•Says Yoruba, Igbo have no reason to complain of marginalisation
Alhaji Lawal Kaita, former governor of Old Kaduna State whose tenure lasted just three months between October and December 1983 is one politician who does not sit on the fence on national issues. Having been around in politics for a long time, there is no gainsaying that he is one of the most respected voices in the Northern part of the country. Though a core believer in the unity of Nigeria, he does not pretend in defending the interest of the North. In 2011, for instance, when former President Goodluck Jonathan was warming up for the presidential election, the vocal politician who was then a prominent member of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) had cautioned that: “Anything short of a Northern President is tantamount to stealing our presidency. Jonathan has to go and he will go. Even if he uses his incumbency power to get his nomination on the platform of the PDP, he will be frustrated out…the North should not be blamed for the calamity that would befall Nigeria if Jonathan emerged as President.”
Currently, the elder statesman disagrees with the position of the Southern part of the country that Nigeria should be restructured. Among other issues in this interview with WILLY EYA, he was emphatic that Nigeria does not need any restructuring.
Nigeria recently clocked 57 years since her independence in 1960. As an elder statesman who has witnessed Nigeria literally grow from childhood to adulthood, if you sit down and reflect, what comes to your mind?
In the 57 years of her existence, Nigeria has progressed tremendously. We have improved and developed and we are among the leading nations in the world.
Accepted that Nigeria has recorded improvements in several areas, but are you not also worried with the level of challenges it has faced and it is still facing now?
The worst and troubling challenge that we have faced so far since independence was the Nigerian- Biafran civil war, which we fought with our blood and we crushed it. We are now 57 and we are facing a smaller challenge from the same people, the Igbo again. We have faced so many apparent change of governments through coup d’états and we have survived all of them.
How do you feel that after 50 years of the civil war that agitations are still coming from the same people? Don’t you think that maybe the Nigerian state has not adequately addressed the problem which the Igbo have been agitating for?
I can say that a small minority within the Igbo feels marginalized in their own expectations of Nigeria. But we the majority of Nigerians do not think that the Igbo are marginalized. They are everywhere and are doing well in commerce, business and so on. They have no reason whatsoever to agitate; they are agitating for what?
What is dominating public discourse today is the issue of restructuring even though there is no consensus on whether the nation actually needs it at this point in time. There does not seem to be an agreement between the Southern part of the country and the North on this matter. What is your perspective of the argument?
My own position is that Nigeria does not need any restructuring. I do not think Nigeria needs any restructuring.
But having existed for 57 years, don’t you think it is high time the structure of the country is amended to suit the realities of the time considering that after all, the only thing permanent in life is change.
Tinkering with the constitution is not restructuring. It may be part of it, but you do not have to restructure Nigeria. And I ask you what is restructuring. If you say restructuring, what do you mean?
In Nigeria today, restructuring means different things to different people. To some, it is true federalism in terms of resource control. To others like the position of the South West, it is a return to full regionalism. The East is also calling for true federalism and so on. But the agreement in all of these perspectives is that something needs to be done to the present structure. Don’t you think so?
I was part of the constitutional conference where we advocated for the presidential system and we voted against the parliamentary system.
But don’t you think that Nigeria should be doing better than she is doing now?
That is another angle to the question and I am not prepared to discuss that.
Do you agree with those who insist that the North is reluctant to support the call for restructuring because they are benefitting from the existing structure?
No, how can I agree with that? What other benefits does the North get from the present structure that others are not getting? As far as I am concerned, the North is not benefitting anything. What is the North gaining?
A typical example is the skewed number of local governments in favour of the North where the old Kano State,which includes the present Kano and Jigawa has 77 local governments, whereas Lagos State with its population has only 20. Considering that the federal allocations are shared among the three tiers of government, don’t you agree that this structure unduly favours the North?
I was a governor of Kaduna State for three months and I created new local governments out of the existing 17 or so then. Why did the governor of Lagos not create more to the number he wants?
Even though Lagos created new local governments, they are not recognized by the constitution and so do not get any allocation from the Federal Government.
Why don’t they receive allocation and why are they not recognized by the constitution? The highest revenue earner is the federal government, Lagos and those states that produce the oil. They are the highest revenue earner. The North does not get much in terms of revenue allocation.
Your tenure as the civilian governor of Kaduna State was short-lived and just for three months following the coup by the then military government under President Muhammadu Buhari. What do you think was the effect of that coup to our democracy today?
Without the truncation of that republic, Nigeria would have been much better. If democracy was allowed to flourish from that time till now, Nigeria would have been better than it is now. Nigeria would not have been where it is today. I was a governor, but they removed us for nothing.
