Many Nigerians have questioned any claim to a common nationhood by citizens of Nigeria. They posit that Nigeria is an artificial creation arbitrarily put together by the British imperialists to serve their economic expansionist interests, and that there was little basis for the constituent parts to regard themselves as sharing a common heritage. At various times, Nigeria has been described as a mere geographical expression, referring to a geopolitical space occupied by persons of centrifugal originsand inclinations.
Despite the mutual suspicion that characterized the regions following the amalgamation of the Northern and Southern Protectorates of the Niger Area; the decolonization movement that swept across Africa in the post-Cold War era, saw Nigerians working together to exorcise the spirit of colonialism, and with it, the colonialists, even if it meant momentarily setting aside the differences that held the regions apart. The British constituted the common enemy, and it wasn’t difficult for the leading nationalists to work together to secure political independence; or was it flag independence?
No sooner had the country secured Independence, than the Civil War broke out. It was a bitter period of bloody rivalry that ensued as the then Eastern Region, sought to secede from the rest of the country. Since the end of that war, and in fact, since the coming to being of Nigeria, under the British; Nigerians have not come together freely, and of their own accord, to confer as to the nature of country they want to have for themselves. The presence of the military in power for most of the period of Nigeria’s existence as an independent nation, was certainly contributory to evolving a society in which basic freedoms were absent.
The marking, few days ago, of the 53rd anniversary of the country’s Independence, once again, has brought to the fore, the need for de-emphasizing ethnoreligious differences as far as public discourse was concerned. The highpoint of the President’s address was the constitution of an advisory committee to set out a framework for a National Dialogue or Conference. Prior to this time, there had been a clamour by Nigerians for the convoking of a Sovereign National Conference, sovereign to the extent that decisions reached by the Conference; would be subjected to a popular referendum, after which, it automatically becomes the core of the supreme law of the land. However, the various governments that had held sway before now, both military and civilian alike, had only succeeded in holding teleguided conferences. From the Constitutional Conference set up by Sani Abacha, to the National Political Reforms Conference, set up by Olusegun Obasanjo; it was clear that there were predetermined outcomes expected by those who were in power at the highest levels.
So, for many like me who believe Nigerians deserve more than they are getting from this administration, and practically isn’t expecting much from it; it was a pleasant surprise to hear the President announce the setting up of an advisory committee on a National Conference without attempting to set no-go-areas in its terms of reference. Granted, the President cautiously avoided the term “sovereign”, but it is left for the committee to properly interpret the pulse of the people – realizing that ultimate sovereignty rests with the people – and advise the government appropriately, or to limit itself and create no-go-areas for the yet to be decided conference.
The issue of convoking a National Conference is one of the most controversial subjects that confront Nigerians. There are many who believe that a Sovereign National Conference is the basic prerequisite that must be met, before the country can know genuine peace and development. There are others who believe, rightly or wrongly, that any conference so convened, must not be “sovereign” in nature, else, Nigeria would cease to exist. According to this latter category of Nigerians, the unity and indivisibility of Nigeria, is a settled matter that is not up for discussion; and as such, it constitutes the “No-Go-Area” of any national dialogue. This piece is mainly to address two categories of Nigerians: those whose clamour for a Sovereign National Conference is informed by their desire to bring an end to the so-called forced marriage of strange bed fellows that Nigeria is said to be, on the premise that Nigerians are too different to be a single nation, and or because they have a presumption of self sufficiency of their region on account of the oil deposits available to them, should the country split; and those who have an eternal fear of such a conference, either out of their love for Nigeria, or out of fear of what would happen to the economic fortunes of their region should the region that is presently the source of the mainstay of the national economy, be allowed to go.
