleum rose steadily to dominate the national economy.
The decline of the derivation principle was accompanied by the clamour for the creation of more states all over the country. Before independence the various regional governments opposed the creation of states. This was mainly because states creation was perceived by these regional governments controlled by the dominant ethnic groups as capable of weakening their control. The oil boom was now seen as the proverbial national cake whose distribution was based on states. The principle of economic viability was ignored in the creation of states as the dominant ethnic groups continued to multiply their states for the purpose of sharing oil revenue. Villages became state capitals which were transformed into modern cities by oil money. By 1995 the country had 36 states plus the Federal Capital Territory, 36 state bureaucracies and 774 local government councils, all financed with oil proceeds. Without oil money most of these unproductive states cannot survive. This is the negative side of state creation motivated mainly by political and redistributive considerations.
The amazing paradox was while non-oil-producing parts of the federation were agitating and getting more states hence increasing their share of national revenues, the oil-producing states were resisting being divided into more states. A case in point was the old Rivers State were successive governments in Port Harcourt resisted the creation of more states. By the time they realised the folly of their resistance resulting in the creation of Bayelsa State in 1995 other parts of the country had already fattened themselves on hassle-free national cake from the Niger Delta.
The proliferation of states, decline of the derivation principle, increasing centralization of the polity by the military dictatorship which continued to strengthen the dominance of the major ethnic groups, oil-based environmental degradation, monumental looting of oil money by the elite, and the perceived exclusion of the Niger Delta from the benefits of the oil economy, combined to heighten new definitions and strategies of resource control. To some resource control now meant the predominance of the derivation principle in the revenue allocation formula, ranging from the current 13 percent to 50 percent. At the extreme were proponents who advocated total control over the natural resources of their communities. The new phase of resource control agitation accompanied growing resistance in the Niger Delta and the demand for varying degrees of autonomy by the local ethno-linguistic groups.
The Ogoni people under MOSOP were to pioneer the new phase of agitation and empowerment with a new methodology of mass movement. While demanding for local autonomy, the Ogoni Bill of Rights issued in 1990 defined the Ogoni’s conception of resource control as “the right to the control and use of a fair proportion of the Ogoni economic resources for Ogoni development.” The 1998 Kaiama Declaration by the Ijaw youths adopted a more radical stance by declaring that the Ijaw have agreed to remain a part of Nigeria but will “demand and work for self-government and resource control for the Ijaw people.”
Anger and resistance in the Niger Delta was building up rapidly. While the Ogoni adopted a non-violent approach, anchoring their struggle on the support of the international community, other groups were not so patient with the slow-yielding non-violent method and opted for direct action. The situation made the Abacha dictatorship to concede the 13 percent derivation principle in the 1999 Constitution. The derivation issue became one of the hottest issues at the 2005 still-born Political Reform Conference initiated by President Obasanjo.
Not done yet, the Niger Delta struggle for resource control entered a militant phase with the inauguration of the current civilian dispensation in 1999. Groups such as MEND and sundry warlords intensified armed resistance, resulting in the kidnaping and death of foreign oil workers and drastic reduction in oil production. By 2010 a heightened combination of politically-motivated and criminally-inspired violence which was crippling the oil industry had forced the late President Umaru Yar’ Adua to initiate the Amnesty Programme to end the internal war in the Niger Delta. Today the struggle has to all intents and purposes been hijacked by a deadly criminal fringe which makes no pretension about the political factors that originally motivated the armed resistance in the Niger Delta.
At this point we may need to reflect on the gains and losses of the resource control struggle. The 13 percent derivation fund without doubt has been a significant gain for oil-producing states. In 2002 Delta State was the largest oil producing state in Nigeria. By 2007 it was Rivers State, which was in turn overtaken by Akwa Ibom State in 2012. What are the benefits to the people of Niger Delta of this huge infusion of cash from the derivation fund? Clearly there has been considerable infrastructural development in these states but the same cannot be said of social development as all the indices of such development remain unimpressively low.
It could be said that more attention has been paid to infrastructure projects largely because these are more physical manifestation of oil money than relatively invisible poverty reduction initiatives that would benefit the masses. Moreover, the award of infrastructure contracts represent opportunities for personal enrichment. Every unaccountable government always has projects to siphon money, so have been many of these contracts. This is prebendal politics, which focuses on personal gains for public office holders and their supporters rather than collective development. The phenomenon is best captured in Richard Joseph’s 1987 seminal book, Democracy and Prebendal Politics in Nigeria: The Rise and Fall of the Second Republic.