There is this argument, which comes up once in a while that the era of one united North is over. The validity of the argument finds expression in the ongoing debate for restructuring where the Middle Belt is aligning more with the South than with the core North. Will the North ever regain its unity like it used to be in the past?
The North cannot be as united as it used to be but the division is not as much as people talk about it. We in the North still understand one another very well.
Do you agree with the perception that the power elite in the North is too selfish considering the level of poverty in the region despite having dominated the nation’s leadership since independence?
I cannot say that and I do not believe what you are saying.
How do you compare the caliber of politicians of old and the ones we have today in terms of commitment to the public interest?
When you talk of Sir Ahmadu Bello, Chief Obafemi Awolowo and Dr Nnamdi Azikiwe, they are much superior to the class of politicians we have today. Honestly, they are much better than us. You cannot compare Ahmadu Bello who ruled the whole North with the politicians of today. He died without anything. He had no money.
We must restructure before 2019 – Falae
•Enough of injustice in Nigeria
Chief Olu Falae, the former minister of finance and former Secretary to the Government of the Federation(SGF) has cautioned that Nigeria must be restructured before the next general elections in 2019. The octogenarian who was also the joint presidential candidate of the Alliance for Democracy, AD and the All Peoples Party, APP in the 1999 presidential election believes that for the country to move forward, she must go back to the 1963 constitution. He made the remarks and more in this interview with WILLY EYA.
Recently, Nigeria celebrated 57 years of independence amid discordant voices on the vexed issue of restructuring and you are one of the Yoruba leaders who recently converged on Ibadan to take a position on the issue. Do you think all these efforts would eventually lead to restructuring?
You know I am a leader in the South West and at the National convention, I was elected as the leader of the Yoruba delegation. So, I am central to the Yoruba position. The Yoruba position is my position and it is the same position I canvassed in my book, ‘The way forward for Nigeria’ which I launched since 2005 in Lagos. What we mean by restructuring is going back to the Independence Constitution which our leaders negotiated with the British between 1957 and 1959. It was on that basis that the three regions agreed to go to Independence as one united country. So, it was a negotiated constitution. This is because, if the three regions were not able to agree, there would not have been one united independent Nigeria. But because the three regions at that time negotiated and agreed to package a constitution, that is why they agreed to go to Independence together. When the military came in 1966 and threw away the constitution, they threw away the negotiated agreement among the three regions, which was the foundation of a united Nigeria.
So, the military did not only throw away the constitution but a political consensus negotiated and agreed by our leaders of the three regions in those days. When we say restructuring now, we are saying let us go back substantially to that constitution which gave considerable autonomy to the regions. For example, each region at that time collected its revenue and contributed the agreed proportion to the centre. But when the military came, they turned it round and took everything to the centre. That could not have been accepted by Ahmadu Bello, Nnamdi Azikiwe or Obafemi Awolowo.
This constitution we are using was made by late Gen Sani Abacha and the military; and Abacha came from only one part of Nigeria, so he wrote a constitution that favoured his own part of Nigeria. That is why I am saying, let us restructure and go back to what all of us agreed before. That is the meaning of restructuring. The regions used to be federating units, but in today’s Nigeria, they would now be called federal regions because states have been created in the regions. So in the West, you now have federation of Yoruba states which would belong to the Nigerian union at the centre. So, it is not like the region of old with all the powers. No. It is now going to be a coordinator of the states in the zone. That is what we mean by restructuring. And the regions would have a considerable autonomy as they used to have. For example, for the younger people, they may not know that every region then had its own constitution.
There were four constitutions at independence –the Federal constitution, Western constitution, Eastern constitution and Northern constitution. That was how independent they were and every region had an ambassador in London. The ambassadors for the regions were called Agent General so that you do not confuse them with that of Nigeria then called High Commissioner. So, Nigeria had four ambassadors in London. The ambassador for Nigeria then called a High Commissioner was M.T Mbu. The ambassador for Eastern Nigeria then was Mr Jonah Chinyere Achara, Western Nigeria was Mr Omolodun and for Northern Nigeria, it was Alhaji Abdulmalik. There were four of them. That was the kind of arrangement we agreed to, but the military threw it away and gave us this over-centralised unitary constitution. So, we said this is not acceptable any more; we must go back to the negotiated constitution which gave considerable autonomy to the regions, so that they can compete in a healthy manner. For example, Chief Obafemi Awolowo wanted to introduce free education in the West and other regions said they could not afford it, but he went ahead to introduce it in the Western region. He said he wanted to pay a minimum of five shillings a day, while others were paying two and three shillings. He went ahead and passed the law, making five shillings the minimum wage in Western Nigeria.
