The Bakassi drama, by Ita-Giwa.

---

The issue of the people of Bakassi Local Government Area, whose ancestral home in the Bakassi Peninsula was ceded to Cameroun by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) is still on the front burner 10 years after. Last week, the leaders of the Bakassi Peoples General Assembly led by Senator Florence Ita-Giwa addressed a press conference in Lagos on the state of things in the area and the plight of the people. NDUBUISI ORJI, who was there brings the excerpts: Did you make any move to discuss with the Bakassi Self Determination Front, which declared the area a sovereign state before coming here to avoid internal conflict that may arise.
Anybody in any form that wants to draw attention to the Bakassi issue, we appreciate. We don’t know anything about that(secession). If that is their effort in helping us in bringing attention to the Bakassi issue, we are not going to sit here and condemn anybody. We are saying that as responsible grown up Nigerians, who are leaders, we do not believe in it, and we are not part of it. You were senator in the National Assembly, and worked with ex-president Obasanjo as special adviser.
As somebody who was close to the seat of power, why was it difficult for you to get anything done before Obasanjo left office. Two, given the fact that the incumbent president is from the Niger Delta region, what do you think is pulling him back from doing anything for your people? You know that in Nigeria, anything I say about Obasanjo is always seen to be in defence of Obasanjo. But you have said it the way it is here. And this is a life long struggle.
We started this struggle when I was young, and I have gotten into old age now, and we are still in the struggle. The truth is that I was actually invited to New York for the ceding. But unfortunately at the last minute, I was asked to leave the room because I am too emotional. The first meeting we went to in Geneva, I had a confrontation with the president of Cameroun, which was said not to be diplomatic. But my desperation did not look into the issue of diplomacy.
I had a direct confrontation with him ( camerounian president) . And we now went for the ceding and only Donald Duke, the then governor was allowed to be there. I don’t know what I would have done at that time. I am not saying that I would have done anything to stop the ceding. But subsequently, President Obasanjo kept asking me questions about what I think would be comfortable, and painless in relocating the people. And in Nigeria, decisions can be taken at the level of the federal government and implementation at the state level will be another problem.
I do understand that even before Obasanjo left office, he provided money for the immediate development of the area, that we are to be relocated to. But certain things happened quickly. I will also own up here that sometimes, it may not be to the advantage of the people that you are leading if you are friendly with government and are also trying to protect government by allowing things to go on. Because we were actually taken to an area that was very horrible-Ikang. But because it was done hurriedly, these things have to be done you have no choice at the time than to go along.
And of course, overnight, at the state level, they have brought out law no 7, which now made it imperative for us to go along with any arrangement. So, I will not say that Obasanjo made it as painless as he promised. But I would also say that Obasanjo made efforts at the level of the Federal Government. But whether those efforts were implemented at the state level, is another thing. I will also like to let you know that the reason why I am called mama Bakassi is because from constitutional conference to the Senate, I have never stopped talking about this issue, which has virtually consumed me. I am very happy today that everybody is crying with us. But I was alone voice in the wilderness for so many years.
The state (Cross River) did set up a resettlement committee. In fairness to the present governor, (Liyel) Imoke, he made me chairman of that committee, and we sat for almost six months or there about, and worked out ways and means that the resettlement will be conducted in a very painless way. We made recommendations. But unfortunately, as it is with this country, up till today, those recommendations have not been implemented.
It is also note worthy for me to mention here that (late President Musa) Yar’Adua in his life time also set up a committee which was headed by the present president, who was then vice president. And I know that maybe as Niger Delta son, he showed enough interest and enthusiasm in ensuring that a body was set up to actually come out and see our state and see the areas that we actually want to be relocated to. And I believe that Jonathan committee also made recommendations that would have facilitated our resettlement. But again, nothing has been heard about the report of that committee. You talked about the possibility of being relocated permanently to a location of your choice, would having a permanent settlement not militate against moves by the House of Reps to seek for a review of the ICJ judgement. There was no Bakassi person that was involved in the process.
At that time, we wished that Bakassi indigenes were invited to the Hague. I am sure you all know that at the time that Cameroun took Nigeria to court during (late General Sani) Abacha regime, Abacha ignored that process. As the soldier that he was, he refused to subject the country or himself to that judicial process. He rather chose to go to war to liberate the area. But at the time, that we say we are now democratized we want to play the good people, and we subjected ourselves to that process, and we lost the case. But I would want to say that no Bakassi indigene was asked for any input in that matter. No Bakassi indigene. Just like a mixed commission was set up and it was a non Bakassi person that was made a member of that commission.
I actually came out, because sometimes out of desperation, I will come out to say I want to do this, I want to do that. And I was described as being too emotional, too militant over the Bakassi issue. It was felt that I would not be able to work with other countries. The issue of resettlement, let’s be realistic. I don’t like play acting, especially when you are dealing with peoples lives. We have said it over and over again that we appreciate the efforts of the House of Representatives, even though it has taken ten years, eight weeks to the final day that we can appeal the ICJ judgment. Now, the people of Bakassi have been on the streets all these years.
They have been completely marginalized. When it got to the point that we could not even vote, we now felt that we have to rise up and act. Because if we cannot vote, then it means that these children that we are raising, when they grow up they will not be part of the democratic process of this country. Now, we have been disenfranchised. I did not vote (in the last general election). I do not know if I can contest elections again, and I am still politically ambitious. So, where will I go and use my voter’s card. What we need now is immediate resettlement, and if there is any possibility of going back to Bakassi peninsula, well and good. You all know that going through an appeal in an international court is not an easy thing. It probably will take at least 3,4,5 or 10 years.
We need to be resettled. We need to resettle our traditional institutions. Most of the traditional rulers are now refugees. We left things in Bakassi. We left our homes, we left the graves of our fore fathers in Bakassi, which is very painful. We almost lost our identity. They started describing us as numbers. I do not have the name of a village again, I was known as no 10 or ward 2. Can you imagine Ita –Giwa not having a village? I cannot go and claim my mother’s village, because I have a father. My father was a traditional ruler. So, what we need now is where we can go and settle down and call our home and it is also part of the former Bakassi.
It is also worthy for you to note that it is the Bakassi Peninsular that was ceded, not the local government. And that is why they say we can move with our structure. We want to be resettled in Dayspring. If you like call it temporarily, but we want to be resettled in Dayspring. Dayspring is Nigeria. So, if we are living there as a temporary arrangement, it is Nigeria and it can be made permanent after the court judgment. We are going to resist strongly any attempt by anybody to exclude us from being part of the review , from giving evidence, and part of the process of resettling us. We wear the shoes, and we know where it hurt. You kept talking about being resettled in Dayspring Island. Why is it difficult for the government to allow you go.? I wish I have an answer.
All I know is that we were forcefully taken to the place called Itang through law no 7. There is always drama going on in Nigeria, because as we speak now, law no 7 has been abandoned. But at the time, the resettlement committee, we recommended Dayspring. But I will like the government of Cross River state and Nigeria to tell Nigerians why they have not taken us to our place of choice. They took us to a land locked area. We were born in riverline, ocean front area.
We earn our incomes from the ocean. Our life style revolves around the ocean. Our life style does not strive in farmland, we are not farmers; we are fishermen. We are aquatic people. So, I like the government of this country to tell us why we have not been relocated to our place of choice. We actually offered to go and start developing the area for ourselves if we officially were allowed to go there.

