₦airaland Forum

Dr. 'Layi Abegunrin, Department of Political Science, Howard University provides additional views on how to sustain Nigerian federalism




Federalism presupposes that the national and states/or regional governments should stand to each other in a relation of meaningful autonomy resting upon a balanced division of powers and resources. Each state/or region must have power and resources sufficient to support the structure of a functioning government, able to stand and compete on its own against the others. In today's Nigeria, inter-ethnic intolerance has reached its peak and become endemic. Consequently, the nationalities within the Nigerian state are mutually distrustful of each other and there are many evidences from such festering issues as the violence in the Niger Delta areas, the ethnic clashes in many of the northern and Middle-Belt states, and insecurity all-over the country, the unresolved debate over the sharia question, and the call for resources control by the southern states. In light of all these crises and mutual distrust among all of us Nigerians, there is definitely a need for the Nigerian nationalities to enjoy state autonomy while uniting with each other through true federal government exercising some basic powers, and running some common services. Our union and cooperation should be based on devolution of power and resource control to the regions. True federalism, fiscal federalism, and restructuring of all our national institutions through a sovereign national conference are imperative. There is a need to revisit and restructure our present association we call "Nigeria." Since the independence the northern led military and their political class had dominated the political power and economic resources of the country, this is supposed to be a federal arrangement. Why then should one section of the country be in control at all or most of the time? Professor Sagay said "Political domination and economic centralization has characterized the current arrangement in Nigeria since 1966." Chief Obafemi Awolowo warned against the inherent dangers in the present structure of the Nigerian federation and said:

"If a country is uni-lingual and uni-national, the constitution must be unitary.
If a country is uni-lingual or bi-lingual or multi-lingual and also consist
of communities, which over a period of years, have developed divergent
nationalities, the constitution must be federal and the constituent states must
be organized on the dual basis of language and nationality. If a country is
bi-lingual or multi-lingual, the constitution must be federal and the constituent
states must be organized on a linguistic basis. Any experiment with a unitary
Constitution in a bi-lingual or multi-national country must fail in the long run,"
(Obafemi Awolowo, Path to Nigerian Freedom, 1949, pp. 48-49)

Nigeria is a nation within nations. With about 450 ethnic groups, unitary constitution/system cannot solve Nigerian problems, but genuine federalism. And with our chaotic situations since the end of the civil war, we should convene a sovereign

national conference to restructure the Nigerian polity. Chief Olusegun Obasanjo underscored the seriousness of a national conference in 1998 before declaring his intention to run in 1999 presidential election and said, "Every Nigerian has a stake in the survival and prosperity of the country. This stake should be recognized, no section or group should be made to feel disenfranchised or alienated. The obstacles to voluntary and enthusiastic identification with Nigerians should be removed. I believe this can be achieved through open dialogue among the constituents of the Nigerian Federation" (The Guardian, Lagos, November 3, 1998). Obasanjo went further and said, "Nigeria was taken captive by conspiracy of deception, oppression, corruption and injustice all for greed and selfishness and it needs liberation. Nigeria is too fragile and the situation is too dangerous for anything but the truth and justice and too small for anything but brotherhood and sisterhood. And the world is moving fast that it may leave us behind," (Olusegun Obasanjo, This Animal Called Man, 1998, p. 219). This was Obasanjo the retired General, but since he has been elected and sworn in as Obasanjo the president of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, he has retreated from his original statements of 1998.

After the April 2003 presidential election, Obasanjo has forced out his opposition to a national conference when he claimed that, "Nigerians do not need national conference if genuinely what they want is to be part of Nigeria. They want fairness, justice and whatever is given other parts of Nigeria is given to everybody. There is a platform in my
Party the PDP to achieve all these." Now Obasanjo is carrying out the platform of his party, the PDP by organizing the "Conference for Political Reform," and loaded it with his hand picked PDP loyalists. President Obasanjo is out of touch with the voice of reason in Nigeria, and the reality on the ground. These hand-picked party members will not be acceptable to decide the Nigerians' future. What Nigeria needs is a Sovereign National Conference with elected representatives of Nigerian ethnic Nationalities. All ethnic groups must be represented either big or small.

Some of the contributors to this forum have pointed out the importance of Nigeria in Africa and in World affairs, and of A Pan-African Agenda for the National Conference. First of all we should not forget that charity begins at home. Our priority and number one national interest is the protection and security of our citizens; and stability, peace and survival of Nigeria as a sovereign nation. When our country is not stable, secure and at peace at home, how do we contribute to Pan-African Agenda and be respected and be able to maximize the power of Pan-Africanism? As a people, our interest should be to have maximum opportunity for individual and community development without let or hindrance. We need an enabling socio-political environment that provides the best opportunity to individuals for self-actualization and fulfillment so as to unleash their creative energies for development and transformation of the local and regional communities and the national polity as a whole, which will help us continue to contribute to Pan-African Agenda.

Is true, Nigeria has made important contributions in African continental affairs, starting with the Nigerian troops serving in the United Nations peace keeping operations in the Congo in 1960, sent her troops to help put down army mutiny in Tanzanian in 1964. The Nigerian government made moral, materials and financial contributions to the liberation


of Mozambique, Angola, Zimbabwe, Namibia and the end of apartheid system in the
Republic of South Africa (Olayiwola Abegunrin, Nigeria and the Struggle for the Liberation of Zimbabwe:Š, 1992, PP. 78-123). The nation's troops were sent for peace keeping operations in Liberia, Sierra Leone and currently her troops are serving in the Darfur Region of the Western Sudan to rein in peace in that part of Africa. Nigerian troops have served in peace keeping operations not only in Africa but also in the Middle East- Cyprus and Lebanon and in Central Europe- Bosnia. Nigeria would continue her active role in African affairs and as a leader in Pan-Africa Agenda and respected in the World affairs, if she could keep her house in order domestically through a stable and secured true federal system of government.

Thus, for Nigeria to continue making these contributions and respected and accepted as the giant of Africa she has claimed to be, we need new arrangements of a genuine Federalism that will allow us and future generations to renew our faith in a union whose spirit had been severely wounded. The structural problems that have bedeviled Nigeria since the 1914 amalgamation in the name of British crown have not been resolved. If today, Britain, the former colonial overlord and creator of Nigeria, is talking of autonomy with its constituent nationalities: the Welsh, Scottish and Irish in this twenty-first century, obviously, Nigeria needs to see the handwriting on the wall. With the current situation Nigeria cannot survive (should not continue) as quasi-federal country, but as a complete federal state with full autonomy for the regions. According to K.C. Wheare, "Federal Government is an association of states, which has been formed for certain common purposes, but in which the member states retain a large measure of their original independence," (C.K. Wheare, Federal Government, 1946, p. 1). Under the current federal government in Nigeria, all power is centralized, and the states/or regions do not have any control over their resources, or police. Nigeria's economic development, political stability, security and peace depend on extending the freedom, benefits and choice of autonomy to each ethnic nationality within the country.

Under a new arrangement, the regions, or geo-political zones or whatever you call it should be allowed full fiscal autonomy and be free to manage their economy within the limit of their resources. Every state or region at the present stage of development needs its revenue to carry out much needed development projects. Professor Pius Okigbo gave an insight to this problem and warned that, "Any attempt to subsidize and give grants to each unit of the federation without due consultation with and approval of the so-called, well-to-do sections of the country will lead to abuse of power in the center, interstate animosities and feuds, as well as charges of favoritism," (Pius Okigbo, Nigerian Public Finance, 1965). Since the military came to power in January 1966, sectionalism, nepotism, ethnicity and political favorism had been rampant in Nigeria. On the issue of revenue allocation, the land belongs to the people, and there is no sovereignty, but the people, therefore, each region within the Federation of Nigeria should be empowered to levy taxes on its own people for its economic development projects as needed. A sovereign national conference should come up with a constitution that will develop cooperative, competitive and innovative federalism that respects the universal norms in intergovernmental relations, transparency, accountability, justice and mutual confidence, respect and trust.

Some of the states created by the military regimes are not viable, thus, there is a need for boundary adjustment. The classical authorities in political economy have emphasized that the land and including all that it contains belong to the people. Therefore, it is imperative that the 1978 land use decree by the former military administration of General Obasanjo should be abolished. People should and must have right to use their lands the way they want for their own benefits.

If there is no struggle there is no progress, and nations are built out of struggle and ours will not be different. Thus, in restructuring the Nigerian institutions, a new orientation should be included to establish discipline and enforce it at all levels of our society. Nigerians from all walks of life should respect the rule of laws and be a society of laws and order. Let no one be afraid of diversity. We all should be Nigerians because we want to be Nigerians, not because we are forced to be Nigerians. Therefore, for Nigerian state to survive, prosper and restore her purpose, it must be restructured, and this is our chance to establish an acceptable peoples' constitution for political stability, security, economic development, peace and progress. Therefore, a sovereign national conference is imperative, and is the viable option for our survival, peace, stability and sustainable development of Nigeria.

Unless, we have an appropriately constituted sovereign national conference by representatives of all ethnic nationalities (i.e. regardless of the number or seize of each ethnic group, all must be represented to voice their views), and all concerned interest groups (civil society, civil rights and women organizations, labor unions, student organizations etc), within the country; the various nagging issues holding Nigeria like an albatross won't be resolved. The final document agreed upon at the national conference should be put before the Nigerian people for a national referendum. People should decide their own constitution, and it should not be imposed on the people. It should be Nigerian constitution and Nigerians should decide its shape.
http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/386.html

Similiar calls in Zimbabwe

Sovereign National Conference (SNC) Solution To Zimbabwe's Problems Social, economic and political crisis in Zimbabwe demand urgent resolution. The economy has virtually collapsed and Zimbabwe is the first country in the 21st century to hyperinflate. Unemployment rages at 70 percent and HIV/AIDS ravages the population.

More distressing, the ruling ZANU-PF party of President Robert Mugabe is stone-deaf, hopelessly blind, and clueless. Impervious to reason, appeals and even international condemnation, it does not see the failures of its own policies, preferring to blame the West and colonialism for Zimbabwe’s woes.

By Joao EM Matandirani
http://www.zimpolitics.net/snc.htm
Even more disconcerting is the impotence of the Southern African Development Community (SADC), African Union (AU) and the international community to effect real change and bring relief to the suffering people of Zimbabwe. “smart sanctions” by the U.S. and the European Union have failed to dislodge the Mugabe regime or bring change. Now, the international and African community is divided over what to do next.