There was no problem with that. In Western Nigeria, the constitution provided for a House of Assembly and the House of Chiefs. In Eastern Nigeria, there was no House of Chiefs because they did not think they needed one. There was no problem with that and that is the kind of Nigeria we negotiated in London, but that is different from what we have today. So, we are saying let us go back to that arrangement which all of us agreed at independence and not what Abacha imposed on us, which is very partial, unfair and one-sided. That is the meaning of restructuring; it is to restructure unfairness and give semi-autonomy to the federating units.
Why does the North seem reluctant to shift ground on this vexed issue of restructuring? Based on the arguments from various quarters so far, it appears the whole South and even the Middle Belt have reached a consensus on the need to restructure Nigeria as against the position of the core North which still believes that the status quo should remain.
The North has not spoken. But when you say the North, what do you mean? I ask this question because the Middle Belt which constitutes about nine or 10 states are on the same page with the South on restructuring. We had a meeting in Abuja last week and I was there where we agreed on restructuring. And the states represented there by their leaders, were about nine. They include Benue, Plateau, Taraba, Kogi, Adamawa, Taraba, Kwara, southern part of Bauchi, southern part of Borno and southern Kaduna. So, when you say the North, you must define what you mean because nine states out of the 19 in the North are in support of restructuring. It is the North West alone which is now in the minority and which have not announced its position. It is meeting and setting up committees and also our meeting in Abuja last week also set up a committee to engage the North West on this matter. The idea is to fully persuade them to go back to what all of us agreed at independence.
To some people, going back to the 1963 constitution may not work considering that so many things have changed in Nigeria. For instance, 36 states have been created unlike the period in question when we had only regions and not states. Don’t you think there is merit in their argument?
But I have told you that when we go back to the 1963 constitution, the regional government of today would be a federal regional government because of the creation of states. That is not an issue. For instance in the East, it would be a federal regional government of the East. It would be the same thing in the South West and other regions. Why should we not go back to that arrangement? That is what we agreed before. How do you expect us to accept the unfairness in this constitution which gave Lagos State only 20 local governments and gave old Kano State 77 local governments? Is that not injustice? That is unfair and nobody would accept that. No reasonable man can argue that the unfair unitary constitution that we have today should continue. But at the same time, those of us do not want Nigeria to break up. What we want is that all of us should remain in Nigeria, but it would be a more balanced Nigeria, where the ethnic groups are free to pursue their priorities. The South West in those days believed in free education and we had it.
Those who did not want it did not have free education. Chief Awolowo decided to have the Muslim Western Board to take care of the Western people going to Mecca. The other people did not have it. Fine! We decided to have a House of Chiefs and the East did not want to have one and there was no problem. That is what we need. Nobody should be forced to behave like another person. Uniformity does not mean unity. This is because we are different people with different objectives, cultures and values.
A heterogeneous society cannot operate a unitary government. Look at Britain that is our former colonial power, they are of the same race, colour, religion, language and culture and yet today, you have four governments in Britain. They include the parliament in Scotland, the Assembly in Cardiff, the Parliament in Northern Ireland and the Westminster defacto federal government. So Britain itself has gone into a federation although they are homogeneous. Here we have about 600 different ethnic groups, not the same culture, not the same language and you want to treat us as a homogeneous country and a unitary government. It is not possible. It does not make sense.
The question by a school of thought in the North is: why is the call for restructuring more vehement now that President Muhammadu Buhari who is of the Northern extraction is superintending over Nigeria.? Their argument is, why did the South not champion the call for restructuring when former Presidents Olusegun Obasanjo and Goodluck Jonathan, both of the Southern region were in office?
Before Obasanjo was in power, in 1991 and 1992, we launched the request for restructuring. I remember the Press Conference addressed by Chief Anthony Enahoro. Former President Obasanjo was not near power in 1991. My book, The way forward for Nigeria’ was launched in 2005 and a whole chapter is on restructuring. They are only trying to tell lies and confuse issues but ask them, is it not true that we have an independent constitution and that their leader agreed to it and signed it. Are they more Northerner than the Sauduana of Sokoto, or are they wiser than him? So, they should not ask that sort of question and in any case, ask them why do they think I, a Yoruba man should agree to old Kano’s 77 local governments and Lagos State only 20 states. It is because they share revenue every month and they share it equally to the local governments. Kano has 77 and Lagos has only 20, why do you think we should accept that cheating? Who would tell me that kind of nonsense? Why don’t they believe on equity and fairness?