Resource control-inspired armed resistance has given way to vicious criminality in the Niger Delta. Sundry criminals who made a living out of armed robbery and varieties of extortionism have taken to kidnaping for ransom which is more lucrative. Capturing an innocent high value individual yields more cash than several risky armed robbery operations combined. And the relatively inaccessible creeks have offered save havens for these criminals to ply their inglorious trade. Many commanders and foot soldiers of resource control militancy organized in cult groups became mercenaries for desperate politicians in the violent electoral contestations that have characterized the Niger Delta since 1999.
Significantly, the Goodluck Jonathan’s Presidency was seen as a reward for the Niger Delta struggle. The administration therefore enjoyed tremendous goodwill across the Niger Delta at its inception. Sooner than later sections of the Niger Delta began to feel excluded ostensibly on account of the overtly ethnic colouration of those from the region who were benefitting the most from their closeness to the presidency. Nothing symbolises more graphically the uncertain legacy of the Jonathan presidency in respect of the Niger Delta than the uncompleted East-West Road, the virtually abandoned highway linking Yenegoa and Ogbia which connects Jonathan’s LGA, and the failure to implement the UNEP Report on Ogoni.
Meanwhile, the environmental pollution of the Niger Delta continues. The oil companies do not see any sense in replacing corroded pipelines installed fifty years ago. These have become pipelines to hell as they leak and spill huge amounts of oil into the creeks and agricultural land. These horrendous lapses are conveniently labelled by the oil companies as “equipment” or “operational failure”. In Nigeria oil companies get away with murder because our laws do not protect the rights of citizens against corporate recklessness. Thriving fishing ports of yesteryears have today been turned into economic wilderness inhabited by illegal bunkering and refining denizens. Destitution has become the way of life for local inhabitants who in the past made livelihood of fishing and farming. .
As a corollary to resource control, the question has often been quietly asked whether Nigeria would have remained the single entity it is today if the oil that is sustaining the country was located in any of the dominant ethnic areas. Let us assume the oil was found in Lake Chad area, the North-West or South-West geopolitical zones. Many respondents may readily answer in the negative. Perhaps there would have been in existence today a Bornu Republic, a Republic of the Caliphate or an Oduduwa Republic. The luck that Nigeria has is that the petroleum resource which has been the single most important force that has glued the country together, is located in the Niger Delta, a region occupied by minorities who have no strong desire and capability to assert a sovereign existence. In spite of all their proclaimed aspirations of autonomy and resource control, what the Niger communities want are a political space, a voice in a united Nigeria, and improved living standard, not a separate country.
In conclusion, robbed by their governments, impoverished by oil production and besieged by hostage-taking violent criminality, the inhabitants of the Niger Delta appear prostrate and helpless. The “resource curse” should be reversed. These are some of the critical issues which the next phase of the resource control movement must address.
Ben Naanen is a Professor of Economic History at the University of Port Harcourt. He was a former General Secretary of the Movement for the Survival of Ogoni People (MOSOP) between 1992-1999, and later became the chairman, Provisional Council of MOSOP in 2012. He has been at different times, Resident Senior Fellow and Consultant, World Resources, Washington DC, USA; Consultant, UN Research Institute for Social Development, Geneva, Switzerland, and Director, Emerald Energy Institute of Petroleum Economics Policy and Strategic Studies, University of Port Harcourt, member, Multi-Stakeholder Committee for the Implementation of UNEP Report on Ogoni set up by the Federal Government and Member, Governing Council of Nigeria Institute of International Affairs (NIIA). He is a copious writer, researcher, analyst and consummate scholar.
There is no gainsaying the fact that Nigeria has come of age, having attained political independence for six decades. In spite of its numerous challenges ranging from socio-economic to infrastructural deficit, insecurity and endemic corruption, Nigeria remains Africa’s big brother and and an important member of the world body – the United Nations.
Beside being the largest economy in Africa and the 27th in the world in terms of nominal Gross Domestic Product (GDP), Nigeria has the 6th largest gas reserves and the 8th largest crude oil reserves in the world. It is rich in commercial quantities with about 37 types of solid mineral and has a population of over 200 million people. In addition, the debt-to-GDP ratio is 16.075 percent as of 2019.
Yet, the Nigerian economy has grossly underperformed in comparison to its enormous resource endowment and its peer nations. In the 1970s, the emerging Asian countries like Thailand, Malaysia, China, India and Indonesia were far behind Nigeria in terms of GDP per capital. Today, these countries have transformed their economies and are not only miles ahead of Nigeria, but are also major players in the global economy.