The coalition government between ZANU PF and Movement for Democratic Change has not gone well at all. President Mugabe has ignored the objectives of the deal and instead used the “coalition” as a platform to rebuild ZANU PF and an opportunity to manage the transition to the next leaders of ZANU-PF.

Past efforts to resolve the Zimbabwe crisis failed because they appealed to the good sense of the Mugabe regime to initiate change. But the depth of the crisis in Zimbabwe is such that the government of Robert Mugabe alone cannot solve it; nor can the MDC or any single individual or political party. Hence, it must take the collective action of all Zimbabweans. As such a mechanism must be established that permits this. Fortunately for Zimbabwe, it does not have to re-invent the wheel. Such a mechanism, known as the “Sovereign National Conference” (SNC) already exists in Africa itself and derived from Africa’s own indigenous institution of village meeting.
http://www.zimpolitics.net/snc.htm
When a crisis erupts in an African village, the chief and the elders would summon a village meeting and put the issue before the people. At the village assembly the issue is debated by the people until a consensus is reached. During the debate, the chief makes no effort to manipulate the outcome or sway public opinion. Nor are there bazooka-wielding rogues, intimidating or instructing people on what to say. People express their ideas openly and freely without fear of arrest. Once a decision is reached, it is binding on all, including the chief.

In the early 1990s, this indigenous African institution was revived by pro-democracy forces in the form of "sovereign national conferences" to chart a new political future in Benin, Cape Verde Islands, Congo, Malawi, Mali, South Africa, and Zambia. Benin's nine-day "national conference" began on Feb 19, 1990, with 488 delegates, representing various political, religious, trade union, and other groups encompassing the broad spectrum of Beninois society. The conference held "sovereign power" and its decisions were binding on all, including the government. It stripped President Matthieu Kerekou of power, scheduled multiparty elections that ended 17 years of autocratic Marxist rule.

In South Africa, the vehicle used to make that difficult but peaceful transition to a multiracial democratic society was the Convention for a Democratic South Africa (CODESA). It began deliberations in July 1991, with 228 delegates drawn from about 25 political parties and various anti-apartheid groups. The de Klerk government made no effort to "control" the composition of CODESA. Political parties were not excluded; not even ultra right-wing political groups, although they chose to boycott its deliberations. CODESA strove to reach a "working consensus" on an interim constitution and set a date for the March 1994 elections. It established the composition of an interim or transitional government that would rule until the elections were held. More important, CODESA was "sovereign." Its decisions were binding on the de Klerk government. President Frederick de Klerk could not abrogate any decision made by CODESA - just as the African chief could not disregard any decision arrived at the village meeting.

Clearly, the vehicle exists in Zimbabwe for a peaceful transition to democratic rule or resolution of political crisis. This vehicle worked in Benin, South Africa and Zambia. This is the vehicle all

stake-holders in Zimbabwe must insist on for Zimbabweans to solve their own internal problem. It is the same vehicle all outside Zimbabwe – from SADC, the AU, UN, European Union to the U.S. Congress – must insist on for peaceful change in Zimbabwe.

AU should enjoin all member states to insist on the convocation of a SNC, not just ask Mugabe and opposition activists to “talk to one another.” African sanctions should be imposed if the Mugabe regime fails to comply. Such sanctions may include the blockade of land-locked Zimbabwe by SADC member countries and a cut-off of electricity by South Africa.

Indeed, the alternate scenario is horrific. If nothing is done in Zimbabwe, there will be a complete meltdown and implosion, as was the case in Liberia (1991), Somalia (1993), Rwanda (1994), Burundi (1993), Zaire (1996), Sierra Leone (1999), Ivory Coast (2000) and Togo (2005). And the cost of rebuilding and putting Zimbabwe back together will be enormous.

THE DRC CONGO EXAMPLE

Democratic Republic of Congo:
Sovereign National Conference
DetailsCategory: Mechanism Created on Monday, 12 September 2011 11:13 Last Updated on Wednesday, 14 December 2011 23:37 Published on Wednesday, 30 November -0001 00:00 Written by Super User Hits: 307
NAME OF MECHANISM
Sovereign National Conference (Alternative Process)

YEARS OF OPERATION
Opened sessions on the 7th August 1991; temporarily closed in January 2002 by Prime Minister Nguz-A-Karl-I-Bond; and then worked uninterrupted from April to December 2002.

MANDATE AND OPERATIONS
Mandate: Established by Mobutu’s government, under pressure of political parties (UDPS), CSOs and the International Community.

The conference claimed to be a democratic forum of all relevant forces of former Zaire, and was tasked with

1) interrogating the country’s history and question how and

2) finding a way to deal with the multidimensional crisis (political, economic, social, cultural and moral).

Outcome: Recommendations regarding the establishment of political institutions to manage the country’s transition to multiparty democracy.

Staff: Chaired by Catholic Archbishop Laurent Monsengwo Pasinya, the respected chair of the Bishops' Conference.

RESULTS
The conference adopted a series of resolutions in different commissions; however these were not officially endorsed by the government, and the institutions to deal with the transition were not established.

FINAL REPORT
Note: After the initial suspension of this conference, a protest entitled the “March of Hope” was organised by religious communities in order to advocate the re-opening of the conference. Unfortunately, 30 people were killed and hundreds injured during their attempt to resume the conference.

http://www.justiceinperspective.org.za/africa/democratic-republic-of-congo/sovereign-national-conference.html#congocommision

Sovereign National Conference (With Honesty) 2004-2005
Back in October 2003, at the first post-war International Conference on Biafra held in Maryland, USA, (follow link), the communiqué called for Nigeria to call for a Sovereign National Conference (SNC) within 6 months wherein the different ethnic nations fighting and suffering in Nigeria would come to the table to decide on if and how they would associate with one another. Failure to call such a conference, according to that communiqué, would leave Biafra with no choice other than to explore the formation of a Biafra government in exile.

By March 2004, the deadline passed without comment or effort by the Nigerian government. Biafra followed through and exercised the stated option.

At the time of this writing, there is a strong popular initiative (resisted by Obasanjo's government) aimed at convoking SNC by October of 2004. While the effort is commendable, it is compelled by the ever worsening of conditions in Nigeria. It is a last ditch effort to avoid a cataclysmic end for Nigeria.
http://www./SNC_with_honesty.htm
However, the rumored goal of SNC being proposed still aims to keep Nigeria one. What a shame, because this is the same poison-recipe which is killing--no, has already killed--Nigeria. "Sovereign National Conference (With Honesty) 2004-2005" is a three-part essay presenting what a successful SNC means, and why.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Excerpts,
", What keeps Nigeria one today, if “one” you can call it, is mutual hatred, fear, suspicion, malice, "demonization", pretense, hypocrisy, arrogance and exploitation, held together by lethal force and the unscrupulous opportunism of a haughty few who can wring wealth and power from this pathologic state of affairs.

In the North, the Muslims want their own Sharia Nation and care nothing about Nigeria or Nigerians, except for the preservation of a structure called one-Nigeria, which guarantees their power to control the politics, the military, the security, the economics, and the human resources of entire Nigeria, but especially, the Oil resources.

The non-Muslim North care nothing about one-Nigeria because such a structure ensures that the Muslim-North subjugate and exploit them and take over their land, forcing Islam on them and forcing them off their own land.

The West only cares about what serves the best interest of the Yoruba race, and they do not mince words about it. They are not interested in what is good for Nigeria, nor in sharing anything theirs with Nigeria.

The East understands that their best interest is served by a sovereign Biafra, but suffer from a “defeated nation complex,” acting like an enslaved nation under occupation by the conqueror, Nigeria; helpless to protect their own people, helpless to protect their own natural resources, denied the opportunity to integrate into Nigeria, forcefully ruled indirectly through persons hand-picked by Nigeria, and are well-loathed and constantly dehumanized by Nigeria. This unbearable condition is guaranteed and sustained only by the structure called one-Nigeria.

We can trace the root-problems of Nigeria to the same root problems of Africa, the result of colonial “Balkanization” maps which have left so-called independent African countries with unworkable, unnatural, dysfunctional forced “unions.” The prize of trying to maintain this colonial error is the dysfunction we know as Nigeria today; and as Africa in general.

The time for hypocrisy and pretense is over. The problem with Nigeria is one-Nigeria—trying to keep Nigeria one. The solution is the assertion and diplomatic recognition of each individual nation’s sovereignty. The sovereign nations, now equal partners, can then, with equity and mutual respect, resolve other issues among them. In truth, the word “Sovereign” in Sovereign National Conference is designed to refer to such individual national sovereignties, not to the sovereignty of the entity called Nigeria, "

____________________________________________



", The root-problem of Nigeria is “one-Nigerianism”—forcing different nations to try to be one country / one people, in an unconscious adoption and defense of over-a-century old colonial Balkanization imperative deliberately intended to benefit the colonialists at the expense of the indigenous peoples. This colonial policy was carried out on the entire African continent. Therefore, the root-problem of Nigeria is the extension and mirror of that original root-problem of Africa. Is it any wonder, then, today that Africa is still roiled in wars and battles, inter (and even intra) ethnic national conflicts, political instability, and other struggles of existential proportions and category?,

What is Balkanization? It is the deliberate and calculated division of a region, country, or continent, with the sole intent of making it extremely difficult for the indigenes to form a cohesive opposition force against the Master(s). In fact, in a clever twist, the division-lines are purposely intended to inspire continuous conflict among the divided; of this conflict, only the Master can throttle it for precise control of the entire region. This implies that those being divided are not represented at the planning table; that natural and defining attributes of the peoples being divided are to be exploited and manipulated in such a way as to cause maximum disunity among the peoples, even among related people. Hence, natural boundaries can be ignored entirely, or blurred, while new ones are forced; originally natural populations are split off into newly created units, and so on. The peoples are thus distracted and blinded by their troubles; the Master masterfully controls the confusion so as not to let it get outrightly out of hand; the region is then first systematically and continuously looted for “raw material” and second, forced to be a paying consumer of “refined goods” from the Master’s own land. This is the full meaning and motivation of Balkanization. And, that’s what Africa has inherited, kept, and has been defending and practicing today. Now, one can understand why Africa is in the state that it finds itself in today, "

___________________________________________



", Key to success of SNC:

Ratify and recognize each individual different nation as inviolably sovereign, as prelude to SNC.
Insist on core-representation by nationality.
Maintain and insist on a non-violence process
Negotiate everything else,
", In mid-1966, still dripping—literally—with the blood of the victims of his revenge-countercoup (history does not forget), Gowon made this statement:

“The basis of unity [for Nigeria is] not there…”

Sadly, the veracity and accuracy of this statement clearly eluded him; nor was he touched by its profundity. Thus, Yakubu Gowon was to act different from this truth, forcing, tinkering, bumbling and bungling, trying to defeat the immutable truth which apparently had “issued out of the mouth of [the proverbial biblical] babe,” thereby pushing Nigeria over yet another precipice in the continuing drop into a bottomless abyss. Almost forty years later, even the benefit of real experience and hindsight cannot convince him of his error, as he still defends “one-Nigerianism.”

