Governor El-Rufai is reputed to have said that those northerners opposing restructuring are not speaking for the north but for themselves. He said this during the 26th Nigerian Economic Summit in Abuja.
He said that Northern Nigeria will be the “biggest beneficiary”, and that all the governors in the region agree to the restructuring.
He said it is very clear that things have to change. “We have to redesign the architecture of our politics”. What he means by that, we cannot immediately understand because it could mean so many things. He said that the recommendations of the various previous conferences have to be implemented.
He said “the earlier Nigeria retraces its steps and puts merit, competence, compatibility and capacity, the better”. “We must have people in government being trained to take over from us”. Well stated. I hope he is not playing to the gallery.
At an earlier presentation at the AREWA HOUSE 50th Anniversary on the 31st of October, 2020, Governor El-Rufai expressed his “passion” on restructuring the Nigerian state. He observed that there were STRUCTURAL BOTTLENECKS (emphasis added) and that RE-BALANCING THE FEDERATION (emphasis added) was necessary by DEVOLVING MORE POWERS AND RESPONSIBILITIES TO THE STATES. This seems to be his major advocacy.
He also suggested RESOURCE CONTROL by the states, whereby, all minerals embedded within a state (including power and renewable energy) should be controlled by states, who would then be required to pay royalties and taxes to the federal centre. But then, erroneously I think, he added that such revenue to the centre would then be “available for distribution to all tiers of government”. Our quarrel with this is that if each state controls its resources and only pay “royalty and taxes” to the centre, which redistribution again to “all tiers of government would be done? We thought he is advocating for resource control such that you “bake your cake and eat it”. Secondly, on what basis would such redistribution be done when, according to the restructuring, each state would have begun operating a system of local government that best suits its circumstances, culture and diversity”?
Another significant recommendation by Governor El-Rufai is his suggestion for a significant devolution of power from the centre to the states, in such a way, the Exclusive Legislative List is shortened, while the Concurrent List is lengthened, to allow states to participate in areas they were not participating in before. He suggested that in like manner, a further devolvement would be done, between the states and their local governments, depending on local circumstances.
On the restructuring that will affect the judiciary, he suggested dual judicial councils for the states and for the Federal Centre and with Federal appellate courts.
Finally, he advocated provision of a clause to enable states merge voluntarily (voluntary merger).
However, neither in his Arewa House speech, nor the later one at the 26th Nigerian Economic Summit, did he mention any restructuring pertaining to the Legislature or the kind of government (Presidential or Westminster model) Nigeria would operate. It would seem El-Rufai is satisfied with the present 36-states structure, but with the possible addition of various forms of local governments under the states as third tier (according to circumstances, culture, and diversity) that best suits a state. While this may be alright, but our understanding of federalism is the sharing of powers between two units, that is, the centre and the parts. However, to include a third tier of government may not be necessarily off-track because there is no one standard form of federation, to the extent you can talk of “True Federalism”.
In connection with the Legislature, people have suggested the collapse of the bi-cameral legislature to the uni-cameral type. He has said nothing on this.
In view of devolvement of powers and responsibilities, there is need for each state to have its own constitution that reflects its “circumstances, culture, and diversity”. Then, there would be a central constitution which would reflect the freedom of the states to operate within its added powers and responsibilities, recognizing the diversities of the units, and need to free the units from the “suffocating embrace” which has been the bane of the present federal but unitary system in operation. There would now be enough “air” for the parts to “express” themselves while remaining united as one country.
It has become clear to us the kind of restructuring Governor El-Rufai is “passionate” about. Apart from the third-tier of government which would change, the existing 36-states structure would remain. It would mean he has turned a blind eye to the legitimate agitations for finding the “true federating units”. It will then mean that the structure is faulty with “bottle-necks” which he earlier talked about and wanted to “re-balance”. Therefore, re-balancing the federation would include, not just maintaining the present 36-states structure alone, but finding the “true federating units”. This is the fulcrum of the agitations, particularly from the over 300 nations that make up Nigeria. We are not suggesting over 300 federating units, we are suggesting that all these nations should come to the negotiating table and negotiate first, their existence under the state of Nigeria, and secondly, and if that is settled, to negotiate the kind of relationship that should exist among them inter se and between them and the centre. They would also decide what kind of centre they want. Negotiation and consensus building is primary. No structure should be imposed which the people have not agreed on. Once that is done, we can say that the structure has been “re-balanced”.
Maintaining the present 36-states structure would mean creating another “monster” which the present federal centre has been. True federations are about finding “true federating units”. The present 36-states structure was imposed by the previous military regimes since 1967 and maintained to date.
A return to the 1976 12-state structure, as suggested by a northern group by the name “friends of democracy”, is advocacy for a worse situation than the present. It means the states would become more “monstrous” than previously. We want equity. We want justice and fairness. Previous leaderships, to date, have not been able to provide this. Nigeria has not been able to build a leadership that will be fair and just to its diverse people. That is why we have not been able to develop into a nation. Once the various nationalities are able to participate in their governance, creating wealth by themselves, and consuming that wealth by themselves and not waiting for the sharing of some “national cake”, thereby promoting laziness, then there will be true progress and development. No individual nation or tribe should commandeer to itself the collective commonwealth selfishly and corruptly, and discriminate against others, based on numbers and other criteria. We want justice. We want equity and fair-play. That will be the restructuring we are advocating for Nigeria. May God help us to reach there.
CHIEF/BARR. J. D. EPHRAIM