Northern agenda in Nigerian politics.

---

By ABIA ONYIKE
One of the major obstacles to genuine development and modernization in Nigeria is what some scholars have come to identify as the “Northern Project” or the “Northern Agenda” in Nigerian politics. The concept deals with the activities and ideas of elites of Northern extraction, who have been socialized to see Nigeria from a separatist and sometimes sectarian perspective. This mentality assumes ab initio that Pan-Nigerianism is an illusion, unattainable and therefore unrealistic.
Therefore, that the North must develop separately as a domineering force in Nigeria. However, the Northern project is not an invention of the incumbent or contemporary power elites in the North. It is an inherited world-view handed down to its current adherents by their forebears, most of who incidentally operated as founding fathers of the Nigeria nation. In the run-up to independence, such founding fathers like Alhaji Ahmadu Bello and Tafawa Balewa, among others, were more interested in the evolution of a Northern platform within the Nigerian federation.
To an extent, Chief Obafemi Awolowo – leader of the Yoruba West – entered Nigerian politics on the same premise, but was compelled by circumstances to strive to reconstruct his world-outlook. So, Nigeria became a strange place where elements who entered the political fray as sectional leaders at the same time masqueraded as nationalists. For instance, the history of India tells us about the undiluted patriotism of Mahatma Ghandi as the leader of modern India; same with Ghana (Kwawe Nkrumah),
Tanzania (Julius Nyerere), Cameroon (Ahmadu Ahidjo), Democratic Republic of Congo (Patrice Lumumba), Senegal (Leopold Senghor), post-apartheid South Africa (Nelson Mandela), Angola (Augustinho Neto), etc. I have never read nor heard that these venerated leaders of their various nations were too preoccupied with their own sections of the country and how to position those sections to gain some untoward advantage over others. Rather, they always saw the entire nation as their constituency, to the extent that their names became synonymous with their countries,
But in the Nigerian situation, the scenario was different. Northern leaders who remained tentative about the Pan-Nigeria experiment, were busy talking about their own section of the country and how to prop it to dominate the rest of the country. This mental state exposes a fundamental flaw of the Northern elite, which is that they had already surrendered the task of nation building. They may have felt inferior and incapable of leading the entire nation, hence their avowed commitment to leading only a part of it.
That feeling of inferiority led to a persecution complex – an attitude that complicated the process of nation-building in the first republic and led to its eventual collapse. Nation-building, especially in the case of a post-colonial state, requires an energetic and visionary leadership that must subscribe to the libertarian ethos of equity, justice, fair-play and unity of purpose.
The Northern leaders never hid their aversion for such important ingredients of development. From hindsight, we can now deduce that the conservative first-generation Northern elites were only interested in the preservation of the status ante. Part of this process involved the super-imposition of their will not only against other parts of Nigeria but also on the enclaves/vassal communities inside their region. Like I have argued elsewhere, it was this initial inordinate ambition that collapsed the first republic and set the stage for the civil war (1967 to 1970). Having failed to impose their will on the entire nation under a democratic dispensation, the Northern project opted for the use of military dictatorship.
This dubious and crude resort to militarism was then justified by them and their collaborators on account of the role the military played in crushing the struggle for self-determination embarked upon by the Eastern region of Nigeria. There are certainly some others who may argue that just as we have a Northern project, there are also the Western (Yoruba) project, and the Eastern (Igbo) project, which also imply that there is no Nigerian project after all. My answer to such a thesis would be that the Eastern or Igbo project was not a product of the original volition of the Igbo.
They were compelled to develop the agenda following their experience in the early 1950s and the civil war period. They had to adopt it in order to survive since other contending groups or forces in the Nigerian nation had proved to be more committed in their narrow-mindedness. As for the Western project, I believe the Yoruba elite had been amphibious and vacillated from one point of the pendulum to the other, depending on what they perceive to be their immediate objectives.
Awolowo enunciated what looked like a Yoruba project in the early 1950s and four years later adopted a Democratic Socialist platform, which ought to have buried the tribal and ethnic foundations of nascent Yoruba politics after independence in 1960. But the North made a major in-road into the West, co-opting Awo’s lieutenants (such as Akintola) in the process.
An attempt to resist the incursion created a national crises and the temporary subjugation of Awoism as a purely Pan-Yoruba or even Western force. Eventually, events unfolded which led to the supremacy of the Northern project assimilating the Yoruba project to form an alliance necessary to countervail the Igbo/Eastern project. So, the defeat of the Igbo attempt for self-determination coupled with the assimilation of the Yoruba into the mainstream Northern project marked a turning point in the reconstruction of post-war Nigerian politics. So, the period of 1970 to 1999 was dominated by the military-bureaucratic oligarchy.
The North dominated the military apparatus of power, while the bureaucratic apparatus was handed over to the Oxford-trained Western Nigeria administrators, who enjoyed the appellation of “Super” permanent secretaries, their main function having been to supplant the 1967 Aburi Accord. The assimilation of the West into the Northern project did not come by accident. It was the product of historical, territorial, cultural and religious ties between the two regions.
So, the Yoruba did not have any major problem playing a second fiddle in that alliance. At least, if for no other thing, Awo was Vice Chairman of the Federal Executive Council during the war; Gen. Olusegun Obasanjo was allowed to hold the reigns of power from 1976-1979, following the death of Gen. Murtala Mohammed after the abortive coup by Col. Buka Suka Dimka. What then has been the position of the minority groups in the country as far as the question of regional projects are concerned?
The ethnic minorities and their elite formations have always pandered to the dominant groups at every historical conjuncture. Even when they were entrusted with power such as in the case of Gen. Yakubu Gowon (1966 -1975); Gen. Ibrahim Babangida (1985-1993) and Gen. Abdusalami Abubakar (1998 -1999), they never developed an independent line of action; neither did they pursue a manifest Pan-Nigeria agenda. They operated as surrogates or figure-heads of the Northern power block. So, their dispensations never differed fundamentally from those of the others from the major blocks.
The overall outcome of the domination of power by the Northern project, include the implementation of policies, which favoured the North to the exclusion of other regions. A case in point was the creation of 19 states from the old Northern regions, while the Eastern and Western regions had 17 states split between them. Out of the 774 local governments in Nigeria, the Northern region alone has 414, while others have 360 split between them. During the Abacha-led 1994/95 Constitutional Conference, the old Northern region was allotted three geo-political zones, while the East and West had three zones.
Even in the analysis of Nigerian politics, a lot of terminologies are distorted to hoodwink the people. There is this resort to North-South dichotomy, as a basis for rotation of the Presidency, forgetting that three main regions came together in 1960 to form an independent union called Nigeria. The Northern region was not bigger than the others in such a way that it can brazenly appropriate all the resources of the nation to itself, willy-nilly. Next week, we shall try to unravel how the June 12, 1993, imbroglio, the greed for power and the on-going insurgency, have combined to set the Northern block on the path of gradual disintegration and inevitable dispersal.

