Ekwueme: Additional State in S’East, A National Imperative

30 Sep 2012


By Vincent Obia and Christopher Isiguzo

Citing recent agreements by national political stakeholders, former Vice President Alex Ekwueme has added his voice to the quest for an additional state in the South-east.

In an extraordinary interview with THISDAY at the weekend in Enugu, Ekwueme said creating an additional state in the South-east geopolitical zone was necessary for national stability.

He said those standing in the way of the creation of another state in the South-east were merely engaging in a prevarication that would not help the course of national unity.

The Second Republic Vice-President and one of the main founders of the ruling Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) also said historical facts “so incontrovertible” put the zone on a most favoured position to produce the next president of Nigeria, declaring, however, that the decision to run for another term was up to President Goodluck Jonathan.

“We must go back to the political conference which was held under President Olusegun Obasanjo and there it was agreed without any contradiction by all the delegates unanimously that an additional state should be created in the South-east zone,” Ekwueme told THISDAY.

The former vice president regretted that the Governor of Kano State, Alhaji Rabiu Musa Kwankwaso, who was a member of the National Political Reform Conference of 2005, which took far-reaching decisions on national issues, including the creation of an additional state in the South-east, was now leading a campaign to try to prevent the achievement of the South-east dream.

Of late, Kwankwaso has made comments that seem to disparage the proposition for an additional state in the South-east.

He said the South-east population would not justify the creation of another state in the zone, stressing in fact that if there is a place that needs to be split into states, it is Kano.

Relying on the results of the 2006 population census, Kwankwaso had said the population of the North-west alone is 35,786,944 compared to the 37,396, 384 combined population of the South-east and South-south.

Ekwueme faulted Kwankwaso’s argument, saying population has never been the major criteria for state creation in Nigeria. If population is the main consideration, he said, Lagos should have been the major subject of any state creation discussion.

“These population figures have never been the main criteria for creation of regions or states. And if we follow that to a logical conclusion, the population of Lagos State, to all independent observers, is well in excess of the population of Kano and if they had been about the same some years back, after Jigawa State was created out of Kano, it would be surprising that the population figures are still about the same,” Ekwueme said.

“I think we should be careful how we bandy figures; we should try to work with facts and figures that should enhance our unity of purpose and togetherness rather than bring up figures that tend to bring up more division among us.”

On the agitation by the people of the South-east that one of their own should succeed President Jonathan, Ekwueme agreed that the position was valid because the region had had the least opportunity to lead the country.

He said: “It’s clear that every region has had a shot at the topmost position in the country. By the time Jonathan finishes his first term, the South-south, which had never had the opportunity until Jonathan came, would have had five years plus; North-central would have had 18 years; North-east, five years and three months; South-west, about 12 years; North-west, about 10 years, while South-east has had it for only six months plus few days.

“So, if we are thinking in terms of equity, and out of the assumption that every geopolitical zone is capable of producing a president who will not be a president for that zone but a president of the entire country and would serve the interest of all Nigerians, then the South-east would be justified in their quest to be given the first chance to produce a president at the next dispensation.”

But Ekwueme said the decision to quit in 2015 or seek another term was President Jonathan’s to make.

“Constitutionally, I have no doubt at all that the President is qualified to seek for a second term if he so desires. He has no bar ceiling his second term, but it would be on what he thinks is in the best interest of the country.

“The most important thing is that seeking for political office should be based on one’s desire to deliver service above oneself, as we say in Rotary. For him to contemplate whether his second term will be for the good of Nigerians or whether it would reduce the chance of Nigeria’s growth, stability and development, is entirely his decision to take and I can’t take it for him, and I can’t influence him in any way.

“But if he decides to seek my advice, I will give it to him privately; it’s not for me to put it before the public.”


http://www.thisdaylive.com/articles/ekwueme-additional-state-in-s-east-a-national-imperative/126419/

Ekwueme..epitome of wisdom and intellects.

PointB: And if we follow that to a logical conclusion, the population of Lagos State, to all independent observers, is well in excess of the population of Kano and if they had been about the same some years back, after Jigawa State was created out of Kano, it would be surprising that the population figures are still about the same,” Ekwueme said.

Need I say more?
Only a blind man will agree that the population of Kano is more than that of Lagos. Do we still need any other evidence to prove that the census figure is manipulated? I've been to Kano and Lagos. The population of Kano is not remotely close to that of Lagos. Even after creating Jigawa from the old Kano state; its population remained the same. They should tell that story to the marines.

We need Regionalism and good leaders not new states. If we don't adress this root factors no amount of states created in any region will solve any problem. Fact.

