The ongoing National Conference is a product of persistent pressure for the creation of a forum at which the Nigerian situation will be subjected to a critical examination for the purpose of charting a new path for the country. The expectation was that the problems afflicting the various facets of Nigeria’s national life would be carefully delineated and conscientiously addressed at such a forum. Although there were dissenting voices, the favourable reaction was overwhelming when President Goodluck Jonathan announced that a conference would be convoked to discuss the problems of the Nigerian state.
The perverted federalism which 29 years of military dictatorship foisted on Nigeria has been a major source of worry to discerning and well-meaning Nigerians. The consequence of this is that the country has become federal in name, but unitary in structure and mode of operation. Before the incursion of the military into the political arena in January 1966, Nigeria had four regions under a truly federal arrangement. The federating units – the regions – were strong centres of development. They controlled 50 per cent of their resources and contributed 20 per cent to the running of the central government. The remaining 30 per cent went into a special fund which was reserved for cushioning regions against the effects of financial or other problems. The regions were thus producing the funds being used to run the federal government. The responsibilities on their shoulders compelled them to be resourceful and productive. The competition among them was healthy and this translated into steady progress for the entire country.
The advent of the military on the political arena did not only bring about a complete reversal of this arrangement, it also put an end to the competitive spirit that had been serving as a stimulant to economic progress. During the first coming of the military – 1966-1979 – the number of federating units was rapidly increased from four to 19 by sheer fiat. And during their stranglehold on Nigerian people, the new generation of military dictators, who ruled from 1983 to 1999, further increased the number to the present 36. Self-serving considerations and the availability of free funds from the sale of crude oil oozing from the soil of the Niger Delta informed the creation of the states. The critical issue of economic viability was not given a thought. This explains the sorry pass in which Nigeria’s constituent units now find themselves. Without the allocation from the Federation Account most of them will collapse within a few months.
As a result of the concentration of resources in the hands of the Federal Government, more than half of the revenue accruing to the Federation Account has been going to the centre. The situation is worsened by the fact that the oil that is the lifeblood of the economy is not being efficiently managed. The vigorous search for alternatives to crude oil now poses a serious threat to Nigeria’s economic survival. The United States of America which has been the major buyer of Nigeria’s crude oil has found a substitute in shale oil. There can be no doubt that other countries that still rely on fossil fuel will, at the earliest opportunity, opt for other sources of energy that are more environmentally friendly. Should Nigeria wait until the single product that sustains its economy loses value before it begins to put its house in order? The concentration of power and resources at the centre has improved the people’s living conditions. The inverse correlation between available resources and quality of life is glaring. The vast majority lives in excruciating poverty while a tiny percentage lives in obscene opulence.
Those who campaigned for a forum to discuss the Nigerian situation nursed the hope that the participants would come up with decisions on how the problems afflicting the country would be frontally tackled. Many of the delegates at the National Conference have been pushing for a restructuring that will return Nigeria to true federalism. Many others have taken the position that nothing will change. The southern delegates are the agitators for change while the northern participants are the entrenched defenders of the status quo. The fear now is that the National Conference, like the ones before it, may end up as another exercise in futility.
It is indeed a paradox that the north, to which a unitary form of government was unacceptable in 1966, is now fiercely opposed to true federalism. During his six-month rule as Nigeria’s head of state, Major-General J.T.U. Aguiyi-Ironsi abrogated the federal structure and declared Nigeria a unitary state. Immediately Aguiyi-Ironsi’s government was overthrown by northern military officers in the revenge coup of July 1966, Nigeria was reverted to a federal system. The same unitary structure which was so violently resisted was later surreptitiously institutionalised under a nominal federation during the long years of military rule under northern military officers. It should be apparent to everybody that the disguised unitary structure has failed Nigeria. It should not be lost on opponents of return to true federalism that the free-flowing oil money cannot continue ad infinitum. The present arrangement encourages indolence.