North not ready for power –Ezeife.

---

By WILLY EYA
A former Governor of Anambra State and a prominent leader of thought in the South East, Chief Chukwuemeka Ezeife, is one man that does not fear to speak his mind on any issue. Ezeife believes that the situation in Nigeria is not irredeemable despite the challenges facing her as a nation. In this interview, the elder statesman bares his mind on various issues affecting the nation. Excerpts…
From your vantage position as an elder statesman, what do you make of the current state of the nation?
My attitude to the current state of the nation is guided by my belief that the hands of God are in the emergence of Jonathan as President. Not only does God not make mistakes, He, indeed knows what is best for Nigeria. It does not, therefore, matter what happens or how man perceives what happens. Jonathan, I believe, is a tool in the hands of God to shape Nigeria as He wants – to let God’s design for Nigeria manifest. I am beginning to think that the manifest destiny of Jonathan Presidency is the structural transformation of Nigeria from a country which appears permanently shipwrecked to a country where things work – to a country that works. From “longest” time ago and for solid reasons, the potential greatness of Nigeria has been celebrated. Hope has increasingly deemed on the actualization of that potentiality. Jonathan transformation, or the structural transformation which comes with Jonathan presidency, may yet actualize the potential greatness of Nigeria. Jonathan may not personally be leading the structural transformation agenda, but it cannot be lost on any observer that, for the first time in Nigeria, the North, the South, the East and the West are calling for a National Conference. So are all the ethnic groups in Nigeria, the large and the small.
National Conference for what?
What else, but to restructure Nigeria for peace and meaningful progress! No achievement can be greater than this.
Do you think that the present administration under President Jonathan would win the war against Boko Haram?
The war against Boko Haram is not for Jonathan to win or lose. It is a war that Nigeria must win to survive. God helping us, the sun is already setting on Boko Haram. It is not because of the great arsenal of Jonathan; it is not because of the great knowledge and strategic acumen of Col. Dasuki (which are evident); it is not because of the great resolve of those Nigerians who are so upset by Boko Haram. None of the above! Boko Haram must die because it is not the will of God that evil should triumph over good. Because God has so willed, the futility of Boko Haram is dawning on its strongest Nigerian supporters. The original founders of Boko Haram, whose simple objective is the Islamization of Nigeria, have realized that their objective is mission impossible – inevitably. Those who supported Boko Haram to make Nigeria ungovernable for Jonathan, as well as those who thought of Boko Haram violence, as a strategy for winning back power, are realizing the futility of the effort: that if they insist on “born to rule”, they will have only themselves to rule over. What is more, the longer they sustain that violence, the longer they stay out of power in Nigeria. The poor souls who supported Boko Haram in protest against bad governance which resulted in the abject poverty and ignorance of the people, are realizing that, while a short offensive would have served their purpose, and raised national consciousness to their plight, the prolonged offensive is making themselves and the people they depended on poorer now and much poorer in the longer term. They have achieved the negation of everything they had intended. It remains, possibly, the suspected or speculated foreign sponsors who, it was thought, wanted to exploit Boko Haram as a tool to make their prophesies self-fulfilling. Nigeria must survive. Jonathan structural transformation will assure that. Most Nigerians may not agree, but it is possible that Jonathan’s perceived slow and prayerful approach to the problem may have saved the country from the worst from Boko Haram.
What is the way forward to deal with the insecurity situation in the country?
I cannot claim any special knowledge in the area of national security. Apart from insecurity resulting from political motive, which includes political thuggery, there are other forms and sources of insecurity. These include theft, sexual harassment including rape, arson, ethno-religious conflicts, robbery, armed robbery, kidnapping etc. I think that, of the major ones, the easiest to deal with is kidnapping. Principally, community policing should play the dominant role. And youth groups like OPC, MASSOB etc can be empowered to play major roles. I do not want to dwell on security problems in which I do not know much. I do have one specific element of solution to advocate. It is “Safe Whistle Blowing”. From coup making to corruption, from kidnapping, even kidnapping led by the security agents who are paid to combat the crime, to all other conspiracy-related crimes and sources of insecurity, Safe Whistle Blowing can make a great impact on crime control. The key requirement is that the whistle blower is assured of his/her anonymity. And I know of a Nigerian group who claim to have developed a system that guarantees this. They claim that as long as the destination of a call is to designated security numbers, not even the service providers, whose systems are used, can identify the caller.
Do you agree with those who insist that insecurity in the North is a strategy by the power elites in that part of the country to ‘recapture’ power in 2015?
In my answer to the second question, I indicated the view that among the several motivations for promoting Boko Haram is the idea of some that it will help return power to the North. There are even those who suggest that power went to the South-South as a result of a desire to appease the violent groups in the region. I have indicated, a number of times, that Boko Haram will for a long time, deny presidential power to North. With the seeming desperation by the North to recapture power from the South, do you think Nigeria would ever remain the same? Voices of reason come from every part of Nigeria, including the North, or the deep North. Some very serious Northern minds, in high social and political positions, have categorically advised the North against risky gambles to regain power. The reason for amalgamation is still very much with us – and the gap may be getting wider. Why should the beneficiaries of amalgamation spearhead or court “disamalgamation.” The problem is that our politicians do not stop and ask the question “power for what” outside of self? The North has ruled Nigeria for more than 38 years in her 51 years of independence. What does Nigeria, and especially the North, have to show for this long dominance. Some have claimed that the North ruled and ruined Nigeria and ruined the North even more. Indeed, this is one of the reasons given for Boko Haram. Do we ever stop to think about the interest of the Talakawas of the North, the down-trodden, and the disappearing middle class, everywhere in Nigeria? Is the poor result of Northern dominance in the leadership of Nigeria due to weaknesses of the individual leaders – all of them- or a necessary consequence of a social system. When should we stop thinking only of the plunder incentive, propensity and possibilities, in the holding of political power? When do we stop thinking of self, relations, in-laws and “out-laws”? Is there a place for the interest of Nigeria, the largest concentration of blacks on earth? Shouldn’t our political objective be dominated by a desire to develop into a super power in this world, so as to satisfy what clearly looks like our manifest destiny of leading the Blacks of the earth, being their big brother and rallying point, and, above all, raising the dignity and respect of Blacks in the world? Must we remain a source of shame for Blacks – big among them like the penny among higher valued money units. Do we look among us to see who can lead the country out of the present mess created by man, in a country, in every way, designed by the Almighty God Himself for unmatched greatness? No leader of Nigeria, military or civilian, has shown a craving for the economic development and growth of Nigeria. Obasanjo did a bit well as Head of state, but after he was brought out from where he was consigned for three years to rats and mosquitoes, for no just cause, he appeared to have decided to take vengeance on all Nigerians, especially on the far North and the South East. Jonathan showed the right signs during campaigns but, so far, Boko Haram has not let us observe his true performance. When the development and growth of Nigeria become the objectives, the North should stay far away from her leadership, until they are ready in some fundamental ways.
Corruption is arguably the most challenging problem facing the country today. Do you think Jonathan has the strength of character to fight it?
Some time ago, I told an audience at the Yar’Adua Centre that, “the soul of Nigeria is going …going … !!!” Corruption has eaten up the consciences and souls of Nigerians and has induced them to the worship of almighty god of crass materialism. We can see fugitive mentality in Nigerians’ treasury plunder activity. The fugitive is so alarmed and frightened, so stupefied, by what he saw, his terrifying experience, that he does not know when to stop running. Nigerians in plundering the coffers of the state behave like this fugitive. No consideration is given to what can be done with the money being hauled. Corruption in low and high places is the root cause of our many problems from industrial unrest to small and not-so-small thievery, from armed robbery to kidnapping, from unemployment to poor infrastructure development, from import dependence to the inability for our manufacturers to compete with their foreign counterpart, and the consequent de-industrialisation of Nigeria, etc. What to do? When Jonathan is allowed to lead, he must adopt a ruthless “do-as-I-do” policy – keeping himself clean and swiftly weeding out the contaminated.