Comes now Olusegun Obasanjo—for the third time, no less—a man not unfamiliar with the path and ways of Gowon. Says he, Obasanjo:

“…what can SNC [whose goal is one Nigeria] accomplish that [‘all the King’s men and all the King’s horses’] could not achieve?”

And, just as sadly, the profundity of this statement has also completely eluded Obasanjo, who these days prefers to remind the nations and their peoples suffering in Nigeria that he is ready to give his life to keep Nigeria one; all that the peoples really want is a chance to make and see their own life function, and leaders that won’t deliberately and stubbornly blow this chance for a simple, basic human desire enjoyed and taken for granted by the rest of the world—all but Nigeria

If Gowon and Obasanjo cannot grasp the reality of Nigeria—the problem that is one Nigeria—does that then really condemn everyone else to blindness and on-going ignorance?, "

_______________________________________



", SNC: to endorse a malevolent and failed structure called one Nigeria, thus to repeat history; or to ratify the original sovereignties of all nations presently suffering as Nigeria, as such breaking down, finally, the ”Iron Curtain” of Balkanization which hitherto fore had denied the nations and their peoples access to the ingredients of basic human existence, hope and progress,

What shall it be? That’s the question, "



August 2004

Biafra Foundation
733 15th street , N.W.
Suite 700
Washington DC 20005
Phone: 202-347-2983
Fax: 202-347-2984

Email: Biafrafoundation@yahoo.com

INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON BIAFRA
GREENBELT , MARYLAND
OCTOBER 18, 2003

Communiqué

With representation from Eastern Nigeria, Anioma, Europe, and throughout the United States of America and Canada, the first post War International Conference on Biafra was concluded with the agreement that the conditions that led to the Biafra-Nigeria War are still present and worse; that the persecution of Ndigbo in Nigeria continues to dictate the overall and specific policies of the Federal government. The effect of this has been the gradual destruction of the country itself, its economy, and its overall pride.

Consequently we, the delegates to this International Conference have resolved:

To explore the possibilities of forming a government in exile in six months if the federal government fails to organize a Conference of ethnic nationalities, in order for these nationalities to decide how they want to associate with one another
To warn governors and functionaries of Eastern Nigeria to desist from collaborating with federal agencies in the harassment and murder of citizens of Eastern Nigeria, particularly members of the Movement for the Actualization of the Sovereign State of Biafra ( MASSOB ).
That governors of the Eastern States be mindful of the international laws on crime against humanity and that they will be held accountable even years after they must have left office.
To hold them responsible for the safety of Chief Ralph Uwazurike and members of MASSOB considering the threats to their lives from Federal and State government agents.
To challenge Ndigbo to take political responsibility for their self-preservation and self-determination in view of the orchestrated efforts by their enemies to oppress them perpetually.
To challenge Ohaneze Ndigbo, Igbo National Assembly and all Igbo groups to be vehement in protesting the oppression of their people and forcefully speak out in their defense.
To urge all Igbo organizations, businessmen, intellectuals, students and the clergy to join the struggle to re-actualize Biafra

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www./Communique%20first%20International%20Conference%20on%20Biafra%202003l.htm

ABURI_ THE NATIONAL CONFERENCE THAT GOT AWAY



Max Siollun

maxsiollun@yahoo.com



Wednesday, July 10, 2002

http://www.kwenu.com/publications/siollun/aburi_snc.htm

The fashionable political theory being bandied about in Nigeria today is “Sovereign National Conference” (SNC). According to the advocates of an SNC, if we held yet another constitutional/national debate – all our problems will be solved. Implicit in the SNC argument is that some at most, want to use the SNC to break up the Nigerian federation, and at least, use it to derogate powers from the Federal Government to such an extent that Nigeria’s constituent regions would become autonomous albeit under a figurehead central government.



What we tend to forget is that Nigeria has already had half a dozen constitutional debates – none of which has ever resolved the nagging problems which have dogged Nigeria from independence till today (corruption, ethnic actionalism, indiscipline, profligacy). Given that we have already wasted billions of Naira on constitutional debates, and constitutions that are no longer in use, I do not really see how an SNC could discuss anything that has not already been covered in the previous constitutional debates. Rather than wasting more money on another rancorous conference, which will yet again be hijacked by the same people who produced the constitutions which we are all now unhappy with, I think we should go back, to the “SNC” which Nigeria has already had.



On January 5th – 7th 1967, the members of Nigeria’s then ruling military junta, the Supreme Military Council (SMC), met for the first time at Aburi in Ghana under the auspices of the Ghanaian Head of State: Lieutenant-General Joe Ankrah. It was the first official meeting of all members of that SMC. Following two bloody army coups in 1966, the military governor of the eastern region of Nigeria: Lt-Colonel ‘Emeka’ Ojukwu, had refused to attend any SMC meeting outside the eastern region of Nigeria due to concerns over his safety. The massacre of tens of thousands of Igbos in northern Nigeria only heightened Ojukwu’s sense of isolation and insecurity. In turn, Ojukwu’s public belligerence towards the FMG (whom he suspected of tacitly supporting, or having a hand in the massacres) served to antagonise the FMG, who began to suspect that Ojukwu planned to announce the secession of the eastern region from the rest of Nigeria.



BETWEEN ONE AMBITIOUS COLONEL AND THE REST OF THE COUNTRY

The military governor of the north: Lt-Col Hassan Usman Katsina, dismissed Ojukwu’s inflammatory public remarks as attempts “to show how much English he knows”. As far as Katsina was concerned, Nigeria’s problem was a stand-off “between one ambitious Colonel and the rest of the country”. Throughout the six months following the coup of July 29th 1966, Ojukwu repeated his mantra that “I, as the Military Governor of the East cannot meet anywhere in Nigeria where there are Northern troops”. That virtually ruled out an SMC meeting inside Nigeria’s borders. Ojukwu had even turned down offers to attend an SMC meeting on board a British (whom Ojukwu, and Igbos in general did not entirely trust) naval ship, and at Benin, but was finally convinced to attend in the neutral territory of Aburi in Ghana. Ojukwu’s aides were not without doubt. Some warned him that the Aburi meeting could be a trap set by anti-Igbo members of the Federal Government to arrest or kill him. Ojukwu brushed aside their concerns by pointing out that he had received a guarantee of safe passage from Lt-Col Gowon (then the Nigerian Head of State), and that he had to trust Gowon’s word as an officer and a gentleman.



Virtually everything discussed at that Aburi conference is relevant till today. So much so that a reader would be tempted to believe that the discussion was on Nigeria’s problems as at 2002, rather than 35 years earlier, in 1967. It is probably the best recorded constitutional debate in history. Aware that something momentous was occurring, the Ghanaians had the conference tape recorded. The tape of the discussions were later released by Ojukwu as a series of six long playing gramophone records. In attendance on the Federal Military Government (FMG) side were Lt-Col Yakubu Gowon (head of the FMG), Commodore Joseph Wey (head of the Nigerian navy), Colonel Robert Adebayo (military governor of the western region) Lt-Col Hassan Katsina (military governor of the northern region), Lt-Col David Ejoor (military governor of the mid-west region), Major Mobolaji Johnson (military governor of Lagos), Kam Selem (Inspector-General of Police), Mr T Omo-Bare. Ojukwu was in attendance as the eastern region’s military governor.



The federal delegation came “wreathed in smiles” (see Akpan: The Struggle For Secession) and anxious to mollify their former brother-in-arms Ojukwu. Colonels Adebayo and Gowon even offered to embrace Ojukwu. Ojukwu for his part, was still stung by the terrible massacres of his Igbo kinsmen in northern Nigeria the previous year and was in no mood to embrace his former colleagues. The contrast in the demeanour of the participants was in itself a microcosm of what took place over the course of the next two days. While the federal delegation behaved as if the Aburi conference was a social gathering to reunite former friends who had fallen out over a tiff, Ojukwu saw the conference for what it really was: a historic constitutional debate that would determine Nigeria’s future social and political structure.



As per usual, western perspective were focused on image, rather than on the genuine problems of the protagonists. Documents recently de-classified by the United States’ State Department depicted the FMG-eastern region stand-off as a personality clash between Ojukwu and Gowon. According to the American perspective: “many Americans admire Ojukwu. We like romantic leaders, and Ojukwu has panache, quick intelligence and an actor’s voice and fluency. The contrast with Gowon – troubled by the enormity of his task, painfully earnest and slow to react, hesitant and repetitive in speech – led some Americans to view the Nigerian-Biafran conflict as a personal duel between two mismatched individuals” (Airgram from US Embassy in Nigeria to the Department of State: Lagos A-419, February 11th, 1968). As they were busy fighting in Vietnam and fighting a “cold war” against the USSR, the Americans did not become militarily or politically involved in the dispute. Instead, treating the conflict as one falling within Britain’s sphere of influence.



Although Commodore Wey played an avuncular role, it was obvious that the discussion revolved around the younger Colonels: Adebayo, Ejoor, Katsina, Ojukwu and Gowon. Ojukwu showed from the beginning that he was prepared for serious business. He arrived at the conference armed with notes, and an army of secretaries. The other debaters should have realised at this point, that something serious was going to occur. The Ghanaian host Lt-Gen Ankrah made a few introductory remarks and reminded his guests that “the whole world is looking up to you as military men and if there is any failure to reunify or even bring perfect understanding to Nigeria as a whole, you will find that the blame will rest with us through the centuries”. Ankrah added that although he understood that the eastern region/rest of Nigeria stand-off was an internal matter for Nigerians, they should not hesitate to ask him for any help should they feel the need. After the hostility and bitterness that preceded the Aburi meeting, the civilian observers were stunned at the camaraderie displayed by the military officers. The debaters threw off formality and addressed each other by their first names: “Emeka”, “Bolaji”, “Jack” (nickname of Lt-Colonel Gowon) were thrown around as if addressing each other in at a social gathering.



