Posted by By Anthony Omosun on
Those who threaten fire and brimstone if power doesn't return to the North in 2007 must realise that violence begets violence......
Those who threaten fire and brimstone if power doesn't return to the North in 2007 must realise that violence begets violence. Nigeria is made up of different nationalities whose peaceful coexistence lies in the observance of the rule of law and not the law of the jungle.
Amid the expectation of rotation of power, primarily expected to balance the lopsided dominance at the centre, came the power shift bombshell. Prominent Northern politicians of the ruling Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) now claim that the party leadership had a gentleman's agreement in 2002 for power to shift to the North in 2007.
But democracy is not about intra-party gentleman's agreement. It is a form of government in which the people have a say in the exercise of power, typically through elected representatives. But the so-called gentleman's agreement falls short of this basic requirement, as matters of such national importance ought to be tabled before the National Assembly, for cross-party deliberations and not just the PDP.
Ideally, a decision should be taken on the basis of a select-committee report on the feasibility of power shift. And for the avoidance of conflicts, any power sharing arrangement reached, should be entrenched in the constitution.
The PDP is but one of the main political parties in the country and its gentleman's agreement cannot be foisted on other political parties, or the electorate. Nigeria is not a one party state and cannot be governed as such.
Speaking to newsmen in Lagos recently, former Speaker of the House of Representatives, Alhaji Umaru Ghali Na'Abba said, 'my worry is that the PDP always does its things without contemplating the consequences to the larger polity". Na'Abba who deserted the PDP for the newly formed Advanced Congress of Democrats (ACD) also believes that political parties should allow a transparent process to bring about their presidential candidates.
Also, Joseph Kennedy Waku, in an interview with TELL magazine, described the PDP as 'a dishonourable organisation." The maverick Northern politician declared: 'We have more than one political party in the country. Other political parties are not advocating zoning, particularly the Advanced Congress of Democrats."
The fact that the PDP acted unilaterally by agreeing on power shift through a gentleman's agreement, is no longer in doubt. But unlike Na'Abba's reasoned, mature and statesmanlike approach to the political trend in the country, other power shift hardliners resorted to vitriolic utterances.
According to Dr Olusola Saraki, the North was ready to deploy every weapon at its disposal to achieve power shift. But it is difficult to see what democracy and warfare tactics have in common. Those who aspire to be leaders of Nigeria or are looked upon as such, must be judged by their utterances.
'Any move to deny the North, opportunity of regaining power in 2007, will be an open invitation to chaos in the country", warned Col. Hammed Ali, former military Governor of Kaduna State. According to him, President Obasanjo should not 'betray" the North in the run up to the 2007 presidential elections. 'He (Obasanjo) should remember that the North brought him out of prison, the same North installed him as President and if he now decides to work against the North, then there is a big problem."
Certainly, there is a big problem for not recognising the disproportionate domination of power at the centre since independence in 1960. There is a big problem for not empathising with the South, for the insensitivity generated by this asymmetrical power control. On aggregate, the number of years on the seat of power by the South, is infinitesimal, compared to that of the North, and there is a big problem for not taking this into consideration.
By 2007 when Obasanjo ends his tenure, the South would have been in power for just over 11 years as against 35 years for the North. What an un-bridgeable gap! There is a deficit of 24 years which must be carried forward and made good, unless declared a political bad debt and written off by consensus. Or how else can this problem be resolved?
Not surprisingly however, Joseph Waku has his weird idea. According to him, 'if by accident some Northerners seize power and the South-South refuse to seize power, they are cowards." Sane advice or incitement? Probably futile and unhelpful. And so the problem lingers on in the absence of any realistic approach to this festering issue of imbalance in power control.
Col. Ali stepped on a different rung of the ladder by bringing in the idea of the North freeing Obasanjo from prison. But he cleverly refused to say who jailed Obasanjo for trumped up charges. How pathetic! Prison is meant for criminals and not for people expressing their democratic right to differ. Prison is meant for felons and not for someone whose electoral mandate had been usurped.
There's no point stirring the hornet's nest, just for the sake of dirty politics whilst dodging the issues proper.
The claim that the North installed Obasanjo as President, unwittingly proves the decadence and unreliability of the country's electoral system which is supposed to be free and fair and not subject to manipulation by any geo-political section. What happens in 2007 presidential election now set for do-or-die battle is therefore anybody's guess.
In some rather insensitive remarks, Niger State governor, Abdulkadir Kure was quoted as saying that the South-South was incapable of producing the president, the zone is always 'under" and not to be 'seen". He went further: '…if we insist on the right person leading the country always, then all the presidents of Nigeria will come from the North."
But seizing power through the barrel of guns is no qualification to govern. It is unconstitutional, undemocratic, uncivilised and amounts to an act of political banditry.
Kure's insinuation is tantamount to a distortion of Nigerian political history as the South, comprising Eastern and Western regions, became internally self-governing in 1956. The North relied on the British and only achieved this status in 1959. To crown it all, the federal government was trailing behind the two Southern regions in the race for development. Left with the South, Nigeria would have gained independence long before 1960.
As power shift hardliners shy away from reality, a messiah seems to emerge from Northern youth groups under the aegis of Arewa Coalition for South-South (2007) Presidency, ACSSP. According to the coalition, 'it would amount to the greatest injustice if the South-South zone was deprived from producing the next president. The Nigerians in that part of the country are nobody's underdogs," the ACSSP emphasised. What a dramatic turn of events.
One can only hope and pray and wish the ACSSP success in their fight for justice and fairplay in the polity.
Omosun writes from London.
aomosun@microsoft.com