In April last year, Nigeria was rated the poverty capital of the world, with 91.51 million people living in extreme poverty. Only recently too, Nigeria’s Country Director of Oxfam International, Constant Tchona, revealed in Abuja that 94.48 million Nigerians live below N684 per day, meaning they are living below poverty level. This also means that 25 percent of the world’s extremely poor will be living in Nigeria by 2030. In this circumstance, it is difficult for the country to meet the Sustainable Development Goals set by the United Nations.
This is not a good testimonial for a country that prides itself as the giant of Africa and the 27th largest economy in the world.
How Nigeria came about this ugly narrative has remained a disturbing paradox of a nation.
In the closing days of Nigeria’s independence, things seemed to be well arranged for a new country to take off. The lands and rivers were in their pristine state – virgin, lush and sumptuous, to guarantee a rich harvest for the farming and fishing population which then constituted 80 percent of the native population. The weather was generally good and the people were energetic and hardworking.
We have gold in Ilesha, cocoa in the South-West, palm oil in the East and groundnut pyramid in Jos, which sustained the economy and earned the country good revenue as a net exporter of agricultural produce. As a bonus, the nation found oil in Oloibiri, in the present-day Bayelsa State, which made the story sweeter and the future rosier.
Initially, the agricultural sector, driven by the demand for food and cash crops production was the centre of the growth process, contributing 54.7% to the GDP during the 1960s. The second decade of independence saw the emergence of the oil industry as the main driver of growth.
As the nation began to produce oil in commercial quantity, Nigeria abandoned its agrarian economy and embraced an economy driven by oil. Oil thus became the mainstay of the nation’s economy. Since then, government expenditure has become dependent on oil revenues, more or less dictating the pace of the economic growth. Paradoxically, the oil boom turns out to be the bane of the country’s development till date.
Since independence, economic policies have not been in short supply. Successive governments have, since 1960, pursued the goal of structural changes without much success. There was the First National Development Plan between 1962 and 1968, the Second Development Plan (1970-1974), the Third Development Plan (1975-1980) and the Fourth National Development Plan (1981-1985).
We also had Operation Feed the Nation during General Olusegun Obasanjo’s military regime, Green Revolution under President Sheu Shagari, Structural Adjustment Programme (SAP) under President Ibrahim Badamosi Babangida, the National Economic Empowerment Development Strategy (NEEDS) under President Olusegun Obasanjo, as well Nigeria’s Vision 2010 and Vision 2020. All these plans and programmes are geared towards breathing life into the nation’s economy, by reducing dependence on oil, diversifying the economy, generating employment, and creating a globally competitive and stable economy.
The purpose of the NEEDS, for instance, was to raise the country’s standard of living through a variety of reforms, including macroeconomic stability, deregulation, liberalization, privatization, transparency and accountability.
It was also intended to create seven million new jobs, diversify the economy, boost non-energy exports, increase industrial capacity utilization, and improve agricultural productivity. The initiative was meant to be replicated at the state level known as the State Economic Empowerment Development Strategy (SEEDS). But the programme, like many others before and after it, didn’t succeed much due to various factors ranging from insincerity on the part of its drivers, policy inconsistency and somersaults and lack of continuation by successive governments.
However, the transformation in telecommunications sector stands out as the most successful reform in 60 years. Many sectors of the economy have leveraged on this transformation to make significant progress in the use of information and technology in the service sector of the economy. This has enhanced service delivery although it is prone to impairment by frauds and corruption. Sadly, the corruptive activities of fraudsters in the banking industry have made the telecoms transformation unsatisfactory. Moreover, the poor quality of service, the high cost of doing business and multiple taxation, unrest and banditry are sources of concern to investors.
Generally, the major factors accounting for the relative decline of the country’s economic fortunes in spite of these lofty policies, are easily identifiable as political instability, lack of focused and visionary leadership, economic mismanagement and corruption. Weak infrastructure and weak institutions also pose threat to the nation’s economy, just as power supply remains a major burden on businesses.
Prolonged period of military rule stifled economic and social progress, particularly in the three decades of 1970s to 1990s. However, since 1999, the country has returned to the path of civil democratic governance and has sustained uninterrupted democratic rule for a period of 21 years. But have things changed? Maybe; maybe not.
No doubt, economic growth has risen substantially over the last decade, with annual average of 7.4%. But the growth has not been inclusive, broad-based and transformational. This implies that economic growth in Nigeria has not resulted in the desired structural changes that would make manufacturing the engine room of development and induce poverty alleviation.
Even though economic statistics shows that the non oil and gas sector accounts for 90.9 percent of the GDP while oil and gas accounts for 9.1 percent, the paradox is that the oil sector accounts for over 50 percent of the nation’s revenue more than 80 percent of its foreign exchange earnings. This reflects the imbalance in the economy since independence and also underscores the declining productivity in oil and gas for the past 60 years.