Many are afraid that there might not be a country called Nigeria after the 2015 election. Do you share that pessimism?
My immediate reaction to this is “arrant nonsense”. But we must be wary and let the true long term interest of every group in Nigeria, large and small, guide the actions of the group in the Nigerian political arena. Of course, the true long term interest of every group in Nigeria is the permanence of one Nigeria, restructured to make things work.
Do you think the current move to amend the constitution would reduce the political tension in the country?
To this I think my answer is yes. But we really need to remove sources of tension, not just to reduce tension. The National Assembly is not in a position to go far enough. Their role is really to repair some cracks on the walls of the house. Rebuilding the house, belongs to the owners of the house. We should not allow our current positions in the system becloud our thinking about long term remedies. That the members of the NASS have conflict of interests which disqualifies them from rebuilding the house, can easily be seen when we consider how they would deal with whether unicameral or bicameral legislature is best for the country. As humans, they must have difficulty with dealing with this issue objectively.
What are the most critical issues that the Constitution review should address?
Among the most issues are: the federating units, true federalism, remedying the defects of one national police with zonal police, not state police, for which our level of moral development cannot support and fiscal federalism, the derivation principle, with adequate provision for national interest etc.
Some are kicking that state creation should not be part of the amendment. The argument to support this position is that even most of the existing states are no longer viable. As one from the South East, do you agree with that position?
On the issue of one extra state for the South East, Nigeria politicians have shown great understanding and a good sense of fairness. I participated in the Committee of Leaders who rounded up the affairs of the 2005 National Political Reform Conference. See how these eminent Nigerians, representing every area of Nigeria, decided on the issue of one extra state for the South East zone. There were 42 members, 39 voted for one extra state for South East to bring the zone into equality with the four zones, which have six states each. (North West has seven). Two members only, voted against and one member abstained from voting. The Presidential Constitutional Review Committee has sharpened the reason for the special treatment of the one extra state for the South East zone. There is an overwhelming national consensus on the matter. The idea of equality of zones is generally accepted. This can be achieved with seven or eight states per zone. But this is grossly inefficient as even most of the existing 36 states are clearly unviable. The optimum solution is to declare equality of zones while making the six geopolitical zones as the federating units. You may even consider 12-zone federating system, with each existing zone split into two, with necessary boundary adjustments. But this will definitely be less efficient than the six-zone system.
It seems the dream for an Igbo presidency may never be realized considering that it is most unlikely that Jonathan would handover to another southerner. What is your take on that?
I have dealt with issue of Igbo Nigeria President extensively in the past. I should like to come to you on another occasion on this. However, the following summary statements are relevant. The principle of zoning and rotation have meaning only in the context of the six geopolitical zones of Nigeria. North/South alternation is not rotation and has never been a national policy. The federal character principle captures the essence of power sharing and rotation of leadership. Zonal rotation of power is an extension of that principle. The zones are what Nigeria uses for power sharing and rotation of leadership since 1995. There is even an extra minister per zone. The famous PDP Constitution provides for the zones as the basis of rotation. By 2015, every zone in Nigeria, except the South East, shall have supplied Nigeria with Chief Executive Officer for more than five years. Only the South East is left out. What will be the equity, justice and fairness, if Jonathan is to hand over to a zone which has held Nigerian Chief Executive Officer position for more than five years, rather than to the South East, the only zone that has been out in the cold. If you take the tripodal position in Nigeria, only the Igbo, of the three legs of the tripod, has not held the office – the Hausa/Fulani has, the Yoruba has. Someone, who seemed to have some problem of memory loss about history, recently talked about the American and the Nigerian civil wars and the necessary effect on access to power by the defeated. Perhaps it is necessary to remind some people about the Nigerian war. In 1966, with pogrom and other deprivations and iniquities, Nigerians declared their rejection of the easterners. The rejected people refused to reject themselves but rather decided to build a world of their own. When Nigeria changed her mind and decided to keep Nigeria one, the rejected people dutifully co-operated, since they did not want to be outside Nigeria, if they could help it. A neighbouring country provided an opportunity for one Nigeria, where things would work. A solution was worked out and agreed. The rejected ones happily prepared to rejoin Nigeria, Nigeria unilaterally and unceremoniously reneged on the agreed terms and forced a war “to keep Nigeria one”. Can any sensible person see a relationship with the American civil war in this? But, really, when will Nigerian interest predominate. Which Nigerians have played the role of developing, commercializing and opening the eyes of other Nigerians? Which Nigerians create values where hitherto no values were known to exist? Which group of Nigerians have voted with their feet for one Nigeria and are making home of, and actively developing and improving everywhere they are. When will it be the turn of economic development and growth of Nigeria – development in line with her manifest destiny? Which Nigerian will find it necessary to spread development fairly evenly across Nigeria, in order to satisfy his own people, who live everywhere in Nigeria? I shall discuss this issue further when we meet again.
Are Igbos ready in the event that such an opportunity calls especially against the perception that they cannot speak with one voice?
Some people are in for a dumbfounding surprise. But that will be because they do not pay attention to Igbo behaviour over issues that the Igbo consider important to themselves. On the issue of 2015 Igbo agenda, please put your ears on the ground. Yes you will hear, not one voice, but very many different voices. Note, however, that the multitude of voices are saying the same thing. It is not many voices, but discordant voices that cause problems. How disunited were the Igbo in burying Ojukwu? Giving him such burial honour that no human, born of a woman, has ever received. In “disunity”, we dumped “all our eggs in Jonathan basket” – the initial serious division among some elite notwithstanding. Truly, yes, we have no leader that dictates the direction we all must follow. We really do not need one, as long as good reasoning, available to most of us, guides decisions. Our shoemakers, farmers, welders, truck pushers, drivers, generally all our people, recognise and appreciate the truth and what makes sense. That is the leader we follow. We also know ourselves, the antecedents of each of us, we know who to trust. No group, out of national power for decades, like the Igbo, can have the coherence of our people. Look around. Count your teeth with your tongue. And now that an arch, ardent hater of our people, has begun to anoint presidential candidates and their running mates, to spite us, it must do some good to our coherence. For those who did not know before, will now know.
Are you not worried over the infighting among governors of the South East in recent time?
Do you know that for about more than half a decade, one person has been Chairman of South East Governor’s Forum. You cannot take the necessary adjustment to any new element as infighting. Or are people seeing in the unity of our governors the antithesis of what they wish us.
Do you support the economic integration of the South East zone?
We have a document on economic integration, endorsed by all the governors. It is an idea whose time has come. Nobody can resist it. Look at the West. They are very advanced in it. Now the South South, as diverse as they are, they have embraced integration. Should there be a problem, we can, creatively, work out an acceptable solution or compromise. There is this possibility of a device that can be called “Federally Administered States”, if it becomes necessary. A resort to such a device is becoming increasingly unlikely, as communication improves among groups.
What is the future of the country considering that so many people seem to be losing hope on its continued unity?
Because God lives, because God created Nigeria for His purpose, though through the instrumentality of British imperialism, which appeared to have deliberately sowed the seed for self-destruction in the country because the permanence of Nigeria is in the true long term interest of every group in Nigeria, and because the Nigerian people are headed for “We the people of Nigeria .. hereby make and give unto ourselves this Constitution” (for peace and progress), Nigeria has come to stay.