The problem with regionalism is getting every part of the country on board. The (core) North will not agree to it and they will use their numeric advantage in the NA, bestowed upon them by successive military regime, to block such move. The only counter-measure to this is get some of the North Central states on board such plans. Additional states in the South (East) is also crucial in balancing the political odds necessary to achieve regionalism.

Broadly speaking, Ekueme is very much on point here.

PointB: The problem with regionalism is getting every part of the country on board. The (core) North will not agree to it and they will use their numeric advantage in the NA, bestowed upon them by successive military regime, to block such move. The only counter-measure to this is get some of the North Central states on board such plans. Additional states in the South (East) is also crucial in balancing the political odds necessary to achieve regionalism.

Broadly speaking, Ekueme is very much on point here.

Not necessarily. The argument of lopsided representation has its logic to it, but I don't see why we can't have LESS states, and some more reps and senatorial districs from the south to balance things out (if that is what the clamour is about). On a serious note we need to start merging some states and using the saved resources to develop some of the cities we have. Any part of the country that wants 100 states can have it, at the end of the day it WILL NOT bring development.

PointB: The problem with regionalism is getting every part of the country on board. The (core) North will not agree to it and they will use their numeric advantage in the NA, bestowed upon them by successive military regime, to block such move. The only counter-measure to this is get some of the North Central states on board such plans. Additional states in the South (East) is also crucial in balancing the political odds necessary to achieve regionalism.

Broadly speaking, Ekueme is very much on point here.

I feel your point bruv but i always feel there's a way around it. Regional state Governments can come together to form alliances with the sole aim of initiating joint projects to generate employment and boost the region's economy. Large scale mechanized farming is a no-brainer, the options are limitless. When i hear companies leaving Nigeria i see it as an oportunity for a home grown company to replace them. Co-operation between regional Governors should be encouraged. State Creation has never solved any problem.

Population determine the needs and thus the SW deserves another state.

dayokanu: Population determine the needs and thus the SW deserves another state.

Ndigbo are not against any state creation in the south west. What we want is parity. I would love a situation where the south west gets another state just like the north west with 7 states.
Second, population has not been the sole determinant of state creation in Nigeria. Have you wondered why Ibadan state was not created ahead of Ekiti state with less population.
What the south east wants is just parity with other geo-pol zones.

PointB: The problem with regionalism is getting every part of the country on board. The (core) North will not agree to it and they will use their numeric advantage in the NA, bestowed upon them by successive military regime, to block such move. The only counter-measure to this is get some of the North Central states on board such plans. Additional states in the South (East) is also crucial in balancing the political odds necessary to achieve regionalism.

Broadly speaking, Ekueme is very much on point here.

Unfortunately, the reason you stated against the call for regionalism is the same reason why 'balancing' would not be achieved through the creation of additional states. The constitution has made it so hard to create additional states in any part of the country.

Should the SE (or anywhere in the South for that matter) get an additional state, you can be rest assured that the North will also use the strength you mentioned to also get additional state(s)in its regions which would take the 'balancing' issue back to square one.

It looks like a catch 22 situation.

Andre Uweh:
Ndigbo are not against any state creation in the south west. What we want is parity. I would love a situation where the south west gets another state just like the north west with 7 states.
Second, population has not been the sole determinant of state creation in Nigeria. Have you wondered why Ibadan state was not created ahead of Ekiti state with less population.
What the south east wants is just parity with other geo-pol zones.

What should e the criteria for state creation if its not population?

I would rather use the population as a reason. WHats the point of creating more states in a place that has 2million ppl while another place with 20m is unattended to

Boring thread

dayokanu:

What should e the criteria for state creation if its not population?

I would rather use the population as a reason. WHats the point of creating more states in a place that has 2million ppl while another place with 20m is unattended to

In that case, Lagos state will get additional 3 states while vast areas such as Oke-Ogun Saki etc in your state will remain in the same Oyo state.
As I said earlier, population has never being the sole means of creating states in Nigeria. Have you not wondered why cross river state and Rivers states were created in 1967 while the bigger east and west were not touched?.
In Today's Nigeria, the sole reason for state creation is equity. The south east has to be at par with other zones.

Sky Blue:

Not necessarily. The argument of lopsided representation has its logic to it, but I don't see why we can't have LESS states, and some more reps and senatorial districs from the south to balance things out (if that is what the clamour is about). On a serious note we need to start merging some states and using the saved resources to develop some of the cities we have. Any part of the country that wants 100 states can have it, at the end of the day it WILL NOT bring development.

Less states and more reps will probably serve the same purpose of politically balancing the region. But it won't address the problem of ethnic nationalities cries of marginalisation in other spheres. Merging states in regional blocks is actually one of the most widely supported view in the south. I doubt the North will accede to this, again, their political numeric advantage comes to play here.