The lack of political will to restructure the oil and gas sector remains a major drawback to Nigeria’s economic growth and prosperity. It is this lack of reform, restructuring and planning that is the bane of the nation’s economic backwardness so far. It makes the Nigerian economy vulnerable to external shocks owing to its weakness in economic inclusion.
Although oil revenues contribute two-thirds of state revenues, oil only contributes about 9.1% to the GDP. This means that oil remains a small part of the country’s overall economy.
The fall in oil prices since 2015 has further weakened Nigeria’s economic base. The country experienced economic recession for the part of 2016 and 2017. The period witnessed serious devaluation of the Naira with high inflation throwing ordinary Nigerians off-balance and the private sector groaning in excruciating pain.
One sector Nigeria has failed to develop maximally over the years is agriculture.
Nigeria ranks sixth worldwide and first in Africa in farm output. The sector accounts for about 18% of GDP and almost one-third of employment.
However, the largely subsistence agricultural sector has not kept up with Nigeria’s rapid population growth. The sector suffers from extremely low productivity, reflecting reliance on antiquated methods, thus making Nigeria, once a large net exporter of food, to now import some of its food products.
However, the present administration under President Muhammadu Buhari, through prioritisation of local agricultural production and ban on importation of foreign food items, is making efforts towards making the country food sufficient again. Mechanization is now gradually leading to a resurgence in manufacturing and exporting of food products, and the move towards food sufficiency.
Other sectors which could have helped the nation’s economy such as tourism and mining suffer from the country’s poor electricity, roads and potable water.
For instance, the mining of minerals in Nigeria accounts for only 0.3% of its GDP, due to the influence of its vast oil resources. The domestic mining industry is underdeveloped, leading to Nigeria having to import minerals that it could produce domestically, such as salt or iron ore.
It will be recalled that organized mining began in 1903 when the Mineral Survey of the Northern Protectorates was created by the British colonial government. A year later, the Mineral Survey of the Southern Protectorates was founded. By the 1940s, Nigeria was a major producer of tin , columbite, and coal .
Iron and steel sector in particular, received priority attention in the 1980s. For instance, iron and steel industry was established in the nation’s bold march towards industrialisation. It will be recalled that about one billion Naira at that time was allocated to this sector in the Third National Development Plan.
Considering the increasing demand for steel, the availability of iron ore and coal in the country and the importance of steel industry to rapid industrialisation, the Federal Government established iron ore and steel plant in the country. A steel authority was also created which gave birth to three organisation – the National Steel Council, the Ajaokuta Steel Company Limited and the Associated Ores Mining Company Limited. In addition, the Delta Steel Company was established in Aladja, Warri, Delta State. Contracts were also signed for the establishment of three rolling mills at Osogbo, Jos and Katsina.
The concentration on oil resources, however, hurt the mineral extraction industries, as both government and industry began to focus on oil resources. The Nigerian Civil War in the late 1960s did not help matters either as many expatriate mining experts left the country.
The Nigerian economy further suffers from an ongoing supply crisis in the power sector. Despite Nigeria’s oil and gas potentials, power supply difficulties are frequently experienced by residents.
Private sector-led economic growth remains stymied by epileptic power supply leading to the high cost of doing business in Nigeria. This is in addition to the need to duplicate essential infrastructure, the lack of effective due process, and non-transparent economic decision making, especially in government contracting.
In all of these, the ordinary Nigerian bears the brunt of economic hardship. For example, the pump price of Premium Motor Spirit (PMS) which was N87 in the run-up to the 2015 general elections has increased to N160 despite the fall in oil price. The Federal Government attributed this steady increase since June this year to removal of fuel subsidy.
In the same vein, electricity tariff has jumped up by 100 percent, despite epileptic power supply in the country. Just four days ago, a nationwide strike called by the organised labour in protest against the increase in electricity tariff was averted due to the suspension of the new tariff by the Federal Government.
In all, Nigeria’s recent economic indicator showed that its GDP in real terms declined by 6.10% (year-on-year) in Q2 2020, thereby ending the three-year trend of low but positive real growth rates recorded since the 2016/17 recession.
This is according to the second quarter (Q2) GDP report, released by the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS).
According to the numbers contained in the GDP report, the performance recorded in Q2 2020 represents a drop of 8.22% points when compared to Q2 2019 (2.12%), and 7.97% points decline when compared to Q1 2020 (1.87%). Apparently, the significant drop reflects the negative impacts of the disruption caused by COVID-19 pandemic and crash in oil price on the Nigerian economy.