---

Forces of darkness have taken over Aso Villa –Asu Beks.

---

By WILLY EYA
President General of Ijaw Peoples Assembly, Asu Beks, is not happy with developments in Nigeria. Contrary to the impression of many, he believes that the people of the Niger Delta are not getting a fair share of the opportunities they deserve. In this interview, he speaks on various issues, including the reasons for the emergence of the Boko Haram sect. Excerpts…
It was the leader of the Oodua Peoples Congress (OPC), Dr Fredrick Fasehun, who said a couple of days ago that the June 12, 1993 election was annulled because the Hausa/Fulani elites did not see any reason why a Yoruba man like M.K.O. Abiola would become president. The difference between President Goodluck Jonathan and Abiola is that while they succeeded in preventing Abiola from being sworn in, the forces within the local and international community did not make it possible for anything to happen to Jonathan’s position as president. Not many people have forgotten what happened during the June 12 saga and of course the Hausa/Fulani oligarchy were still very cautious not to allow a repeat of the June 12 saga. They were the masterminds of what happened on June 12, 1993. So, what you see playing out now is a clear indication that the North has sworn not to allow the presidency to come down to the South. Even if late Umaru Yar’Adua had done his eight years, they would have come with one gimmick or the order to take back power. This is because the only thing they have and which they know they can use is their so-called population. But do not forget that all those census figures they are brandishing are contestable. You can imagine a situation where cattles and cows are counted as human beings. We all go to the North. They have landmass but when you drive around, do you see people in those places? But come down to any part of the South and you see houses, communities and people from one kilometre to the other. The point I am trying to make here is that it has become obvious that we cannot continue like this. I still do not believe that this one Nigeria thing can go any further. Perhaps, as a nation, we are just going to confirm the prediction of America that by 2015, there would not be a country like Nigeria. Look at what is going on. Before the general election, they had said that if General Muhammadu Buhari did not emerge as president of Nigeria, they would make the nation ungovernable. People like us begin to wonder that if we are talking about democracy in Nigeria, we should not be talking about the likes of Buhari. This is a man who overthrew an elected government headed by his own kinsman, Shehu Shagari. We can only allow him if we have short memory of history. They had said they would make the country ungovernable and that is precisely what we are seeing today. But my worry is that my brother and kinsman, President Goodluck Jonathan, is succumbing to their blackmail. If Jonathan was not doing that, there is no reason why a Sambo Dasuki would be preferred as a better candidate to General Owoeye Azazi, a world-acclaimed intelligence officer, as National Security Adviser.
Tell me, have we not had more violence under Dasuki than Azazi. Don’t also forget that Dasuki was former ADC to Gen Ibrahim Babangida. And however you look at it, an ADC is a glorified bodyguard. That is the only experience he has to be NSA. And you are talking of an Azazi that has been trained as an intelligence officer in all the best defence institutions in the world and a former Chief of Defence staff. I also know as a matter of fact that Dasuki’s allegiance is to the Sultanate and the likes of Babangida. It is only the information that he wants to give to Jonathan that he would give.
Of course, he would sieve the information before he gives it to Jonathan. But an Azazi would give Jonathan the information the way it is. And that is precisely what he was doing. But along the line, they felt that the position of the NSA is one of the offices that are the birthrights of the North. The Comptroller of the Nigerian Customs Service, Federal Capital Minister, Chief Justice, Inspector General of Police, Managing Director of NNPC, NPA and so on.
Now, they are blackmailing Jonathan to say give them to us so that we can support you in 2015. But the Jonathan I know is not after 2015 but wants to make sure that after these first four years, Nigerians would say yes, he did not disappoint. We know that it has been difficult in the past one year. People are still finding it difficult to say is it this man that would transform this country. But do not forget the security challenges the man has been grappling with. How do you contend with governing this country and a Boko Haram man pointing the man at you? In the recent past, I have not put on my generator. There is no doubt that the power situation has improved.
Look at the minister of power, Prof Barth Nnaji, a serious man who is ready to turn the power sector around. You can also see an aviation minister, Stella Odua that is working. You can see Okonjo Iweala, one of the best economists in the world. We have a few of them like that in the cabinet. And when people begin to talk about non-performing cabinet and about impeachment of Jonathan, do they mean that a president should take a horsewhip and begin to go from ministry to ministry. Obasanjo was there for eight years and what has he to show for the eight years? Abacha was there for only God knows when. Babangida was also there for donkey years and what did he achieve?
The only person from that part of the country I can still say he performed was Yakubu Gowon. So, Jonathan should remain focused because the Boko Haram thing is a distraction. I am also telling him that he should step on toes. Obasanjo sent soldiers to burn down Odi and heavens did not fall. So those states that have refused to accept democracy like Yobe, Borno and so on, Jonathan should declare a state of emergency there. And those you have identified as being sympathetic to Boko Haram that are in your government, remove them, the heavens would not fall. Do you agree with those who insist that the South South is still being marginalized even when their own is the president of the country? This is what I have just told you that Mr President is being blackmailed. And I want to tell you that the people of the Niger Delta would not forgive him if after four years( let us not start talking about whether he would come for a second term or not), there is nothing to show, there would be problems.
If the East-West road is not done, nobody would be happy with him. The Niger Delta issue is not only about amnesty. Amnesty is one small part of the entire package. We are talking about education, industrializing the region and also empowerment. How do you empower people if you do not put them in key positions where it would trickle down? If you go to the Nigerian Ports Authority today, the Lingua Franca is Hausa. If you go to NIMASA and Customs, it is the same thing. In the case of Customs, from 1986 to date, only for 12 months had the office of the CG been shared between the South West and South East. It is the birthright of the North. If you check all the key positions, they are in that region particularly the North West zone where the vice president comes from. They removed the Group Managing Director of NNPC, a man from Kogi State and gave it to the man from Kaduna State in North West.
They removed Azazi from Bayelsa State and gave the NSA to Dasuki from North West. They removed the Managing Director of NNPC, Suleiman from Adamawa and gave it to Habib Abdullahi from Kano. The chairman of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), Managing Director of NIWA, the governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria, are all from the North.
There is no Bayelsan that is the head of any parastatal even under a Jonathan presidency. It is a shame. In order of protocol, you have the Senate President from the North, the Speaker, Chief Justice of the federation, President of Court of Appeal, Chief Judge of the federal High Court and so on are from the North. And in the North West is where we have the likes of Buhari and IBB. Mr President has told us that he is not Goliath, that he is not a war monger and that he believes in constructive engagement. But President Jonathan should wake up because if after four years it continues like this, I am not sure that the Niger Delta people would forgive him. That is why I support my brother, comrade Joseph Eva who said recently that we need prayers. It is possible that the voodoo inside Aso villa has taken a better part of Mr President and he can no more see. This is because the Jonathan that I know as Deputy governor and as governor and even vice president is different from the one we are seeing now. The forces of darkness have taken over the villa. They have blindfolded Jonathan so that he would be doing only the bidding of the North. The case of the South West is even more pitiable. When you count the key figures in government up to 12, none is from the South West and don’t forget the massive support they gave to him in the last election. Where Jonathan got massive support were from the South South, South East and South West. As far as I am concerned, the North is reaping where it did not sow. They should wait until it is their turn.