The money is coming from here. In any case, it should be clear that if Britain cannot run a unitary government, Britain with the same culture, language, religion and everything, and they now have four governments and they are asking for independence now, if they are asking for independence in a homogeneous country like Britain, why do they think that they can sustain a quasi unitary constitution imposed on us by a Northern military officer called Gen Sani Abacha? You have more questions to ask them than they have to ask you. I just want to conclude that restructuring is inevitable.
With the tension in the country now arising from all manner of agitations and particularly the crescendo for restructuring, what do you expect on the road to the next general election in 2019?
Look, who is talking of 2019? We are talking of restructuring now and you are talking of 2019. Most people are not interested in an election, if it is going to take place within this un-restructured Nigeria. The election would produce the same injustice and uncertainty. We must restructure before 2019.
I’ve not marginalised S’East –Buhari
From Juliana Taiwo-Obalonye, Abuja
ISSUES surrounding the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), infrastructure decay and underdevelopment of the South-East, among others, topped discussion when President Muhammadu Buhari met with governors, ministers and federal lawmakers from the zone and the leadership of Ohaneze Ndi Igbo, yesterday.
The governors in attendance were: Abia, Okezie Ikpeazu; Enugu, Ifeanyi Ugwuanyi; Ebonyi, Dave Umahi, the Imo deputy governor, Eze Madumere and the deputy governor of Anambra, Nkem Okeke. Lawmakers in attendance were: Deputy Senate President, Ike Ekweremadu and Senator Enyinnaya Abaribe, representing Abia South.
The President of Ohaneze Ndi Igbo, Chief Nnia Nwodo, who told State House correspondents that the interaction was frank and robust, expressed confidence that Buhari, in all sincerity, will address all issues, with time.
Nwodo, flanked by members of the delegation he led to the meeting, said: “We had a frank and robust exchange. We discussed the problems of the South East and as head of state he is the final repository of an appeal for the resolutions of those problems. We went into great details about each of those problems and I have confidence that he will give it the attention they deserve.
He further noted: “We dealt with problems of development in the south east, basic capital projects which have for a very long time been neglected not just from this government but for a very long time. Major arteries of federal highways in the South East have been in complete state of disrepair.Enugu-Onitsha, Enugu-Port Harcourt, Aba-Ikoyi Ekpene are virtually impassable.
“We talked about the inland waterways and the dredging of the River Niger. We talked about the reticulation of gas pipelines on the south east. We export gas from the South-East to other parts of the country, but there is no reticulation of the pipeline and industrial clusters in the South-East.
“We talked about the only international airport we have in the south east which has very bad infrastructure in terms of the buildings that have been ravaged.
“We got assurance from the president that he will deal with each of those problems.”
Asked if the issue of marginalization was discussed, Nwodo said: “That was the opening line and that was why we singled out these things. Like I have said, these problems have been there overtime and we have had several presidents, it didn’t just happen in the last two years. But we expressed the desire that he should be able to address them.”
Asked if the president’s promises can be trusted, he responded that “there is no reason for me to doubt him because this is the first time I have had this interaction with him. I have the feeling that he spoke to us very frankly.”
Asked if the issue of IPOB formed part of the discussion, he said, “We came here for the issues of developments in our place.” When prodded further he said the issue of IPOB came about as symptomatic consequence of the continuous marginalization of the South-East over a long period of time. “Understandably, our children are restive and we want to make sure that the Federal Government is responsive to the issues that have cumulated to fan up these agitations.”
On devolution of powers, Nwodo said: “We did talk about the issue of devolution of powers, the constitution, the paucity of the states and local governments in our place and the President has asked that he be given time to look at this more holistically.”
President Buhari had in his Independence Day broadcast blamed the elders and leaders of South-East for IPOB’s agitation, insisting that they should have warned those daring to agitate for Biafra to give up the idea because of the consequences of the civil war suffered by the region.
A statement by the Special Adviser on Media and Publicity, Femi Adesina, said President Buhari assured stakeholders from the South East that the region will benefit more from roads and coastal rail projects, which are of critical importance to the economy.
He declared that 2nd Niger Bridge, the East-West Road and the coastal rail project, are receiving utmost attention from Buhari’s administration.
The President said counterpart funding from the Chinese government would substantially fund these projects, which when completed will improve the welfare, well-being and economy of the people in the region.
“I thank you for articulating your demands and I want to assure that we are doing our best for the country. If we can stop people from stealing, then there will be more resources to put into projects that will create employment for Nigerians,” the President said.
Responding to allegations of under-representation of Igbos in his government, the President said: “I gave South-East four substantive ministers, namely, the ministries of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Investment, Science and Technology and Labour.
“Seven states in the North got Ministers of State and of the two Ministries headed by your sons, I cannot take any decision on foreign policy and investments without their input,” he said.
The President also promised the leaders, he will visit states in the zone soon.