The latest GDP number somewhat surpassed both the IMF and World bank forecast for year 2020, which implies the nation’s economy may witness yet the biggest contraction in four decade. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) disclosed in its June outlook that the Nigerian economy would witness a deeper contraction of 5.4% as against the 3.4% it projected in April 2020.
According to the NBS, the 6.10% decline in GDP was largely attributable to significantly lower levels of both domestic and international economic activity during the quarter, which resulted from nationwide shutdown efforts aimed at containing the COVID-19 pandemic. The non-oil segment of the economy such as manufacturing, transport and trade were the worst hit even though the vital oil sector was also badly affected by the pandemic.
The recent labour statistics report released showed that unemployment rate in Nigeria rose to 27.1% at the end of Q2 2020, as the impact of Covid-19 pandemic is significantly being felt across critical sectors. While Nigeria has embarked on gradual easing of lockdown since Q2 2020 with a N2.3 trillion stimulus intervention, economic activities are yet to fully peak, indicating a muted outlook in the remaining quarter of the year.
Although economic activity, especially in the area of trade and services, seems to be gaining some momentum as restrictions are loosened, sentiment is still relatively downbeat and the recovery is likely to remain constrained going forward as the lingering effects of the health crisis continue to take their toll.
However, amidst high unemployment, mounting price pressures, tighter Forex liquidity and a subdued global economy that cloud the future outlook, economic experts are optimistic that the economy is expected to bounce back to growth, next year, even though it will remain modest. They project GDP to grow 2.3% by 2021, which is unchanged from last month’s estimate.
How this prediction will translate into economic fortunes for ordinary Nigerian, however, remains a puzzle only time will unravel.
Recommendations:
Nigeria has a bold vision of becoming one of the top 20 economies in the world by 2030. This is very achievable by virtue of its size, its vast oil wealth and human resources. But this goal can only be achieved if Nigeria makes the transition to a new economy based on knowledge, productivity, and innovation that will enable it to be competitive in a 21st century context.
According to the World Bank, there are common factors that are associated with successful development. No country has attained development outside these common denominators. These are:
Good governance: Good governance is perhaps the most important factor in development. Without good governance, every other thing is in disarray. Good governance in both public and private sectors creates an environment where contracts are enforced and markets can operate efficiently. It ensures that basic infrastructures are provided, with adequate health, education and security.
Economic growth: This has to do with poverty reduction. Experience has shown that countries that have reduced poverty substantially and in a sustained manner are the ones that grow fastest.
Vibrant private sector: It has been established that private firms, including small and medium-sized businesses play a critical role in generating employment, particularly for the youth and the poor. This is where the contribution of the micro-finance banks is needed.
Empowerment: The citizenry must be empowered to contribute to development. Accordingly, every person should be able to enjoy essential public services such as good health, education and safe water. These are critical social services that should be provided equitably.
Ownership: A nation’s development agenda must be homegrown. The country must start from the grassroots to transform the economy.
Knowledge development: Knowledge has always been central to development. The era when natural resources dominated trade has given way to an era in which knowledge resources are paramount. This has positioned countries like the US, Republic of Korea, China, and India in a better stead.
To achieve Vision 2030, Nigeria needs to move beyond the stop-start development patterns of an oil-based economy to create a stable and prosperous base for a 21st century society built on knowledge. How much is Nigeria ready for this transformation? Only time will tell.
As Nigeria clocks 60 years of existence as a sovereign nation today, the unity and security of the country appear to be the leading concern among the plethora of issues inundating the Federal Government and the generality of the citizenry. While the view of the central administration is expressed in its chosen theme, ‘Together At 60’ for the year-long celebration, individual citizens and groups at all levels have also been speaking their minds on the momentous occasion.
In this interview with our Deputy Political Editor, Opaka Dokubo, an accomplished entrepreneur, industrialist and politician, the governorship flag bearer of the Labour Party in Rivers State in the 2019 general elections, Chief Isaac Wonwu shares his thoughts.
Excerpts:
What are your thoughts about the fact that Nigeria is 60 years old as a nation?
Well, I must congratulate this country for attaining 60 years as an independent nation and I must congratulate all of us as Nigerians, particularly, for being steadfast over time and remaining united (and) peaceful, as one nation.
I must salute the founding fathers of this independence. I must also salute the heroes of this country; our military, those that man our healthcare-the resilience of Nigerians, particularly in the face of the COVID-19 pandemic.