And Jonathan, whatever mistakes he has made, he still has time to correct it. Board appointments are coming and some of the chief executives are also due to go and he should begin to correct it otherwise we are not going to forgive him. How do you reconcile your argument that the Niger Delta has not benefited from Jonathan’s administration even with the various programmes including overseas training being enjoyed by Niger Delta youths? The ones you have trained abroad who are back to the country, have you given them jobs? Where are the jobs? It is one thing for you to send your children to school and another to give them jobs. The Amnesty office under Kingsley Kuku does not manufacture jobs. Youths of the Niger Delta are entitled to education like other Nigerians. Awolowo used Koko money to grant free education in the west and why should we not have free education in the Niger Delta. Puzzles over FG/Boko Haram dialogue OMONIYI SALAUDEEN Without a doubt, the tolerance capacity of President Goodluck Jonathan to the insurgence of Boko Haram is again excitingly on trial.
A couple of days ago, when the Federal Government announced its readiness to reopen peace negotiation with the recalcitrant group, some enthusiastic Nigerians hived a big sigh of relief in the hope that it would put an end to the incessant loss of human lives. In a statement by Minister of Information, Labaran Maku, the Federal Government officially extended an open hand to parley with Boko Haram, saying: “it is our hope that this process will lead to restoration of peace, security and tranquility in northern Nigeria.” But the first shocker came when the group demanded either resignation of the president or outright renunciation of his religion as a condition for dialogue. Either way, the renewed peace process has already been literally aborted in-vitro. This is another way of telling the president that they are not ready for dialogue yet. Expectedly, the presidency has drawn the line between the limit of what the president can offer as a panacea for peace and the group’s insatiable quest for violence. The Senior Special Assistant to President on Media, Dr. Reuben Abatti, responding to the dreaded sect said,
The president cannot be intimidated by any group or individual. The President will never resign. He has the mandate of Nigerians to serve his father land and nobody should imagine that he will succumb to blackmail. When Nigerians voted overwhelmingly for President Jonathan in the 2011 general election, they knew they were voting for a Christian. He continues to enjoy the goodwill and support of the good people of Nigeria. As President, Dr. Jonathan is the leader of both Muslims and Christians; in fact; he is the leader of persons of all faiths. So, it amounts to sheer blackmail for any individual or group to ask the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria to convert to Islam.” What exactly is the position of things regarding the peace talk is yet unknown. Neither the Federal Government nor the group has disclosed the form of dialogue that is ongoing and where. On one hand, there have been rumours of meetings between the two parties in a foreign the country.
And on the other hand, the group has continued to unleash terror on the innocent citizens. Rather than laying down their arms, members of the group have intensified campaign of violence in the northern part of the country. Indeed, it was like another missed opportunity when the leadership of the group in a recent statement said it had not engaged in any dialogue with the government. It described the purported press statement by one Abu Muhammad, who claimed to be the second in command to the sect’s leader, Abubakar Shekau, as the creation of the media. It also stated that many people were using its name to get huge sums of money under the pretext that they would “arrange dialogue with us” There are several puzzles here begging for an answer. First and foremost, Nigerians want to know which of the group the authority is dialoguing with. They also want to know who genuine leader of the authentic group the government is holding talk with is. Questions have equally been raised as to the sincerity of the government in the whole process. In view of this, some critics have dismissed the dialogue as a ruse. Their skepticism is borne out the seeming lackluster attitude of the government towards stemming the rising wave of terrorism in the country.
The former National Publicity Secretary of the Afenifere, Yinka Odumakin, in an interview with Sunday Sun, raised a number of posers. He said, “There are so many inconsistencies and contradictions in these things. Which of the groups are they dialoguing with? Anybody who has been following what is going on now will know that we are not dealing with one Boko Haram. There is original Boko Haram led by Yusuf, which many people believe could not have acquired the kind of sophistication we are seeing now.
There are also those who believe that there is political Boko Haram which is the one Owoeye Azazi was talking about that exists in PDP. There is also criminal Boko Haram which is the group behind bombing of banks and putting the stamp of Boko Haram to cover their crime. Even there is security Boko haram being masterminded by those who want to justify the N3 billion we are spending on security.” Recalling some of the botched attempts in the past to dialogue with the group, he added, “One day, the president will say they want to dialogue with Boko Haram but they don’t know their face. They next day, he will say they have infiltrated his government. You will recall that he said it at one time that they were in the executive, legislature, the police, the SSS and the military. At another time, they will say they don’t know who they are. When the United Nations’ building was bombed, they paraded three amputees as mastermind of the crime. Where are those amputees today? The other time, they arrested Kabiru Sokoto for the Madala bombing. He was in custody when Zakari Biu was said to have released him.
What have they done with Zakari Biu? Where is Kabiru Sokoto being tried today? Last year, Obasanjo went to Borno to meet with Boko Haram. Within 48 hours, the man who received him was killed. And Boko Haram said they did not kill him. Who kill him? If those who are sponsoring Boko Haram are now ready to come out for dialogue, they should tell us.” Also, the National President of Arewa Youth Consultative Forum, Shettima Yerima, corroborating Odumakin’s submission, posited, “For how long will government continue to dialogue with those who carry arms? It means the only language our government understands is violence. If you take arm, you are respected. If you don’t, nobody cares about you. If this continues, our generation yet unborn will make a lot of provision for arms.
In no time, other groups will spring up after Boko Haram. However, if the government is truly sincerely to discuss with the aggrieved party, they should sit down and find a way forward. At first, I was opposed to it because they were note even coming forward to dialogue. Now, if they are ready to come out and discuss with the government, I don’t see anything wrong in it. But I hope both parties are sincere.” However, despite his reservation for the sincerity of both parties in the purported dialogue, he maintained that peaceful resolution of the crisis would be an enduring solution to the incessant loss of human lives.
But he warned that government should not spare any sacred cow, if anyone is found culpable in the terrorist acts being perpetrated by some mindless individuals. “I actually can’t figure out what condition they are asking for. Are they saying that the atmosphere is now conducive for them to dialogue with the government? If the government feels that the best way to handle them is to dialogue with them, so be it. But where lies the sincerity of purpose on the part of the government and the Boko Haram? If there is sincerity in the dialogue that we are talking about, there will be no reason for all these violent attacks we see every day.
There must be sincerity of purpose that there wouldn’t be sacred cows. I will personally advocate that whosoever has a link with the group should be charged to court. Anybody found wanting for terrorism should be hung. If they can do that, Nigeria will come out of the crisis. I am saying this because the original Boko Haram cannot claim responsibility for all the atrocities that are going on in Nigeria. Today, we now have a situation where armed robbers kill people in the name of Boko Haram. Even when politicians want to cause confusion in one state, all they do is to kill one person perceived to be their enemy and put the responsibility on Boko Haram.”
In another new dimension to the whole issue, he suggested the possibility of external interest in the crisis. “You cannot also exonerate the western world from all these atrocities. Because of our oil, they are very much interested in what is going on in Nigeria. They may be out to do what they did in Libya. This gives me a lot of worry,” he lamented. Over time, President Jonathan has been criticized for lack of political will to deal with the threatening security challenge in the country. At different times in the past, President Jonathan had given different timelines that the crisis would soon be over. None has come to pass.
The two previous attempts by the authority to explore the dialogue option on the Boko Haram issue have been to no avail. One was the peace mission led by former President Obasanjo during his visit to Borno State. Unfortunately, it ended up on a tragic note. Some couple of hours after his meeting with the group, his host was mowed down. The second major move was later led by some Islamic clerics. Similarly, the peace process was aborted due mutual suspicion between the group and the authority. With the controversies trailing the fresh initiative, the question now on the lips of many Nigerians is: how far can government go?