Ojukwu decided to show his good faith, and to test the good faith of the others by asking all present to renounce the use of force to settle the crisis. Ojukwu’s motion was accepted without objection. While this request by Ojukwu may sound very noble, he was in fact playing a cunning soldier-politician. Ojukwu (despite his boasts of the eastern region’s military prowess) realised that he could not succeed in a military campaign against the far more heavily armed FMG. By getting them to renounce the use of force, Ojukwu was trying to negate the FMG’s military advantage. For he knew that if the political situation eventually got out of control, the FMG would find it difficult to resort to a military campaign having already given their word that they would not use force. This may have been an influential factor in Gowon’s reluctance to engage the eastern region in a fully fledged war. Gowon was even accused by some of his own men of treating Ojukwu with kid gloves. The fiery Lt-Col (as he then was) Murtala Muhammed had unleashed his famed volcanic temper on Gowon during an officers’ meeting prior to Aburi. Muhammed slammed his fist down on his desk, and threatened to march into, then sack the eastern region unless Gowon stopped being so soft with Ojukwu. Murtala was eventually posted away from Lagos up to the north. Despite the leading role he played in the coup that brought Gowon to power, Gowon felt Murtala had been making a nuisance of himself by turning up uninvited at SMC meetings.



At Aburi, the assembled military officers struck a chord in unison on the subject of politicians. All of them voiced their contempt for the behaviour of civilian politicians whom they blamed for the wholesale bloodletting of the previous year (completely ignoring the fact that more Nigerian civilians had been murdered by politically motivated violence, in the one year of military rule so far, than in the preceding five years of civilian democratic rule). Commodore Wey slammed the point home rather forcefully when he declared that “Candidly if there had ever been a time in my life when I thought somebody had hurt me sufficiently for me to wish to kill him it was when one of these fellows (politicians) opened his mouth too wide”.



OJUKWU’S PROPHECY
Despite agreeing to attend the conference, Ojukwu was still refusing to recognize Lt-Col Gowon as Nigeria’s Head of State. Ojukwu had defiantly continued to address Gowon as the “the Chief of Staff (Army)” (the post which Gowon occupied before the July counter-coup) in his public statements. Ojukwu was alarmed at the ascension of Gowon to the highest office in the land despite the presence of several other officers who were more senior than him (Brigadier Babafemi Ogundipe, Commodore J.E.A. Wey, Colonel Adebayo, Lt-Cols Hilary Njoku, Phillip Effiong, George Kurubo, Ime Imo, Conrad Nwawo and Lt-Cols Ejoor and Ojukwu who were promoted to Lt-Col in the same week as Gowon). Ojukwu almost prophetically warned that allowing a man backed by coup plotters to become the Head of State, would create a dangerous precedent which Nigeria would find difficult to emerge from. He told Gowon that “any break at this time from our normal line would write in something into the Nigerian army which is bigger than all of us and that thing is indiscipline, How can you ride above people's heads purely because you are at the head of a group who have their fingers poised on the trigger? If you do it you remain forever a living example of that indiscipline which we want to get rid of because tomorrow a Corporal will think, he could just take over the company from the Major commanding the company…”. Ojukwu’s warning was of course not heeded and his prediction that junior officers would in future overthrow their superior officers proved to be correct. The NCOs and Lieutenants that shot Gowon to power graduated into the Colonels that overthrew him exactly nine years later. As Brigadiers, they overthrew the elected civilian government of Shehu Shagari on the last day of 1983, and removed Major-General Buhari from power in 1985. Ojukwu’s impassioned monologue at Aburi could serve as an anti coup plotter thesis. He continued “you announced yourself as Supreme Commander. Now, Supreme Commander by virtue of the fact that you head or that you are acceptable to people who had mutinied against their commander, kidnapped him and taken him away? By virtue of the support of officers and men who had in the dead of night murdered their brother officers, by virtue of the fact that you stood at the head of a group who had turned their brother officers from the eastern region out of the barracks they shared?”.



When Ojukwu expressed his disgust over the murder of Igbo army officers by their northern colleagues in July 1966, Lt-Col Katsina interjected by asking Ojukwu why he had not reacted with the same revulsion when senior northern military officers were murdered by Igbos seven months earlier. Ojukwu reasoned that in January 1966, soldiers from every region of the Nigerian federation (Nzeogwu: Mid-West, Ifeajuna: East, Ademoyega: West, Kpera: North) had staged a coup in which soldiers and politicians from every region of the federation (Akintola: West, Balewa: North, Unegbe: East, Okotie-Eboh: Mid-West) were also killed. Whereas when northern soldiers staged a revenge coup in July, soldiers from one region of the federation only (North: Danjuma, Murtala, Martin Adamu et al) singled out soldiers from one region in the federation as their targets (East: Okoro, Okonweze, Ironsi etc). Katsina took this opportunity to remind Ojukwu of the effort he had put in to prevent the murder of Igbos. Katsina told Ojukwu that “I have seen an army mutiny in Kano and if you see me trembling you will know what a mutiny is…, I saw a real mutiny when a C.O. of northern origin commanding soldiers of northern origin had to run away”.



THE STAR OF THE SHOW

It was obvious to the non military observers of the Aburi conference that Ojukwu “was clearly the star performer. Everyone wanted to please and concede to him” (see Akpan).

Using his “skillful histrionics and superior intellectual adroitness”, (Kirk Greene: Crisis and Conflict), Ojukwu managed to get the other Colonels to understand, and share his reasoning: that in order to keep Nigeria together as one nation, its constituent regions first had to move a little further apart from each other. A paradox maybe, but the Colonels accepted the logic of Ojukwu’s argument.



On the federal side, only the military governor of the Northern Region: Lt-Col Hassan Usman Katsina, seemed to realize the significance of what was going on. Anxious not to allow Ojukwu’s domination of the proceedings to continue for too long, he at one point dared Ojukwu to “secede, and let the three of us (West, North, Mid-West) join together”. Alarmed by talk of a possible break-up of Nigeria, Ankrah quickly interjected and told his guests that “There is no question of secession when you come here” (Ghana). Although the FMG delegation were keen to mollify and make concessions to Ojukwu, Lt-Col Katsina was more blunt than his other colleagues. He preferred to declare matter of factly to Ojukwu: “You command the East, if you want to come into Nigeria, come into Nigeria and that is that”.



Ojukwu envisaged a titular Head of State that would act only with the concurrence of the various regional governments: “what I envisage is that whoever is at the top is a constitutional chap – constitutional within the context of the military government. That is, he is a titular head, but he would only act where, say when we have met and taken a decision”. Amazingly Gowon accepted Ojukwu’s thesis without really understanding the constitutional implications of what he was agreeing to. Gowon was effectively sanctioning measures which would paralyse his own powers. To signify the limited powers that would be exercised by the Head of State he envisaged, Ojukwu proposed that the watered down phrase “Commander-in-Chief” should be used to address the Head of State as opposed to “Supreme Commander” (a phrase signifying immense power). The title “Commander-in-Chief” has been employed by every Nigerian Head of State subsequent to Aburi.



While the other delegates arrived at Aburi with a simple, but unformulated idea that somehow, Nigeria must stay together, “Ojukwu was the only participant who knew what he wanted, and he secured the signatures of the SMC to documents which would have had the effect of turning Nigeria into little more than a customs union” (Kirk-Greene). Ojukwu managed to get virtually everything he wanted, and was so pleased by his success that he even declared that he would serve under Gowon if he (Gowon) kept to the agreements reached. At that point, Gowon arose from his table position and embraced Ojukwu.



The fulcrum of the agreement at Aburi was that each region would be responsible for its own affairs, and that the FMG would be responsible for matters that affected the entire country: a simple enough concept. Afterwards the officers tasted their agreement with champagne. The federal delegation’s jubilation was such that on his plane flight home, Ojukwu asked one of his secretaries whether the FMG delegates had fully understood the implications of what had been agreed. Hindsight tells us that no one at Aburi (other than Ojukwu) really understood the constitutional implications of what had been agreed. Ojukwu was obviously delighted with this – hence why he was in such a hurry to implement the decisions taken, and why the Federal Government had to renege on them.



Some have argued that Ojukwu took the FMG for a ride by using his superior intelligence to trap the FMG officers into an agreement they did not understand. This argument ignores the fact that Ojukwu was engaged in a constitutional debate by himself against five military officers, a police officer, and an FMG civilian, yet still got his way. Surely it is the FMG members of greater numerical strength who should be criticised for allowing Ojukwu to secure such substantial concessions from them.



Back then, as now, each region of Nigeria was petrified of domination by other regions, no region of the federation was keen to adopt a course which would concentrate too much power at the hands of Nigeria’s central government. Even Gowon acknowledged this (and unwittingly played into Ojukwu’s hands) by admitting that he would “do away with any decree that certainly tended to go towards too much centralisaton”. Ojukwu pounced on the central powers theme and remarked that “Centralisation is a word that stinks in Nigeria today. For that 10,000 people have been killed (this figure was later revised up to 30,000, and then 50,000). The clash, and ill defined relationship between Nigeria’s central and regional governments has been the greatest source of political bloodletting in the country’s history. It led indirectly to the gruesome “religious” clashes that resulted in the deaths of thousands of innocent civilians over the introduction of Sharia law in some northern states in 2000. It led to the civil war in which over a million civilians died. It led to the execution of Ken Saro-iwa after he agitated for greater self determination for his Ogoni people.



I am of the opinion that with the failure to implement the Aburi decisions, Nigeria missed a golden opportunity to find a constitutional arrangement acceptable to all of its constituent parts. Had even half of the Aburi accords being constitutionally ratified, Nigeria would have been in a much better shape today. It is a sad commentary on the lack of progress that Nigeria has made since Aburi that the issues discussed then (35 years ago) are still being argued over today. Back in 1967, the Aburi decisions were not implemented for one primary reason: oil. Nigeria’s greedy power brokers did not want a loose constitutional arrangement that would deprive them of the vast revenues which Nigeria earns from its crude oil exports. Hence Nigeria is glued together under a powerful central Government of a type more suitable to a country with contiguous ethnicity.