The Nigerians, that despite the challenges of our time, have remained with wide smiles, the Nigerians that even in the process of the hard times are resolved to move on as compared to many countries that have been enmeshed in processes of protest, demonstration, violence and other measures of expressing their frustrations in the face of the bad economy. I must commend us. Nigerians have passed through hard times and it is making us to be much better and prepared for the future.
It is my belief that the younger generation will learn lessons from our ease processes to do better for the development of this country.
How does the theme of the celebration that borders on togetherness come across to you?
Well, the unity in diversity of this country, the multi- ethnic nationalities, reality in this country is a great concern to all of us and I think that the primary objective of every leader is how to keep the country united. And for whatever economic challenges there are, the security of lives and property in the country is key. I think that the unity of Nigerians is very very important and we must celebrate the indivisibility of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.
What is your assessment of the country vis-a-vis the recent warning by former President Olusegun Obasanjo that Nigeria was becoming a failed state?
We’ve actually done well in terms of unity as a country. We’ve done well in managing our diversity; we’ve done so well in being a continuous Nigeria.
No nation, no organization exists without challenges and with our population and multi-ethnic nationalities, with our diverse interests, we are bound to have some friction.
In management, with out such challenges, it means you don’t have people who can proffer solutions. It is only when you have problems that you can identify people with capacity to trouble- shoot.
I must say that the country has been doing well despite the deficit in infrastructure or mismanagement that we have actually suffered which is as a result of what I call indiscipline, and most people call it corruption.
I think that our administrators in the past should have devised ways to re- orientate our people to be able to appreciate the importance of discipline, most importantly, in our law enforcement and various agencies of government. The system has actually created more strong individuals rather than building strong institutions and our institutions are weak because our laws are weak, our Constitution is weak.
I quite agree with those who have shared their thoughts about Nigeria as a nation but in my view, any house without a strong, solid foundation is bound to vibrate. What we are suffering today is the vibration as a result of weak institutions and agencies of government. But as soon as that is straightened out, we will remain strong.
What do you think about the proposition for Nigeria to return to a parliamentary system of government?
Yes, our laws are weak, our institutions and agencies of government are weak as well but a major problem has also been that the individuals themselves who are operating the system have not been able to obey our laws, they have not been able to have regard for the agencies of government. The law enforcement agencies are also weak and Nigerians generally have been lawless. The lawlessness has brought in a level of impunity and we have grown to a very high level of impunity that has resulted to violence and what you call corruption is characterised with a high degree of non-challance and indiscipline. And until we strengthen our institutions, we may not be able to get it right.
How do we go about strengthening the institutions in your view?
The military will have to live up to its responsibilities; the judiciary must rise above board; the law enforcement agencies must rise up to their game; the civil servant must also rise up to his expectation; over politicization of institutions must stop; the politics must be limited to the political parties; and there must be a time to say the politics is over. As soon as we are able to do this and the judiciary stands firm, I’m sure Nigerians will have respect for the rule of law.
What do you think about the clamour for political power to be rotated to the South-East come 2023?
I am of a different school of thought. I subscribe to democracy, I accept democracy and I want to practise democracy and if Nigerians are to practice democracy, we must allow the democratic process to uphold itself.
I condemn the view of anybody that thinks that power must shift because power shift will more or less weaken the system, democracy must take its course and democracy must be about the will of the people and if we allow the will of the people to prevail, we may not actually mind who becomes the president. What should concern you and I is the dividends of democracy, the provision of basic amenities, the infrastructure, the education, the healthcare.
With 60 years gone, where do you see Nigeria in the next 40 years?
Unfortunately, the nation has not talked about building for tomorrow, we have only built for today and until we begin to come up with a clear vision that will be able to sustain the next generation, we’ve not actually grown. When I was growing up, I heard about Vision 2020. I was actually wondering whether I would live up to the year 2020. Here I am in the year 2020 (and ) first I was hit by the pandemic and I thank God for surviving it. But in terms of socio-economic amenities, in terms of infrastructural development, we have not done enough. So, we’re believing that the next leadership will be able to get the track right in investing in basic infrastructure that will bring the country to a pride of place among the comity of nations. The world is actually on a fast track. The world has become an environment where countries are competing vigorously and I think Nigeria also need to key in.
As a state within the region that sustains the country, would you say that Rivers State has had a fair deal within the 60 years of Nigeria’s independence?
It depends on what you call a fair deal in this country called Nigeria for a state or the Niger Delta region but I think that with the resources we have; with the infrastructure we have on the ground, even if a lot more money was given, I’m not sure we would have actually done much more than we have done. More money has been looted than has been invested into the development of the state, so even if you had pumped more money, they would have looted more. We have seen more people dabble into politics just to loot funds and what has continued to unite us as a people today is our ability to compromise in corruption.
