HENRY OKONKWO

The belief that Nigeria is running a flawed system of government is a notion generally accepted, and deemed incontrovertible by most political heavyweights and opinion leaders. However, amid this wide accord, proffering solutions on the way forward continuously generates loads of discordance. Last Tuesday January 16, the former interim chairman of the All Progressives Congress, Chief Bisi Akande, during his 79th birthday celebration stoked the debate on whether it is the structure of Nigeria, or the form of government that is the problem.

Chief Akande picked holes in the present Nigeria’s presidential system, saying it is an ‘unworkable’ style of administration that has grossly stunted development. He argued that the presidential system is the bane that fuels thievery and corruption among politicians. The APC chieftain went on to join the proponents for a change in government system, calling for a reverse to the Parliamentary democracy which was the practice in the early days of Nigeria until the military intervention in January 1966. “Nigeria’s democracy is a military democracy of sharing and if we continue like this, there is no way we can succeed,” he said. “Evidence-based analysis has proven parliamentary democracy to be the most accountable, transparent form of government in the whole world.” He cited the examples of the United Kingdom, Israel and India which have become strong, stable and prosperous by practicing parliamentary democracy.

This call might not come as a surprise to most Nigerians because Akande is neither the first, second, third or even 10th prominent political leader to prefer the Parliamentary system. Many political leaders and statesmen share Akande’s passion for constitutional reforms. And they have cited increased corruption and heavy expense in governance as the rationale behind their calls for jettisoning the presidential system.

Last December, the Deputy President of the Senate, Chief Ike Ekweremadu described presidential system as ‘too expensive and cumbersome’. Also Mallam Tanko Yakassai had in May blasted it as a system that has failed Nigerians. The founding member of Arewa Consultative Forum, canvassed for a return to the parliamentary system of government in the polity. Again, constitutional lawyer and Senior Advocate of Nigeria, SAN, Robert Clarke, in November said that the Nigeria Presidential system of governance is the basis for corruption in the country. Clarke affirmed that the 1963 constitution which is the parliamentary system of government is the ideal constitution for this country; “let us go back to it”. The elder statesman even called for a military takeover of government for two years in order to change the system to 1963 constitution which is the parliamentary system of government.

Aside the perceived corrupt tendencies, many adduce that the high cost of running a government is another factor that makes the presidential system in Nigeria cumbersome and unsuitable. Former journalist and Minister of Information and Culture, Prince Tony Momoh in an interview with Sunday Sun wondered why “we spend more than 80percent of our resources on recurrent. If you spend more than 25percent of your resources on recurrent, then you should go back to the drawing board.”

Another veteran journalist and columnist, Dare Babarisa agreed with Momoh’s statement with a brief sketch of how monies are wasted in the presidential system of government. “Last year, the total expenditure for all Federal universities and the Universal Basic Education Programme was N495 billion. The National Assembly budget for the same period was N125 billion. Neither the University of Ibadan nor the Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, with their armies of professors, attracts more than a fraction of the money we expend on the National Assembly and its fat cats. This is not a pattern of development of a serious country. Indeed it is a recipe for perpetual underdevelopment.”

However, the twist in Akande’s call was that he was part of the process that ditched the parliamentary system handed down to Nigeria by her colonial masters. Akande was elected into the Constituent Assembly that produced the 1979 Constitution. At that time, there were calls for the abandonment of the parliamentary form of government. Hence, General Murtala Muhammed the then Head of states, inaugurated the Constitution Drafting Committee, headed by Chief Rotimi Williams in 1976, and strongly recommended the presidential system. When General Obasanjo inaugurated the Constituent Assembly in 1977, he made it abundantly clear that the military would prefer that the assembly endorse the presidential system. Thus the assembly enthusiastically endorsed the presidential system. Now, exactly 40 years after that recommendation, Chief Akande, is calling for rethink and reversal to the parliamentary form of government. 

Although Chief Akande’s frankness and bold statement has drawn lots of kudos and critical acclaim, political scholars and policy analysts have pooh-poohed the idea that we revert to the parliamentary style of government. Some of them that spoke to Sunday Sun suggested restructuring the country to enthrone true federalism, while others argue that it is unnecessary changing Nigeria’s form of governance because the problem lies more on the bad leadership that has plagued the nation over the years.

According to Political Science lecturer Dr. Solomon Abioye, the parliamentary system of government advocated for by elder statesman- Chief Akande and others failed in the first republic because of the clannishness and regional sentimentality of the major political players in the first republic. He insisted that the focus should be to groom good people for elective office, people who are selfless, driven by a sense of mission, folks who understand the importance of urgency for change, belief in community, do not wear their opinion on their sleeve and avoid flagging religious views in favour of egalitarianism. “I belong to the school of thought that holds dearly to the idea that a system of government does not develop a country but that quality leadership provided by strong and visionary men, in whichever system, brings development. The prerequisites for the greatness of a modern-day country include the presence of visionary leaders, abundance of productive human capital, infrastructure, technology, constant research, a stable environment (political and socio-cultural), the capability of defending the territorial integrity of state and the ability to inspire pride in citizens.