A CONSTITUTIONAL CHAP
It is clear that Nigeria is quite simply too large, too diverse, and too fractious a country to have an all powerful central government of the type we have today. Everywhere you look in Nigeria, there are groups agitating for greater devolvement of federal power to the regions. Although the mantra of these groups is “restructuring” of the Nigerian federation – what they really intend is what Ojukwu wanted to achieve at the Aburi conference in 1967: a constitutional arrangement that would devolve so much power to the regions that the entity known as Nigeria would exist in name only. Each ethnic group in Nigeria believes that their interests can only be looked after if their man is the president of the country. Hence the uncompromising manner in which some Yoruba politicians refused to recognize any non-Yoruba presidential candidate for the 1999 presidential election, and the argument of some northerners that the political leadership of Nigeria is their “birthright”. Yet northern Nigerians are generally poorer than their southern counterparts despite the fact that northerners have ruled Nigeria for 36 out of Nigeria’s 42 years of independence. Conversely, nobody has noticed a sudden increase in the number of Yoruba millionaires since a Yoruba (Olusegun Obasanjo) became Nigeria’s president in 1999.



Rather than engaging in another constitutional drafting/conference exercise at which will waste more taxpayers’ money, and serve as a means for corrupt “big men” to get even richer, we should dust off the Aburi record, and learn from the debates and mistakes of the past in order to ensure a better future for ourselves. What we need in Nigeria is a constitutional arrangement that convinces each Nigerian that their interests will be taken care of regardless of the ethnicity of the Head of State. What we need is a “constitutional chap” of the type envisaged by Ojukwu back at Aburi.

Simply surprise yourself yonder

Understanding the Sovereign National Conference

By

Beko Ransome-Kuti



The recent rejection of the clamour for a Sovereign National Conference (SNC) by the Senate has once again re-enforced the need to restate our position on the imperative of the SNC.

Surely, the fact that President Olusegun Obasanjo had to make an official statement even though rejecting the call, shows that the agitation is an ever-present shadow. And for the Senate to issue an anti-SNC Communique shows clearly that the senators are confronted again with reality. Boldly, I say without equivocation, that without a Sovereign National Conference, the future of Nigeria remains threatened and monumental pitfalls await the country.

Again nevertheless, let us examine the arguments of Obasanjo and the Senate, which hammer on this logic: that SNC would amount to surrendering the sovereignty of the people, and that the President was not prepared to do that. The senators also argued, like the President, that they are the custodians of the sovereignty and they could not "hand it over". To begin with, these politicians do not seem to understand what sovereignty means or they rather choose to be mischievous. In the first place the demand for SNC is being made by the Nigerian people, who gave political mandate to the President and the elected representatives in the National Assembly (NA). So, in fact, it should be noted that part of the mandate given to the senators was that they should clamour for such things that would foster free expression and democracy in Nigeria.

While choosing the 109 senators, the people did not hand over their sovereignty but rather a political mandate to be represented by the senators. It is also a fact that even though the people voted for the senators, this does not mean that the people will accept everything the senators do on behalf of the people. For instance the senators, without consultation with their constituencies fixed their salaries and furniture allowances. It does not mean that the people agreed with the decision of the senators which was purely an egotistic adventure. In the same vein, none of the senators has sampled the opinion of his or her constituency on the clamour for SNC before the communiqué was issued in Calabar. So in a nutshell, sovereignty belongs to the people and to say that sovereignty lies in the presidency or the National Assembly is to misinterpret history and to submit that the people cannot remove the president, or the senators, which we all know is absolutely incorrect.

To be candid, the call for SNC is both an economic and political demand which content and value goes beyond the mechanistic procedures of the National Assembly, (NA). We should also add that the call for SNC predated the current National Assembly and in fact, the emergence of a democratic government and subsequently the Senate was just a part of the solution for the call by Nigerians to be free politically and economically.

To push home the meaning of SNC, an understanding of the history of Nigeria is crucial. Long before 1914 when Nigeria was amalgamated, the present space was not a void. People, empires and modes of production existed. The far North was ruled by Hausa Habes which was the home of many tribes, Hausa Magajiya, Abyssinian or of coptic stock. From 900 to 1500 AD. The Hausaland was besieged by political forces from Bornu, the Berbes, Tuyaregs and Arabs. The most formidable was the 1804 Jihad which swept the Habeland, imposed an oligarchy, seized the people and the land until the advent of British rule. The Yorubaland had the Oyo empire which triumphed until about 200 years ago, we also have the Bachama, Birom, Angas, Tiv, Kaje, Nupe, Ijaw, Igbo and numerous others. The merging of the Southern and Northern protectorates in 1914 was accidental so also was the name, Nigeria given to its people. It is important to say that British rule was not forged on negotiations with Nigerians, but negotiations with ethnic nationalities. So also there was no "Nigerian position," but ethnic nationality positions. The 1960 independence, to our knowledge, was preceded by a curious finding conducted by Henry Willink supported by Gordon Hardow, Philip Mason, and JB Shearer which compiled a report on July 30 1958 now known as the Willink Commission of Enquiry. I advise the senators to read carefully the various positions of nationalities visited by the British agents in compiling their reports. It is of note that every nationality in the space called Nigeria had a position and there was not and will never be a 'Nigerian position' except that imposed by the few people in power.

That Willink report noted in its introduction: "The boundaries of the territory now known as Nigeria were first defined in 1907. The word Nigeria was then 20 years old the unity and indeed the separate existence of Nigeria and their concepts are of recent growth". It should be noted that the 1953 Conference that preceded Willink report, the attendants of the conference went as 'ethnic' representatives and the conference recommended that Nigeria should be a federation of three regions. So all along, ethnic nationalities have been the hallmark and essence of Nigeria. It is instructive that the years preceding 1960 and particularly since 1966 when unitarism was introduced, Nigeria has not known peace but, war, coups, and extreme poverty.

These problems continue to stare us in the face and no attempt has been made to redress these problems. Unfortunately, representatives of the National Assembly are there as 'Nigerian representatives' and that is why today several Nationalities in Nigeria had no representatives. There is no Ogoni Senator. The Ijaws of eight million people have only four Senators out of 109. Several nationalities in the North and in the South are not represented. So as far as the 'ethnic' interest which is the dominant trend all over the world is concerned, the Senate can never meet the target. For now, this 'ethnic' conflict, we cannot pretend, is the core of Nigeria's past and present woes. We have seen what has happened since President Obasanjo assumed power.



Dr. Ransome-Kuti the Director of the Centre for Constitutional Governance wrote in from Lagos


http://www.nigerdeltacongress.com/uarticles/understanding_the_sovereign_nati.htm

0  CommentTrue Cure For Nigeria is Sovereign National Conference
By Ben Ikari - Author Column 
NDC ruled,failed to rule and has come back promoting their past failure as experience. By: KWAME SEREBOUR / Atw 
More Quotes | Submit Quote
Verily, verily, despite government's presumably tough talk and stance, if Nigeria still has a chance. Only a Sovereign National Conference (SNC) otherwise known as Ethnic Nationalities' Conference (ENC) can save Nigeria. Given that Nigeria was founded on illegal or fraudulent foundation, and the fact that all the different nationalities did not freely discuss and negotiate forming the nation-state, rather imposed on them.

The reality that most Nigerians, considering the culture of oppression championed by a cabal, and deadly conflicts, etc, can not continue to be forced to live under such coerced and repressive circumstances without honest talks.

The aforementioned factors and many that will be discussed below makes a SNC or ENC the Federal government seems to fear, pressing hence the real cure to Nigeria's disease and threats of war. The current semi-conventional warfare, destruction and killing of terroristic magnitude synonymous with the unabated Boko Haram's Northern Islamic sect, and the trading of words to the Boko Haramites by Niger delta militants makes urgent or imperative this conference.

Considering the fact that the disease Nigeria has is foundational and needs no management (else it dies), rather an honest and permanent cure for it to live. The true and holistic cure or panacea (not antidote) to this disease and the peoples' suffering, grievances, national instability and insecurity is, I repeat, a SNC or ENC.

At this long clamored conference, which has repeatedly fallen on the deaf ears of Nigerians in power, all the nationalities that were forced against their wishes to form the country must be present. Any group (s) which may wish to be absent can freely choose.

To avoid unnecessary and deeply divisive conflicts and senseless killing, even a possible second civil war, as the signs are obvious today. The about 300 different nationalities the British colonialists forced into the Nigeria's contraption, will send equal representation freely chosen by their people to a collectively planned conference. This conference should (or could) be sponsored financially by individuals, groups and the federal government, but not influenced by them.

This way Nigeria and Nigerians, will be discussed in earnest, and its entirety and there shall not be any "no go areas" as government-planned and doctored national or constitutional conferences have been restricted.

At the conference, every facet of the country: national interests, unity and security, human rights, and resource control and allocation shall be discussed without reservation. Proper federalism (local autonomy) and democracy, state creation, nation building shall be discussed and resolved. Also to be discussed, according to specifications of international law, is the environment, pollution, revampment and protection-compensation where there is pollution or degradation.

In nutshell, this conference will discuss and negotiate a new Nigeria, which all representatives will agree to, by consensus and not majority vote because even though majority carries the vote as we say in democracy. Not all such majority votes, as we can see in the global politics today are good or in the best interest of the people, but have mostly benefited few rich and powerful in and outside government.

Meanwhile, the conference's representatives shall agree to set up a committee, especially during the conference tenure to draft a new constitution that shall be the Peoples' Constitution, which will take care of their needs or yearnings and aspirations. That is, should the conferees in consultation with their constituencies agree to continue the country, Nigeria.

Sovereign National Conference is, of course, different from a constitutional or ordinary national conference. It is different from mere constitutional review, such as the one that was or currently undertaken by the National Assembly. It is different from that, which Pres. Jonathan recently formed (a 21-Member Presidential Constitutional Review Committee) and led by former Chief Justice Saliu Alfa Belgore, that will among others pick and make recommendations for new laws, out of lingering and popularly suggested laws or provisions that deserves removal.

This group, like the National Assembly's effort at reviewing the constitution as a short-cut to the SNC, will not succeed except it permanently resolves the issues of resource and environmental control and true federalism. It will fail as usual and so a waste a money and time, unless it resolves revenue allocation issues, illegal land-grabbing by government (revocation of land used degree), local autonomy and insecurity, and killing by government officials-complete lawlessness.