And until this in-disciplinary act is minimized, we may not be able to justify our level of development going by the amount of resources we’ve got.
If you look at the history of the amount of money being looted in this country, you may be surprised that one Nigerian civil servant is stealing about a billion naira a day and you begin to wounder how much time he puts into service. So, we continue to hear about more billions of naira being looted and thousands being ulitised for projects. If you look at what we have on ground in the Niger Delta, it can not justify the amount of money that has come into the region. Only a few persons have carted away the resources as palliatives for themselves while the vast majority of the people are wallowing in abject poverty and dying. We have not done well if out of 10 million people only few have had something.
The idea of the rule of law dates back to the ancient time. As early as 2000 B.C, the famous Greek philosopher, Aristotle averred that rule of law was better than rule of man.
Nonetheless, the rule of law is a somewhat nebulous concept. It is one of the most overused and misused concepts, the meaning of which is believed to change from place to place. It means different things to different people.
Interestingly, both the democrat and the dictator all claim abiding loyalty to the rule of law in spite of their misapplication of the concept. What then is the rule of law? Rule of law means the supremacy of the law. It is a preference for the spirit and content of the law instead of the whims and caprices of the ruler. According to Encyclopedia Britannica, rule of law is a mechanism, process, institution or norm that supports the equality of all citizens before the law and secures a none arbitrary use of power
In the 19th century, Prof. A.V Dicey, a constitutional scholar and lawyer, wrote the twin pillars of the British constitution in his classic work, Introduction to The Study of Law of Constitution; the twin pillars are the rule of law and parliamentary sovereignty.
It was he who first attempted to reduce the concept to a definite legal meaning in his lecture on English law at the University of Oxford in 1885.
Dicey’s concept of the rule of law states that no man is punishable in body or goods except for definite breach of the law and no man is above the law, the term rule of law means paramountcy of the law above government. It excludes arbitrary powers.
Though, the rule of law appears not to have a consistent meaning, the concept suggests an overriding supremacy of the law over the whims and caprices of man. Hence, there is a preference for governance through the laid down laws and regulations to that of whims and caprices of the ruler.
Under the rule of law, arbitrary powers are excluded; powers must be exercised in accordance with the law.
Again, the rule of law requires that all acts must be in accordance with the law to be valid;(b) that government activities be conducted within a framework of defined rules and regulations (c) that disputes involving the legality of government actions must be decided by courts independent of government; (d) there should be no undue privileges and discrimination to the society and (e) that no one should suffer punishment outside and authority of the law.
Where the rule of law applies, the fundamental rights of individual are expected to be guaranteed. Fundamental rights, according to natural law theorists, are the species of rights which are believed to inhere in every human person hence they are regarded as inalienable and immutable. Nobody can be denied of such rights. The fundamental rights stand above the ordinary laws of the land.
However, many citizens of Nigeria are dissatisfied with the lack of application of the rule of law.
The say present and past governments have either ignored, neglected or failed to apply the rule of law. They say the situation has left the citizens at the mercy of their leaders.
Executive recklessness has been a major setback in the nation’s democracy yet still, those who run foul of the law believe that foul is fair and fair is foul.
There is a tendency to rejoice that our fundamental rights are entrenched in the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 as amended, but a tale of woes belie our day-today lives.
However, the present administration of President Muhammadu Buhari, which came into power on May 29, 2015 has been accused of large scale human rights abuses and lack of respect for the rule of law.
A Port Harcourt based lawyer and human rights crusader Mr. Chijoke Agi, who spoke with The Tide in Port Harcourt on Monday, said the present administration had no respect for the rule of law.
According to him, “the removal of the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN) in 2018 through a method unknown to law is not only an affront to the rule of law but an utter disregard for the judiciary which is an arm of government. The removal of CJN Walter Onnoghen by President Muhammadu Buhari is the height of disrespect for the rule of law.”
The legal practitioner opined that trial of the former National Security Adviser, Sambo Dasuki over corruption charges was bereft of the rule of law as security agents continued to detain him in spite of the fact that he had been granted bail by a court of competent jurisdiction. He noted that President Buhari violated court orders with impunity. This, according to him goes, against the grain.
Mr. Agi opined that the use of soldiers during the 2019 elections in spite of the Electoral Act was a blatant disrespect for the rule of law.
He pointed out that many lives were lost in Rivers State because of the use of soldiers instead of unarmed policemen as prescribed by the Electoral Act.
The legal practitioner noted that more lives had been lost within the five years of Buhari’s administration than those of his predecessors, yet nothing has been done to stem the tide.