For those who want to see an end to the continues existence of Nigeria because of the seeming diversity of the people, or because of the mineral resources they are fortunate to have in their part of Nigeria; the following questions shall suffice: If you had been born in the part of Nigeria that has no apparent claim to some money-spinning natural resource, would you be pushing for a conference that could easily lead to the division of the country? Where is your humanity? Is it not written that you should love your neighbour as yourself? Is altruism an alien concept to your ethnic group and your religion? Talking about diversity and the need to preserve your exclusive culture; are you unawares that all mankind are migrant by nature? That place which you regard as the home of your ancestors and could so readily die for, was it always the home of your ancestors? Didn’t they at some point in their history, migrate from elsewhere? Is it not taught in your religion that all humanity is from a single source, created by one and the same God? Why then would you promote differences that are merely a function of the circumstances of your birth, which you had no control over; to be the basis of wanting to break away from others who happen to find themselves in the same geopolitical space as you? Do you honestly think that the gains which may be available to your region if the country were to be divided; would be over and above the possibilities that a united Nigeria that is properly administered, can afford its citizens?
For those who live in perpetual fear of a conference that could bring about the end of Nigeria, ruminate on these questions: How would you feel knowing you are condemned to live as citizens with people who do not want to live with you? Wouldn’t it be tantamount to having a marriage in which your partner is being made to remain married to you against his or her will? What do you make of the right of people to self-determination? As per your fear of possible economic misfortune should the nation disintegrate; are the most developed and prosperous nations in the world, those that have a prevalence of natural resources? What happened to the most important resources, ie the human resource? Is there absolutely nothing you can do to harness your natural environment, driven by your human environment, to surpass challenges of existence? Should you be in possession of the same resources the other side is fortunate to have; would you still cling to the continued existence of Nigeria?
The single most important problem that Nigeria is faced with, is not its diversity of peoples or an uneven spread of natural resources. The major problem we have is a conspicuous dearth of leadership. We have had leaders who are driven by narrow parochial interests and who do not realize that it is in the service of the common good, that the individual good can best be guaranteed. I believe that a national conference is imperative at this stage of our existence as a country. Nigerians should be free to determine the sort of government they should get. Pertinent issues like the indigeneship versus the settler question, must be addressed and definitively dealt with. No Nigerian must be regarded as a settler or an alien in any part of the country. We must de-emphasize the ethnic origins of citizens but focus on the place of residence when access to public institutions is concerned. What about the contentious issue of State Police? Does it make sense to continue to have a centralized police force in a country as diverse as Nigeria? Is the performance of the police enhanced when a police recruit is posted thousands of miles away from his place of birth and residence to an area where he can hardly operate effectively owing to cultural inhibitions? What about the issue of Federal Character versus merit and competence? Does the quota system unite us or divide us? Does it help us to have a Nigerian child in Zamfara admitted into secondary school for scoring 4 points, while his counterpart in Ekiti is expected to score over 100, before he gets admitted to school? What about the provision in our Constitution that every State in the country must be represented in the Federal Cabinet? Does it not account for the humongous cost of governance that Nigeria is plagued with?
The foregoing is just a scratch on the surface of the myriad of issues that ought to be addressed by such a conference, sovereign or otherwise. Nigerians need to discuss the nature of country they want. People should be allowed to canvass positions and campaign for acceptance of their positions. In all, common sense should guide us. Nigerians should be willing to yield to superior reasoning and argument, and in conferring, the fears and suspicions should be expressed so they can be addressed. Why, for instance should religion be anything but personal? Why can’t we de-emphasize religion when the official public space is the focus?
A national conference is not only imperative, but most expedient at this time. Irrespective of the intentions of the present government in setting up an advisory committee on the modalities for a conference and dialogue, Nigerians must set the agenda and compel the actors to yield to the informed popular will. We cannot realize the full potentials of Nigeria in the comity of States if Nigerians do not freely agree to live together under certain predetermined conditions. Whatever side of the debate you take, advance it in the public space and seek to convince others by reason of the soundness of your position, and not through compulsion. We must note that as humans, we are more than our ethnicity and religion. They are merely circumstantial parameters of the place and time of our birth.
We must pause and ponder.
I am @efewanogho, on Twitter.
The post Efe Wanogho: Overcoming the Fear of a National Conference! appeared first on Ekekeee.