Unless the Belgore led committee will resolve the issues of state creation, respect for all nationality and equality of groups, that all nationalities (no matter how large or small) which can pay the cost have one state each or more that will be evenly distributed according to need and viability. Unless it will resolve the issues of education, healthcare, child, women and general human rights, and other pressing issues that all the forced nationalities shall agree to. Of course, government appointed and doctored committee will not treat all the aforementioned issues logically and satisfactorily. So the quest for SNC or ENC stands.

In a Sovereign National Conference therefore, the different nationalities, not few appointed individuals by government or few who represents the states by mostly rigged elections and are in the National Assembly, will speak for themselves. This conference will discuss and in honesty and by compromise resolve the grievances of the first military coup plotters of 1966, if any.

Also to come to the table is the issue of late Isaac Adaka Boro, who, angered by the oppression against Niger delta by the federal government took up arms in 1966, and declared the Niger delta Republic from Nigeria. Boro's legitimate rebellion was crushed by the federal troops within 12 days. The grievances of the Igbos leading to the declaration of Biafra Republic from Nigeria, and the ensuing war that lasted 3 years (Nigerian-Biafran Civil War, 1967-1970), killing more than 3 million people shall come to focus.

The nonviolent and peaceful, intellectual agitation for ERECTISM by the Ogonis, under Ken Saro-Wiwa and MOSOP, which culminated into the unjust hanging of Saro-Wiwa and 8 other Ogonis shall be discussed and resolved. The reemergence of the Adaka Boro's armed struggle, led by MEND and other militant groups (mostly of Ijaw stock) in Niger delta shall as well be discussed. The current grievances of Northern Nigeria's (Hausa) Boko Haram; the Yoruba and all other grievances shall also be discussed. There shall be lasting solution resulting from these discussions based on honesty and accountability.

There could as well be level-field pardon for all violence and destruction to enable the new polity move forward. This, of course, will be decided by the conference and Nigerians. If the conferees decide not to discuss these old grievances or issues (which I doubt), but move to fixing all or most of the issues raised above, so be it; so long as doing so will appease all sections, after all there is need for compromise.

It is sufficiently clear that all the government-sponsored and doctored conferences and summit have not and will not save Nigeria nor will the so-called war against terrorism save the state, even though America may be involved now as it seems. America already asserts its interests are threatened by Boko Haram's terrorist acts. The Nigerian conflicts are older and deeper than Boko Haram.

Nigeria-country today, is at multiple cross-roads hence the threatening, deadly and unsafe state of affairs. There is no freedom, justice, security nor peace. Education and other socioeconomic and cultural developments are in total disrepair or nonexistent. Everything is lopsided, and upside down!

The old crooked methods that continuously place the country in the state of bloodletting, irresponsibility, and mismanagement, zero accountability, hyper-greed and total disregard are palpable. Disrespect for individual's (and child, women), groups or nationalities, especially minorities' rights pervade the polity. There is a nationally institutionalized policy to oppress Nigerians, especially minorities.

As such the ghost of a jettisoned SNC which some have been killed for agitating peacefully continues to chase Nigeria. The powers that be have refused to look up not to mention seeing the signs pointing to this conference as the only cure or panacea to the country's disease that emanates from the mistake of colonization, and amalgamation of the Northern and Southern protectors in 1914.

These cabalic insensitivity, greed and brutality have become the Nigerian culture. There have been unabated corruption, state-sponsored terrorism, insecurity and palpable fear, which could be liken to Thomas Hobbes' "State of Nature." A situation he asserted in his acclaimed work: "Leviathan" of 1651, that, "life was solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short," due to human animalistic nature: selfishness, everyone seek power; a life where individual interests and greed take over community or collective interests and dreams.

In such state of nature there is acute backwardness, irrationality, lawlessness, insecurity and lack of organization, so a government or monarch will best manage the people, by Hobbes' thinking. Sadly, the mistake of 1914 does not change the "state of nature," rather makes it worst in and against ordinary Nigerians, because the government or monarchical arrangement is also controlled by humans, who are in the Nigerian case more animalistic.

In conclusion therefore, it is no longer a secret or should it be wise for people to go to war because of the fact that Nigeria's formation was not based on consultation rather illegality and fraud. No spiritualist is needed to know that this coercion of free peoples is responsible for the country's disease.

Many Nigerians, including but not limited to Saro-Wiwa, Anthony Enahoro, Wole Soyinka, and groups have called for a SNC, which will save Nigeria. The true federation (of ethnic nationalities) with great power devolution Nigeria is meant to be was aborted before independence (1960) due to greed and hidden agenda of rulers who were mostly of the so-called majority ethnic groups. That trend has not changed, so a SNC is needed that will speak to such cabalic agenda.

It is on record that late Chief Obafemi Awolowo concluded that Nigeria was a mere geographical expression. He also asserted that, in a true federation all ethnic groups are equal, no matter how large or small. As many, including the Saduana of Sokoto Sir. Amadu Belo and Richard Akinjide, QC, SAN, a member of the Nigeria's first cabinet have declared. Nigeria, especially the 1914 amalgamation is a mistake; it is also poisonous as its attributes and citizens oppression currently shows.

Therefore, it is either this SNC or CEN is convened and all lingering issues causing people so much suffering are resolved or the different peoples go their different ways. A peaceful dissolution or disintegration will save lives hence preferred, to the experience of former Yugoslavia, or the bloody conflict that led to the independence of South Sudan.

Relevant international law shows that independence or self-determination in any fashion and by whatever means, including arms rebellion is not prohibited. Talks and consensus such as expected at the SNC are encouraged by the international law or community for peaceful resolution of conflicts.

If Nigeria will survive another 30 years, the people have no option but discuss and plan a Sovereign National Conference, which will chat a new country or many countries out of the present, for peace sake.

Experience has shown that forced peoples as synonymous with Nigerians can not stay forced forever, but shall do all it takes to be free. And although Libya, Egypt and the rest are not the same as Nigeria, and what may befall Nigeria in about 30 years may not be the same as the Libya's and others' experiences.

The current realities on the global stage should serve the Nigerian government and peoples a lesson, that they should see a Sovereign National Conference or Ethnic Nationalities' Conference as the lasting solution or cure.

It should be seen as a panacea to the country's disease. If not, the dynamics of history dictates a peaceful or bitter dissolution that can not be stopped. As usually the case when the SNC agitation intensifies. Pres. Jonathan (in the league of cabal) is reported in Nigerian Compass of Nov. 18, 2011, as was also reported in Punch of Oct. 20, 2010, as saying or implying, SNC is not an option.

While inaugurating the newly formed constitutional review committee under the leadership of Belgore, "Jonathan noted that in spite of the challenges confronting the nation, “our sense of togetherness is strong and our democracy is deepening” (Nigerian Compass, Nov. 11). Reality shows this statement is not true; rather implies oppression and bloodbath will continue, instead of a lasting cure, which is a SNC
http://www.modernghana.com/news/367636/1/true-cure-for-nigeria-is-sovereign-national-confer.html

Anyaoku restates call for Sovereign National Conference
| Print | E-mail
Written by Jude Ossai, Enugu
Friday, 27 January 2012

ShareEX-Secretary General of the Commonwealth, Chief Emeka Anyaoku, on Thursday, drummed up support for the convocation of a National Conference of all ethnic nationalities with a view to stemming further unrest in the country.

Chief Anyaoku spoke as chairman at the 41st convocation lecture of the University of Nigeria Nsukka (UNN), delivered by former President Chief Olusegun Obasanjo at Nsukka Campus.

The acclaimed intentional technocrat spoke against the backdrop of bombings in major cities of Northern Nigeria by the Boko Haram group and “growing fissiparous tendencies”.

"I must warn about the seriousness of current developments especially the continuing threat to the security of the citizenry and integrity of the state.

These developments, he stressed, had brought “added urgency to the need for a national conference of the representatives of the people of Nigeria to discuss the root challenges to the cohesion and unity of Nigeria.”

Chief Anyaoku also urged leaders in the northern part of the country “to recognise the agony and anger of relatives of victims of the bombings” by Boko Haram in all parts of the countr
http://www.tribune.com.ng/index.php/news/35045-anyaoku-restates-call-for-sovereign-national-conference

Sovereign National Conference now
By Bolade Omonijo 29/01/2012 00:00:00
Font size:
THE resurfacing of the National Democratic Coalition (NADECO) in Lagos on Thursday could not have been surprising to those who have followed the political history of Nigeria. It first emerged in a period of serious national crisis, a time when a full blown dictator took charge of national affairs and dared anyone to confront him. Many of the patriots who founded NADECO then were prepared for the worst and they barely survived the onslaught.


A lot of things have happened in recent times to gladden the hearts of progressives. First, there were the massive rallies and protests nationwide to compel the government to reinstate the subsidy regime on Petrol. Whereas many Nigerians said they understood the explanation of government on the logic of removing the subsidy, patriots and nationalists contended that too many things about the process were shrouded in secrecy and government needed to reformat the system to engender confidence that the accruing fund would be well utilised. The ongoing public hearing by the House of Representatives has further reinforced this position.

Then, when the federal government moved troops to the streets of Lagos and planned to deploy soldiers to all the states of the South West, the people of the region rose in unison. The Oba of Lagos, government of the state, governors of other states in the zone, the media, civil society and political activists challenged the obnoxious decision. Even the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) in Lagos and other states of the region refused to voice support for the decision of the federal government. It is another lesson that the will of the people is superior to any force as the soldiers were withdrawn without much ceremony. Then, the fact that septuagenarians like Professor Ben Nwabueze, Dr. Tunji Braithwaite and Dr. Kalu Idika Kalu led street protest against deployment of troops was an indication that the past is not too far from the present.

All the protests and rallies took place in the context of general national insecurity. Kidnapping in the South East might have abated somewhat, but the Boko Haram dimension to suicide bombing of public and private places, looming religious conflict and increased spate of armed robbery, especially in the South West, have shown that the American’s prediction that the state could disintegrate within the next three years could become a reality after all. Never before had things been so bad in Nigeria. The United Nations House was bombed, Police Headquarters suffered the same fate and only last week, the whole of Kano city was nearly razed. Dare devil nihilists seized the city and triggered off multiple explosions that claimed hundreds of lives. Jos is not too far from memory. The fire is still raging in the North East states of Borno, Yobe, Gombe and Bauchi. The other two states in the zone, Adamawa and Taraba have enough of their own security challenges.