Mr. Agi said that Amnesty International had rated the present government very low on human rights.
He said despite the much touted independence of the judiciary as granted by the present administration nothing seemed to have changed. “the judges are still doing the biddings of their appointees. It will be recalled that Amnesty international had this to say about Nigeria on 31 May, 2019,” the human rights violation such as extrajudicial executions, arbitrary arrests and detentions, torture and other ill- treatments, enforced disappearance, violence against women and girls, restrictions on the rights to the freedom of expression, association and peaceful assembly, mass forced evictions, environmental pollution and lack of accountability for human rights violation and buses.”
Another lawyer, Mr. Endurance Akpelu who spoke with The Tide in Port Harcourt on Monday said the rule of law had become a moonshine to the present administration. According to him, “with the crisis in the North East, the issue of rule of law is a foolish talk. Most importantly, the primary function of government is to maintain law and order and when there is a breakdown of law and order, the rule of law cannot subsist.
He said the insurgency in the Northeast, the killing of Christians in the north and the unchecked violence perpetrated by herders were all indicative of the state of the nation.
Mr. Akpelu said President Buhari was yet to purge himself of his despotic mentality.
According to him, “President Buhari exercises wide discretionary powers sometimes arising from the use of unchecked executive orders. The main plank of civilized democracy is the strict adherence to the rule of law.
This is because when wide discretionary powers are exercised it becomes difficult to differentiate between discretion and arbitrariness. There is a very thin line between the two, that is why Nigeria must adhere strictly to the rule of law instead of self-help.”
The human right lawyer expressed regret that a Nigerian journalist, Omoyele Sowore could be re-arrested by the Department of State Services in a court in Abuja.
Mr. Akpelu also cited the detention of the leader ofIslamic Movement of Nigeria, Ibrahim el-Zakzaky and his wife and former National Security Adviser, Sambo Dasuki as cases in point.
It will be recalled that at the aftermath of the DSS’s invasion of Abuja court room and its re-arrest of Sowore, the Punch newspaper announced that it would prefix President Muhammadu Buhari with his military rank, ‘Major General’ and refer to his administration as ‘regime’ “until they purge themselves of their insufferable contempt for the rule of law.”
The Port Harcourt lawyer, however remarked that all hopes were lost not in terms of correcting the wrongs of yesteryear as country turns 60.
He expressed hope that the country would be great if she maintained strict adherence to the rule of law and punished violators.
Also speaking, a Port Harcourt-based political scientist, Mr. Isaiah Dioku, noted that for the country to move forward there must be strict adherence to the rule of law.
Mr. Dioku pointed out that to promote the rule of law there must be a successful political culture. “In Nigeria today, there is literately a poor political culture. The ballot is nothing to write home about and our political office holders are not accountable to the people instead act as overlords,” he stated.
“It is interesting that the present administration is fighting corruption but there must be a sincerity of purpose on the part of the crusaders. A discriminatory fight against corruption will not remedy the national malaise. A genuine fight against corruption will certainly promote the rule of law. Besides, those who breach the rule of law should be punished,” Mr. Dioku stated.
He expressed regrets that despite yawning gap in the nation’s democracy, some state governors were squaring up to muzzle the media and ban the right to protest through the manipulation of state houses of assembly.
Dioku explains that the separation of powers is one of the niceties of the rule of law and points out that when the executive and legislature are fused anarchy thrives.
The political scientist, said though there must be good working relationship between the two; not fusion of powers.
He warned that the legislature should not allow itself to be used to pass oppressive laws which would occasion rule by law instead of rule of law. He says rule by law simply means rule by any law no matter how untoward that law may be, which is laid down by the authority of legislature of that nation or state. He says in rule by law, “one is not concerned about what the law is or what its purpose is, on the other hand, the rule of law connotes rule of law which is based on certain principles of law.”
Mr. Dioku said at 60, Nigeria had come of age to do things right. He said several decades of military rule and its command hierarchy had affected the psyche of Nigerians. “We don’t have true federalism but a unitary government.
There is only little devolution of powers. So much power is concentrated at centre. This cannot promote the rule of law. Every month all states of the federation gather at Abuja to share oil revenue accruing from the Niger Delta region. What other regions of the federation contribute is not known and never shared,”
He also remarked the Land Use Act is one of obnoxious laws extant laws and noted that the laws on Exclusive Economic Zone and Contiguous Zone were intended to divest revenue from riparian states in favour of landlocked regions.
The political scientist advised the Federal to repeal obnoxious in order to promote the rule of law in the Nigerian nation-state.
By: Chidi Enyie