Andre Uweh:
In that case, Lagos state will get additional 3 states while vast areas such as Oke-Ogun Saki etc in your state will remain in the same Oyo state.
As I said earlier, population has never being the sole means of creating states in Nigeria. Have you not wondered why cross river state and Rivers states were created in 1967 while the bigger east and west were not touched?.
In Today's Nigeria, the sole reason for state creation is equity. The south east has to be at per with other zones.

Then Lagos that has more needs should get the state. Oke-Ogun being vast means nothing when its just expanse of land with nothing.
If its about expanse of land then Yobe , Adamawa should get 3 states each.

The state creation of 1967 was an attempt to separate the land based on the cultures of the people. SW was left as a single state because they were homogenous in Laguage and have a similar culture same with SE.

River, Bendel, Benue-Plateau, North-East and CRS were also created to separate the minorities and keep them from being dominated by the larger majorities so their voices can be heard too

dayokanu:

Then Lagos that has more needs should get the state. Oke-Ogun being vast means nothing when its just expanse of land with nothing.
If its about expanse of land then Yobe , Adamawa should get 3 states each.

The state creation of 1967 was an attempt to separate the land based on the cultures of the people. SW was left as a single state because they were homogenous in Laguage and have a similar culture same with SE.

River, Bendel, Benue-Plateau, North-East and CRS were also created to separate the minorities and keep them from being dominated by the larger majorities so their voices can be heard too

Then in 1996, the criteria used in state creation were mainly based on geo-political zones having a state each.
Now the reason for creation is for balance of states in the geo-polity of Nigeria.
The south west has 6 while the north west has 7 and the south east with only 5. Each zone should have equal number of states and as a consequence, the south east should get 2 states.

Pukkah:

Unfortunately, the reason you stated against the call for regionalism is the same reason why 'balancing' would not be achieved through the creation of additional states. The constitution has made it so hard to create additional states in any part of the country.

Should the SE (or anywhere in the South for that matter) get an additional state, you can be rest assured that the North will also use the strength you mentioned to also get additional state(s)in its regions which would take the 'balancing' issue back to square one.

It looks like a catch 22 situation.

Your analysis is not entirely correct. From every indication it will take more than an additional state in the South (East) to eliminate the political advantage the North have over the South. I doubt if two additional states would. It can only reduce it. Hence, I think it would be easy for the Northern political strategist to accede to additional state in the SE, but not two. In any case, these are all mere postulations. Real politics are more complex. Somehow, I think it's easier though for SE to get additional state than for Nigeria to go regional on the basis of the 6 zones.

Pukkah:

Unfortunately, the reason you stated against the call for regionalism is the same reason why 'balancing' would not be achieved through the creation of additional states. The constitution has made it so hard to create additional states in any part of the country.

Should the SE (or anywhere in the South for that matter) get an additional state, you can be rest assured that the North will also use the strength you mentioned to also get additional state(s)in its regions which would take the 'balancing' issue back to square one.

It looks like a catch 22 situation.

Your analysis is not entirely correct. From every indication it will take more than an additional state in the South (East) to eliminate the political advantage the North have over the South. I doubt if two additional states would. It can only reduce it. Hence, I think it would be easy for the Northern political strategist to accede to additional state in the SE, but not two. In any case, these are all mere postulations. Real politics are more complex. Somehow, I think it's easier though for SE to get additional state than for Nigeria to go regional on the basis of the 6 zones.

Andre Uweh:
Then in 1996, the criteria used in state creation were mainly based on geo-political zones having a state each.
Now the reason for creation is for balance of states in the geo-polity of Nigeria.
The south west has 6 while the north west has 7 and the south east with only 5. Each zone should have equal number of states and as a consequence, the south east should get 2 states.

But the fact is that the regions are not equal in any indices be it population, land mass, productivity or development. Why should an unequal entity be forced to be equal

dayokanu:

But the fact is that the regions are not equal in any indices be it population, land mass, productivity or development. Why should an unequal entity be forced to be equal

I hope you know that there was a time in Nigeria (when truth reigned for a short time in the 1950s) that the East was greater in population than the North and West respectively.
The current population indices you are employing are dubious and born of self deceit. A smart person would know this; but whether dense stupidity created by extreme wickedness (like in your pathetic case) would allow you to see reason is an entirely different thing altogether.

I'm laughing because, the wicked never triumphed for long on earth. Actually the seed of the wicked ALWAYS serve the seed of the benevolent/righteous. Mark these words.

And i wonder who the wicked and the seed of the wicked is going by the fact of who formed a political alliance with who to screw (A)who . . .

To simplify my point, We complain about the cost of Governing this country and how our senators, legislators and governors with their ministries loot the country blind and some people are still proposing state creation to increase their number As a matter of fact, the number of states should b reduced nationwide. We need good leaders not states.