“Some of the countries Chief Akande mentioned prospered under parliamentary system because they have good leaders. I don’t see how the parliamentary system of government would prevent shady politicking, corruption and wanton greed among our politicians and political leaders. If we have had leaders with vision who successfully diversified our economy to the level where oil and gas aren’t the mainstay of our economy, would the elder statesman be talking about the parliamentary system of government? Our institutions are daily being destroyed by people who swore an oath to uphold them.

Related News

“For me, all these talk about systems of government without harping on visionary leadership and party politics is sheer waste of time. America experimented with confederacy up until 1787 when the system failed. They had been living under the Articles of Confederation that ensured they had powerful states and a weak federal government. But they witnessed disorder and chaos rather than ordered progress.

“Today they operate a powerful centre, and it works well for them. Even though confederacy failed in America, their leaders were able to make the presidential system of government work. What have our own leaders succeeded at? Regionalism failed. Military rule failed woefully in Nigeria even though it succeeded in Latin America and South-East Asia. Presidential system has also failed woefully. People run systems, good or bad. We haven’t had the right people in place to run the good race for the benefit of all.”

 In the same vein, lawyer and political strategist, Barrister Aham Njoku in a chat with Sunday Sun shot down Chief Akande’s proposal for a parliamentary system. According to Aham, Nigeria’s system is unworkable because so much power is concentrated in the centre. “We have practised this parliamentary system of government before. Why are we going back to it again? The parliamentary system projected tribal politicking and that was why it was dropped for the presidential system in 1979. The only good thing about the Parliamentary system is that it is cheaper because the legislators are also members of the executive. Don’t forget there was a Constituent Assembly, before the then military Head of States- General Murtala Muhammed, inaugurated the Constitution Drafting Committee, headed by Chief Rotimi Williams in 1976. It was, the Constituent Assembly that proposed that the Presidential System was better for our country.

“For me, the system of government is not our problem, whether we adopt presidential or parliamentary system, the solution is that Nigeria needs to be restructured. We need to devolve power from the centre to the states. In other climes like the U.S for example, the states run their own police, and control their resources. We should borrow a leaf from them and reverse some of those laws that burdened the FG, and vested them with so much power.”

On the flipside, Babarinsa disagreed that Akande’s call should be discarded. “Chief Akande admitted that may be they were wrong. He is now an old man and if he cannot do anything, he can at least tell us the truth. And we know truth is bitter and there is no honey to make it sweet especially if you are in power. Akande’s friends are in Abuja and they may not want anyone to spoil their appetite. We need to thank Chief Akande for having the courage to speak up. His rumination is also a wake-up call that we need to embrace the politics of ideas instead of always talking of projects, consumption and abuse. The idea of going back to parliamentary system is an idea that is worth re-examining. This republic, to prosper and thrive, should not be for the feeding of politicians alone.

Also, Raheem Oluwafunminiyi, a Junior Research Fellow at the Centre for Black Culture and International Understanding, in Abeere, Ogun State agreed with Chief Akande’s call, explaining that Restructuring is a controversial term with polarised meanings. “Some believe our country should be restructured politically, while others say it should be done regionally. Others suggest it should be restructured economically. 

“But within the context of Bisi Akande’s arguments that Nigeria should practice parliamentary system because it is cheaper, and does not distort the political arrangement; unlike what we have in the country now where the legislature is often critical of the executive arm of government. So for me, beyond restructuring and regionalism, I believe we should once again try that system of political arrangement because that was what was applicable in the first republic; where we elect people from the region to represent us at the centre. We had a prime minister who was appointed within that parliament, and of course a figure head president in the person of Nnamdi Azikiwe. I think we should do that again.

“We may not be able to go back to the way we practiced it in the first republic because Nigeria has grown beyond expectation population wise, territory wise to mention just a few. So we can tweak that system to suit our current realities. So within the context of his arguments, I think I concur with him.

On the impression that the style of government would re-ignite and fuel tribalism, Oluwafunminiyi disagreed and further affirmed that it is a kind of government that installs transparency in government. “I don’t think there is anywhere we can fight tribalism in Nigeria. It is inherent in our political structure and in our everyday activities,” he told Sunday Sun.

“But I don’t think the parliamentary system would worsen the pace of tribalism in Nigeria, because every tribe would be represented one way or the other. Just like we are practicing it today, we have the Ijaws, Itshekiri, Urhobos in the House. We may not have very many tribes but major groups would be represented in the parliament. So you wouldn’t say parliamentary government would cause any major havoc in the context of tribalism in Nigeria.”