The President has broached the topic himself: It is time to talk. It is however not enough to serve notice that he would be willing to engage Boko Haram in dialogue, he must be prepared to bring Nigerians of different persuasions together to discuss the way forward. This is also the NADECO message. It is not a new call. It is only a reminder that Nigeria has drifted even further apart since the call became strident in the late eighties. Alao Aka-Basorun and Gani Fawehinmi, great crusaders who did a lot to promote the concept may be dead. But, the idea has survived. The Late Chief Anthony Enahoro, Chief Adekunle Ajasin and Senator Abraham Adesanya who were punished by the Babangida/Abacha administrations for suggesting the need for SNC may be long gone, but the call can no longer be ignored.

It is to the credit of the likes of Admiral Ndubuisi Kano, Mr Ayo Opadokun, among others that they have kept the flag flying. In due course, we shall know if Air Commodore Dan Suleiman, Chief Ralph Obioha and others who left to team up with the PDP intend to identify with the clamour for a new Nigeria, run with a constitution that we can truly call ours.

The questions have reverberated over the ages. Just before independence, the founding fathers gathered at constitutional conferences to decide the way to go. So, the First Republic Constitutions could be described as autochthonous. Others, since, sadly missed the mark. We must return to that path if we are to survive and attain the destined height of the giant of Africa.

For us, oil has become a curse. For others, like Angola, it has been a blessing. The people know what has been done with their wealth and can feel the steady progress. Not so Nigeria. The more prosperous in terms of petro dollars Nigeria has been, the worse has been the standard of living of the people.

A Sovereign Conference is too important to be left in the hands of the indolent handlers of the nation who have frittered away our fund and allowed degeneration in national affairs. To start the process, the NADECO chiefs should be encouraged to kickstart the process by talking to other national and patriotic groups. The satte is unlikely to do a good job if all is left in the hands of the government of the day.

I doff my hat to Kanu, Opadokun and the new NADECO.
http://www.thenationonlineng.net/2011/index.php/politics/34869-sovereign-national-conference-now.html

Thursday, 08 December 2011 00:05
OPC joins calls for Sovereign National Conference
Written by James Azania, Benin

The Oodua People’s Congress has called for the convening of a Sovereign National Conference to address the problems facing the country.

The pan-Yoruba socio-cultural organisation said during its National Coordination Council meeting in Benin, Edo State on Tuesday SNC remained the only option to tackle the challenges facing the country.

President of the organisation, Chief Gani Adams, who addressed members, denied that OPC was solely founded to fight past oppressive military regimes, declaring that the “Oodua fights against any manner of injustice.”

He said, “There is no doubt that Nigeria is being confronted by many challenges that confound its leadership. It is our belief that nobody knows it all; you can only know what you harbour in your own mind; but not what others think is the right thing to do.


Chief Gani Adams

“It is because of this reason that we must look into the issue of convening a Sovereign National Conference. The SNC will enable us to explore better ways through which we desire to live together as citizens of this country.

“It is not just right to continue the way we are going when all can see the damage we are doing to ourselves and the country. We have so many problems,including corruption, insecurity, epileptic power supply and investors apathy and yet we are reluctant to do what is proper.

“Any government that does not have organisations that serve as a watchdog could be bereft of ideas.”

He said the Benin meeting was to create awareness about the organisation and “reawaken its culture of identity.”

http://www.punchng.com/index.php?option=com_k2&view=item&id=7100:opc-joins-calls-for-sovereign-national-conference&Itemid=542

Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN) National Leader Asiwaju Bola Tinubu has said only a Sovereign National Conference (SNC) would save the weakening pillars of Nigeria as a federal entity.

He spoke at the first Anthony Enahoro Memorial Lecture at the Benin Club, Benin City, Edo State, yesterday.

Represented by Ekiti State Deputy Governor Mrs Funmi Olayinka, Tinubu said: “I submit to you today that because of the multiple issues surrounding our skewed federalism and constitutional flaws, the Nigerian nation is weak.

“Unless we move to strengthen it through dialogue and equity, we will remain a nation in mere words.”

The ACN leader said fixing the national pillar would entail a robust people-driven debate, insisting that any artificial tinkering of the present constitution would fall short.

He said: “The 21-member Presidential Committee on the Review of Outstanding Constitutional Issues (PCROCI) recently set up by President Goodluck Jonathan falls short.

“It is a backdoor approach to the issue of national conference. In memory of Chief Enahoro we must convoke a national conference. It would provide a platform to address our pressing concerns.”

He said it was ironic that Nigeria once a product of dialogue at independence now has leaders who avoid robust dialogue state policy. But he stated that free and unfettered dialogue holds the key to Nigeria’s rebirth.

“The people ought to be consulted on the issue of subsidy. We ought to have a referendum on the question, not only of oil subsidy but also on sovereign wealth fund as well as the proposed one-term of seven years proposed by President Goodluck Jonathan,” he said.

Tinubu said federalism as a development paradigm for a multi-national country was no mere labelling, adding that it assures both economic and political fairness.

“Our economic system is supposed to be open and fair. But it is even more slanted and biased than the political system,” he told the audience. “We do not operate a free and fair merit-based economy. We operate a feudal economy, where those in power decide by the whim of the moment who becomes rich and who stays poor.”

He regretted, however, that the military’s over-centralisation had arrested growth and stunted development.

“This has not only stalled development, it has affected recurrent and capital expenditure.

“This fuels corruption at the centre and makes the system a mockery of development.

“It gives a winner-takes-all quality to the presidential election. This is wrong. That is why progressives have been calling for fiscal federalism,” Tinubu said


http://www.thenationonlineng.net/2011/index.php/news-update/27491-tinubu-calls-for-sovereign-national-conference.html

PRESS STATEMENT BY THE NORTHERN POLITICAL GROUP ACF ON THE STATE OF THE NATION. FULL STATEMENT UNEDITED!

An emergency meeting of the Arewa Consultative Forum (ACF) took place on Thursday, 26th January, 2012, in the Conference Hall of the ACF, along Sokoto Road, Kaduna. Lt General J.T Useni, Chairman, ACF Board of Trustees, presided. And in attendance were a large delegation of members from all 19 states of the North and the FCT. The emergency meeting was called following the horrific bomb attacks on Kano on Friday, 20th of January, 2012, by the Boko Haram; attacks that caused the death of some 200 innocent people and the destruction of colossal amount of property. Other matters of concern to the North and the country were also discussed. The following statement was approved to be released:

1). Having reviewed the horrendous attacks on Kano and the spate of attacks on many parts of the North which, at the last count, have claimed the lives of over two thousand people, muslims, Christians, northerners, southerners – everyone - and an unquantifiable amount of property across the North, the meeting came to the conclusion that unless addressed quickly and decisively, the threat posed by these attacks have reached such a level that threatens national peace and order and has the potential to cause the collapse of peace, security and public order in the North in particular and the nation in general. In this regard, the ACF makes the following recommendations:

· a) The Federal Government should commit itself openly and unambiguously in guaranteeing the security of leaders of Boko Haram when eventually they come out for dialogue promised by Mr. President. Government should continue to persevere, uncover the true identity of these people, to be able to determine their demands or grievances and address those that may be genuine and in accordance with our laws.

· b) ACF calls upon all people of good conscience who may have access to members of Boko Haram to urge them to take advantage of secure channels of communication to be provided by the Federal Government towards achieving a resolution of the current bloody impasse.

· c) Similarly, ACF calls upon and enjoins the leaders and members of Boko Haram to realize that no religious doctrine permits the killing of innocent lives. It is important to point out to them that they are inflicting terror, death and destruction upon people not in anyway responsible for whatever injustice they believe have been done to them.

· d) While it is true that the actions of Boko Haram are condemnable, it is also necessary to call upon the Federal Government and all our political leaders as well as all those in positions of authority, to recall the UN resolution 1963 of 2010 which urges governments around the world to address underlying causes of civil unrest and social conflicts rather than resort to hard military power which rarely solve them.

· e)The Federal and State Governments should be seen to demonstrate fairness and justice in dealing with all issues of insecurity and infringement of the laws.

· 2) ACF notes with grave concerns some serious allegations peddled by certain people to the effect that some people from other sections of the country were conspiring to cause high level of insecurity across the country with the clear intention of making the country ungovernable. Some of these allegations go as far as saying that there are plots to assassinate the President. They also allege that southerners were not only being killed but that their attempts to flee the North were being blocked by Northerners. These allegations have been written and widely publicized in the media. Considering the gravity of the allegations bordering on treason, the Forum calls on the government, as a matter of urgency, to investigate them for the purposes of prosecution.

3). ACF notes the well advertised changes made in the Nigeria Police for better services. However, in view of the widespread ineffectiveness with which current security challenges are being tackled, the Forum calls on the government to extend similar re-organisation to all other security agencies, especially the intelligence community. We call on the government to be more proactive, more decisive and engage in less lamentations.

4). The ACF reviewed the recurring calls for a national conference, and even a Sovereign National Conference, for the purpose, the proponents say, of re-defining the terms of our union. The Forum concluded that the terms of our National Union and those by which the Nigerian Federation are run have been well defined in our Constitution. However, for the avoidance of doubt, it should be made clear that the North remains open to, and will be keen to discuss any ideas that may place Nigeria in a better position to meet the challenges of nation building and secure a better future for this and succeeding generations of Nigerians.

Alhaji Aliko M. Mohammed OFR Mr. Anthony N.Z Sani
Dan Iyan Misau National Publicity Secretary
Chairman, NEC

The best Accord we never had. It is not too late to revisit it even though millions of lives, tens of years, loads of valuables , wealth and growth would have been saved. Nigeria  would by now have left the 3rd world and moved progressively towards the first world. The thoughts of the losses suffered by Nigeria at the foolishness that dictated this loss of opportunity is numbing and makes one want to cry. However no need to continue sinking into daydreams or nightmares produced by the Nostalgia. The future is here the opportunity beckons one again. The options are go back to Aburi, Conduct an SNC, submit to a UN supervised referendum or allow destructive seperation take its course.

What amazes me is that there are still opposers  like IBB to these constructive means of engagement or disengagement. What do they really hope to gain by consistently supporting the repression of truth? Are they intrinsically evil, killjoys, dogs-in-the-manger, sadists or just cowards scared of change? Well there is no stopping of an idea whose time has come. They just have to move over or they will be destroyed by the moving train. On Aburi I stand.

diluminati:
Please anyone who knows Orits should tell him not to make any public statements on boko haram matters again.

And why is that? He should be a coward?