‘Braithwate, Babatope are deadwood politicians’.

The Nation.

Dr. Braithwaite

The Akeredolu Campaign Organisation(ACO) yesterday dismissed as  fruitless and of no effect the purported endorsement of Gov. Olusegun Mimiko of Ondo State  for a second term by Dr. Tunji Braithwate, Chief Ebenezer Babatope and Dr. Fredrick Fasehun.
 In a statement, the Director of Publicity and Strategy of the group, Mr. Idowu Ajanaku, said the three men “ have lost relevance in the South-West.”
He said of Dr. Braithwaite: “It would be recalled that the defunct National Party of Nigeria (NPN) registered the then National Advance Party (NAP) to scuttle the Unity Party of Nigeria (UPN) under the late sage, Chief Obafemi Awolowo, but it did not work as the party could not win a councillorship seat in the entire Western States then. We know that Braithwate is back in his familiar turf. But just as he failed in the Second Republic he will fail again.”
On Chief Babatope, the group said: “For us in the ACN, the case of Ebenezer Babatope is like that of Saul, who started with God, but ended up with sorcerers. Babatope started with the progressives, under the late Sage, but ended in the belly of the reactionary, Peoples Democratic Party (PDP). His endorsement of Mimiko has further confirmed that he has lost totally in the politics of Yorubaland. How did his support help Olagunsoye Oyinlola, Segun Oni, Alao Akala, among others.?  It is instructive to remember that this same man endorsed the Late General Sanni Abacha! This time, his endorsement will not save Mimiko from being rooted out of Ondo State in the October 20 election.” 
In the case of Dr. Fasehun, the group said: “Is it not the same Fasehun who was almost killed under Gen. Sani Abacha ? This time he is joining hands with Mimiko to murder the Yoruba Integration agenda. But it will not work,
 “Did Braithwate, Babatope, Fasehun minds prick them with the inability of Mimiko government to commission a single road project in more than three years? On the abandoned Ondo-Akure road, Owo-Akure road, Doom-Dome project, gross unemployment and so on?
“The Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN) will sweep the poll in Ondo State because our promises are based on what we have done in Lagos and other ACN controlled states. Barrister Rotimi Akeredolu on his honour, integrity and pedigree, will not embark on any abandoned project. He will pursue massive infrastructural development of the state, provide employment and expand the economy of the State and will not improvish the people like the Labour Party under Mimiko has done.’’

Offshore Trouble, Onshore Terror.

Simon Kolawole Live!

Nigeria! It always seems there will be no end to our troubles. As we are getting out of one, we enter into another. While we are still battling tooth and nail with terrorism in the North—with no hope of resolution in sight yet, I must add—another potentially explosive item is making its way into the agenda. It is called offshore/onshore dichotomy in the sharing of oil revenue. It is an old wound that is being reopened. The aim of the agitators is to make sure littoral states do not enjoy 13 per cent derivation from the oil mined off their shores. Instead, it would be treated as a federal territory and the revenue will go straight into the central pot, from where the rest of the country will share it.

The very idea of derivation formula is rooted in the concept of compensation. First, it is about natural justice. How can I mine resources from your land and not allow you enjoy a special benefit from it? Second, it is about environmental impact. Drilling oil in your vicinity means you will suffer certain damage to your environment—whether it is onshore or offshore. The motive, therefore, is to pacify your pain. In Indonesia, for instance, oil-producing provinces and districts receive 15 per cent and 30 per cent from oil and gas revenues respectively as compensation for exploration activities. It is common sense, I would love to say.

If oil is drilled offshore Rivers State, for example, the impact will certainly be more felt in its environment than in faraway Kogi State. But the apostles of dichotomy are suggesting, directly, that my state and Rivers should benefit the same from such exploration activities. I don’t think this is fair. I believe we are looking for trouble yet again. Of course, if I want to be short-sighted and selfish, I would support that Rivers State should be denied the offshore derivation payment because it means more money will come to my state. But the real question is: would that be fair and just?

There are two points I want to emphasise here. Revenue allocation in Nigeria is a zero-sum game: my gain is your loss. If one naira is taken away from the revenue of the oil-producing states, non-oil producing states will automatically benefit. Therefore, ordinarily—as I have said—I should be arguing in support of reinstating the onshore/offshore dichotomy so that my people can gain more from the petrodollar pot. After all, my village, my local government and my state rely heavily on the oil money to survive. But this is absolute nonsense.

By the way, I have grown bored and tired of hearing our Niger Delta friends go on and on about “our oil” and how the rest of Nigeria would starve to death “without our oil”. I am sick of it. I am eternally in favour of developing the human resource and relegating oil to the background. I would rather my state produces a Bill Gates than a Sheikh Monsour. I have argued a million times that the rest of Nigeria should begin to focus on turning federal allocation to “pocket money”. They should expend their energies and resources on developing their own productive bases, rather than hoping to live on oil forever or seeking ways to short-change the Niger Delta through onshore/offshore dichotomy. This is where I stand any day.