Tabon:
People should be objective in their comments. Do u think Gej will appoint Igp that will take sides to wipe away christians? This appointment was based on merit and competence. M D Abubakar was screened as d best amongst the DIGs and AIGs. The Niki Toby indicted him as alleged over 10yrs ago but he was not invited for questioning or something. And within this period he has been appointed and given responsibilities,nobody raised any alarm. The Police service commission PSC was not aware of all these allegations and yet recommended him to GEJ and security panel for the job. Lets not blame Gej. There is a procedure for this appointment. The M D Abubakar they said was indicted was not even aware nor the PSC.

Goes to prove the point that they have infiltrated the FGN. Even if he is the best proffesional police officer, no-one with the smallest baggage ought to assume such a sensitive and critical post at such times we are in not to talk of such a gigantic baggage as the Nikki Tobi panel indictment. GEJ shine your eyes oo. It is not too late to do a somersault for the good of all.

Privatisation appears to be the way to go to salvage the nigerian infrastructure.

More of these calls please. The truth is gradually sprouting after 45 years of burial and it shall make all free.

What is the speaker's name and why dont they want him? I smell a rat.

Kids Quiz:

Q: Who reminds you of the Neanderthals. A: IBB . Q:Where can one find a Neanderthal? Answer: No where. Q:Why? A:Because they are now extinct. Q: Why did they go into extinction? A: Because they refused to change with changing climates.

IBB is not just an endangered specie but actually an extinct one. A Neanderthal.

Incredible. Was it really FFK that wrote this? I actually kept checking on the name of the writer to make sure that it was not Kongi himself.
The summary of what he was saying is this, IBB shut the F up. Because you took a bullet 40 something years ago , is that why we must die in the name of onenness? IBB shut the f up.  2 out of 3 British contraptions have gone the natural way why do you think that Nigeria is different? IBB shut the f up. As much as you and your Northern brethren keep seeing the rest of Nigerria as conquered territory that an Ijaw man will not rule except under your dictates, to your tents oh Israel.

Of course many folks including the world powers have realised the mistake of not standing on Aburi but few are bold enough to vocalise it like FFK did here. He spoke for himself and not for the SW. If actually this is the position of the SW, then raproachment between east and west will be faster.

I stand for cooperation between east, west and middlebelt like he propounded here to throw off the yoke of the born-to-rule masters first if they continue opposing an SNC or other peaceful means of split. After that, everybody can answer his father's name or live together anyway they agree. Else, the divide and rule strategy of the North against the south will continue being their nemesis. It has been perfected by them: was used to defeat Aburi and  Biafra and is seriously being used by some northern agents here on NL.

I Pity IGPs. Always meeting their nemesis through one badass. Anini took out one. Osisikankwu another. Now Sokoto takes out Ringim.

nice attempt.

This is vintage NL. When the judgement favours your candidate, Judiciary is the last hope of the masses. When it does not, the President has become a dictator.

Gbawe:
I think some of us underestimate how evil some Politicians and "owners of Nigeria" are. If they can kill close friends and associates then I don't see why they would flinch from killing their so-called people if doing so is a means to an end.

I agree with you here. They can blow up their people to make it look impartial while their main target is to destabilise ther FG. However forget your qaurel with PDP for a moment. All the parties are in it not just PDP. It is not a northern PDP thing but an agenda by the Northern hegemony that feels threathened by a southern power assendency and a stake for 2015 or even before if Nigeria still exists. However it will backfire because other zones will not wish to willingly submit to the hegemony again. This rebellion will sound the death knell of the Nation. An SNC is needed now to forestall this and all hands should be on deck to call for this.

Time for MASSOB to fast-forward their presentations at the UN not spoil all they have worked for over the years and go on a killing spree. They should leave the vendetta for another Igbo organisatiuon that does not flinch at violence like the ogbunigwe group or the BLF, Very opportune time.

More of this please.

I believe that many soldiers retired or thrown out from the army by OBJ are in BH as well as many sympathetic serving soldiers.

Sovereign National Conference is what we need now.

Nigeria: Sovereign National Conference Inevitable
07/01/11
Nigeria: Sovereign National Conference Inevitable
03:15:00 am, by callmeike , 1214 words
Categories: News, Nigerian News
*Nigeria: Sovereign National Conference Inevitable

By Ikechukwu Enyiagu

Challenges do not go away when ignored, they persist, gain grounds, and dominate their host, and ignoring to weed a farm while expecting a good yield is not one of fruitful farming principles. The choice of neglecting or feigned ignorance of the presence of a challenge is the foundation of all defeats. The challenges on unity in Nigeria can’t be wished away nor can it die simply because our leaders have ignored its cries and refused to face and deal with it the right way. Great Britain, even when they went ahead with this amalgamation, already saw, beforehand, the challenges and dangers of that decision, but simply chose to ignore it. It’s only a wicked man and an inevitable loser that ever relies as a more desirable choice on the compelling of obedience and compliance than convictions.

This world, in all its vastness and diversities, is just a family. All diversities are aimed at achieving constructive growths for everyone. We have many governments and countries which make up Africa, Europe, Asia, USA, Arab world, etc. Again, the reason for all these is to maximize participation and growth in and from all quarters. No coerced union ever worked for long, and the people involved never progressed. Tribes have become countries, states joined to make great nations, and countries emerged as great continents-all in mutual understanding and agreement. There are, however, some nations that have divided and gone separate ways-all in a bid to maximize participation and growth in and from all quarters.

Nigeria, for reasons well known and recited by every Nigerian, was made into a country comprising of peoples with ever stretching diversities and dissimilarities. This Amalgamation of 1914 has been on test drives to this moment but we have often either failed to note our lessons or simply ignored them in the euphoria of African contentment with smallness. In spite of all efforts made by our heroes past for a better envisaged Nigeria of our time, some of them, honestly, saw its overwhelming challenges and near impossibilities and, voiced their doubts. Amongst their honest predictions, those of some alive and clear-cut warnings of those who know the truth were: ( Continues below…, )



Photo Above: Map of Nigeria showing its 36 states and capital (Abuja or FCT)

Lord Lugard: “The North and the South are like oil and water, they will never mix.” Yet he went ahead and amalgamated them.

Alhaji Sir Abubakar Tafawa Balewa: “The Southern people who are swamping into this region daily in such large numbers are really intruders; we don’t want them and they are not welcome here in the North. Since 1914, the British Government has been trying to make Nigeria into one country. But the people are different in every way, including religion, custom, language and aspirations… we in the North take it that Nigeria unity is only a British intention for the country they created. IT IS NOT FOR US”.

Chief Jeremiah Obafemi Awolowo: “Nigeria is only a geographical expression to which life was given by the diabolical amalgamation of 1914, that amalgamation will EVER remain the most painful injury a British Government inflicted on Southern Nigeria”.

Al-Hajji Sir Ahmadu Bello: “The new nation called Nigeria should be an estate from our great grandfather, Othman Dan Fodio. We must ruthlessly prevent a change of power. We must use the minorities in the North as willing tools, and the south as conquered territories and never allow them to have control of their future.”

Retd. General Yakubu Gowon: “Suffice it to say that putting all considerations to the test, political, economic as well as social, the basis of unity is not there.” ( Continues below…, )



Photo Above: Nigeria Ex-Military Head of State, Yakubu Gowon leaving after attending Late Nigerian President Umaru Yar'Adua's funeral in Katsina, Katsina State May 6, 2010.

Dr. Benjamin Nnamdi Azikiwe: “If this embryo republic of ours must disintegrate, then in the name of God, let the operation be a short and painless one”.

Chief Chukwuemeka Odumegwu-Ojukwu: “Nigeria is a stooge of Europe. Her independence was and is a lie. Nigeria committed many crimes against her nationals which in the end made complete nonsense of her claim to unity. Nigeria persecuted and slaughtered her minorities; Nigerian justice was a farce; her elections, her census, her politics - her everything - was corrupt. Qualification, merit and experience were discounted in public service. In one area of Nigeria, for instance, they preferred to turn a nurse who had worked for five years into a doctor rather then employ a qualified doctor from another part of Nigeria; barely literate clerks were made Permanent Secretaries; a university Vice-Chancellor was sacked because he belonged to the wrong tribe.” ( Continues below…, )



Photo Above: Chief (aka People's Servant) Charles O. Okereke( left ) interviewing Chukwuemeka Odumegwu Ojukwu( right )

Goodluck Ebele Azikiwe Jonathan: “If anything at all, these acts of mayhem are sad reminders of the events which plunged our country into 30 months of an unfortunate civil war. As a nation, we are yet to come to terms with the level of human suffering, destruction and displacement, including that of our children to far-away countries, occasioned by those dark days. In recent years, we have also witnessed other acts of intolerance, violence and destruction of human life perpetrated by unpatriotic elements for no justifiable reason. Indeed, the nation still bears some of the scars of other similar events like the aftermath of the June 12 1993 elections that brought our polity to the brink. It is inconceivable therefore, that there are some in our midst who seek to re-enact a stalemate in the political process. My fellow countrymen and women, ENOUGH IS ENOUGH.” ( Continues below…, )



Photo Above: President Goodluck Jonathan of Nigeria

As a result of the differences which our leaders pretend do not exist, Biafran independence was declared. MASSOB still cries for freedom, OPC brought its awareness, while MEND came with a new force. Now, it is Boko Haram-bombing everywhere and killing everyone in a bid to Islamize Nigeria. All these are asking for one thing: the freedom to be themselves in their fatherland.

Nigeria, ENOUGH IS ENOUGH. Nigerian leaders, ENOUGH IS ENOUGH. Let’s stop this beating about the bush, this meandering around the glaring truth, and opt for a Sovereign National Conference (SNC). The prophetic speeches of our heroes past have all been happening before our eyes while we feign blindness. Suppressions cannot suppress, if anything, the cries will get more dramatic and violent by the day. If there is any hope left for a better Nigeria, if there is wisdom in averting another civil war, then SNC is the answer.

I hereby call on our president, Goodluck Jonathan, to step up to this challenge that will imprint his name in the sands of time, and call for a SNC. It’s inevitable, it’s unavoidable, and it’s the only way out-the only way to our freedom, peace, and prosperity. There must be a conference of true representatives who will speak for their people. Two cannot work together unless they agree. Only an ignoramus favours chaos and war against a meeting of the elders. It’s a sovereign national conference or complete hopelessness.

http://nigeriamasterweb.com/blog/index.php/2011/07/01/nigeria-sovereign-national-conference-inevitable