However, I am also sick and tired of hearing people argue that the Niger Delta governors are mismanaging their derivation earnings. I say: to hell! Let them burn the money if they like! It is for their citizens to complain and hold them accountable. When there was no derivation and the rest of Nigeria was sharing all the oil money, how did it benefit us? Was Nigeria better off? Was the money spent prudently? The impression being created is that while the other governors are spending their own share of the oil money judiciously, the Niger Delta governors are the only ones mismanaging theirs. That is ridiculous. I will never buy such a clever-by-half argument. This patronising attitude is, after all, one of the major reasons behind the prolonged agitation in the Niger Delta which ultimately led to militancy.

But while someone like me will always argue that the militancy that ravaged the Niger Delta between 2005 and 2010 was more of opportunism than activism, the fact remains that we prepared adequate grounds for these chaps to exploit—with the way we had been treating the oil-producing region since we hit the black gold in 1956. We had a revenue-sharing formula in place that was abruptly skewed after we hit oil fortune. Any sincere analyst or commentator would agree that this was the beginning of the destruction of the production bases of the regions/states. Everybody abandoned their value-added economic base and started rushing to the federal capital every month to share oil money in the form of monthly revenue allocation. We can all see where we have found ourselves today.

At a time in our history, we did not even reserve anything for the oil-producing areas. There was nothing like derivation principle. All the revenue went into the central pot and we started distributing it on the basis of population, land mass and all sorts. Later, we started toying with 1 per cent, 1.33 per cent and such like as derivation. It was the 1995 constitutional conference convened by Gen. Sani Abacha that eventually recommended derivation payment of “at least 13 per cent” to the oil-producing areas. President Olusegun Obasanjo, on assuming power in 1999, refused to implement it for several months, even though it had been incorporated into the 1999 constitution.

Then, suddenly, the highly explosive issue of onshore/offshore dichotomy was reintroduced into the formula. We have always been seeking to take what belongs to the Niger Delta through the back door. The National Assembly eventually enacted a law in 2004 providing for the application of the derivation principle to oil produced within 200 metres water depth isobath for littoral states. This effectively addressed this dichotomy problem and I don’t think there has been any reason to go back on it. So I just can’t understand what we are trying to do now.

My final point: we are looking for trouble if we, in the name of anything, attempt to take more from the Niger Delta states under the guise of onshore/offshore dichotomy. It is one more trouble we don’t need to add to our CV. I want it on record that I, Simon Gbenga Kolawole, Adult, Male, Christian, did warn on August 26, 2012 that if we succeed in reintroducing the dichotomy and depriving the oil-producing states a legitimate share of the oil revenue, we are courting another round of prolonged crisis. The so-called ex-militants (I believe they are still militants) are now richer, better trained, better equipped and better prepared—with a heavier war chest—to unleash terror. In fact, some of them are now trained pilots (under the Amnesty Programme). So we may not be dealing with just AK47s this time around. Fighter jets easily come to mind. After all, whoever thought Boko Haram would turn bombs to household items in Nigeria today?

And Four Other Things...

THAT N5000 NOTE
I have been asked what I think about the planned introduction of N5000 banknote by the Central Bank of Nigeria. It is not a problem for me as long as I have plenty of it (don’t laugh). I like the idea that the note would be adorned with the images of three women who distinguished themselves in politics and activism. Also, I don’t think it would worsen or lessen inflation. Such things are conjectures—N1000 recharge cards would not suddenly start selling for N5000 because of the new denomination. However, I think it would benefit the politicians the more. They surely can carry more “settlement” cash in GMG bags now…  

FEEDING THE WARLORDS
The militancy in the Niger Delta created warlords who are now feeding voraciously on the national treasury. According to a widely circulated report last week, some of them now get millions of dollars to protect pipelines but oil theft continues unabated! What a country! Similar payments were made to militants under President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua in 2008 over the Chanomi Crude Oil Pipeline. What a heavy price to pay for the wrong attitude we had towards the Niger Delta since the discovery of oil. This is simply too much. We will sadly continue to live with the consequences.

FUMES OF DEATH
Yet again, ignorant Nigerians have been sent to their early graves by generator fumes. In Ringim, Jigawa State, three young men were found dead Friday morning inside a room, obviously from carbon monoxide poisoning. It is one thing that we still have to live with generators, but it is another tragic thing that many are still unaware of the danger of sleeping in the same room with a running generator. So many people have died from the ignorance. It happens so often it breaks my heart. Who will help tell my people to protect themselves from this sleep of death?

THE OIC THING
Last week, I voiced my concern over a statement credited to the Minister of State II for Foreign Affairs, Dr. Nurudeen Mohammed, that Nigeria is an Islamic country with the largest population of Christians. My worry is that such a proclamation is unhelpful and unnecessary given the delicate state of affairs in our country. But it appears something was lost or deliberately twisted in translation. I have seen the video clip (www.youtube.com/watch?v=BLgH5srB_NU) and what Mohammed actually said was “Nigeria is the biggest Islamo-Christian country in the world”—while illustrating the essence of interfaith dialogue. The coinage is obviously clumsy but certainly not malicious. It is only fair for me to clarify the issue here.

Jonathan: We’ll Give Impetus to Democracy, Good Governance.

President Goodluck Ebele Jonathan

By Muhammad Bello in Abuja

The federal government has reiterated its determination to give impetus to the growth and consolidation of democracy and good governance by working closely with advanced countries of the world.

President Goodluck Ebele Jonathan disclosed this Friday in Abuja while receiving the outgoing British High Commissioner to Nigeria, Mr. Andrew Lloyd who was on a farewell visit to the Presidential Villa.

He said the government was poised to partner with Britain in particular in order to promote good governance, political stability and socio- economic development in Nigeria and other African nations.

In a statement by his Special Adviser on Media and Publicity, Dr Reuben Abati, the President reaffirmed his Administration’s commitment to marshalling and executing policies and measures that will help Nigeria to successfully overcome present challenges.

“We shall continue to count on your support and I hope your successor will continue your good work here in Nigeria,” President Jonathan told Mr. Lloyd.

According to him, there is already in place an excellent bilateral relationship between Nigeria and Great Britain which received a significant boost during Mr. Lloyd’s tenure.

He commended the High Commissioner’s efforts to boost trade and economic cooperation between Nigeria and Britain, the high-point of which, he said, was Prime Minister David Cameron’s visit to Nigeria with a delegation of British business men and investors.

The President also received the outgoing Egyptian Ambassador to Nigeria, Mr. Youssef Hassan Shawki who is leaving the country after a two-year tenure.

President Jonathan expressed the hope that Nigeria and Egypt will continue to build-up and expand areas of bilateral cooperation.

He wished Mr. Shawki well in his future endeavours and urged him to now consider himself a life-long Ambassador of Nigeria to Egypt and the rest of the world.