Confab: Northern delegates’ volte face

THE narratives surrounding the 2014 National Conference, which cost  taxpayers N7 billion, took a strange turn lately following the failure of the government to hearken to the demands of Nigerians. The Conference delegates from the North recently publicised their plot against the final report of the conference, with a threat of anarchy and chaos in case it undergoes the due process to form part of the Nigerian constitution. They claimed that the report is of questionable legal validity. Even though the decisions at the conference were arrived at by consensus, the delegates claimed that they were arrived at by undemocratic means.

In a communique issued at the end of their meeting in Abuja, they stated inter alia: “We urge members of the National Assembly to be wary of and not rely or act upon a report which is full of flaws and not enjoying national or popular support (sic). We call upon any group of persons or individuals agitating for any form of restructuring of the federation, first and foremost, to respect the existing constitutional order and to seek to do so within the bounds and parameters stipulated under our constitution and the law. To suggest otherwise would lead to chaos and anarchy.”

The outburst of the northern delegates, with their threat of dire consequences over any attempt to put the necessary machinery in motion to implement it, has pitted them against many other stakeholders, including senior citizens from the southern axis of the country who were delegates to the conference. Alarmed by the outburst, they warned against such display of arrogance and boisterousness. The report having been a product of intense lobbying, horse-trading and debates, these delegates felt that the position of their northern counterparts on it was not just an affront to the collective will, wisdom and aspirations of stakeholders in the Nigerian project, but also a calculated attempt to maintain the status quo which perpetually breeds friction, tension and instability in the country.

We believe that rather than  seeking to truncate the quest to find an enduring and realistic solution to the country’s core problems, the northern delegates should be at the forefront of the agitation for change. Nigeria, as it is currently structured, is not conducive to development. The unitarism imposed on the country flies in the face of logic and the democratic best practices. It is unjust, parasitic and precarious. Therefore, the new naysayers must descend from their Olympian heights and treat other citizens as equal partners. Of a truth, the claim that the North was not adequately represented at the conference is fraudulent. The 492 delegates comprised representatives of diverse interests across the country. The  North was adequately represented, and by quality delegates.

Indeed, the distinguished and eminent jurist of northern extraction who presided over the conference, Justice Idris Kutigi, described it as monumental in the annals of the country. Kutigi asserted that the 494 delegates were assembled to address the perennial fears, disappointments, aspirations and hopes of Nigerians spanning more than 100 years. He said: “The 1978 Constituent Assembly had a membership of 230 people and met for nine  months. The 1995 National Constitutional Conference had a membership of 371 people and met for twelve (12) months. The 2005 National Political Reform Conference was made up of 400 delegates and met for five months. We are 494 in membership and you made us do all this work in four and half months.”

It is preposterous for a country that is in a quandary to throw away a veritable  opportunity to reinvent itself. More than 600 resolutions relating to the form of government,  policing system, resource control and local government administration,  among others, were decided by consensus after due lobbying, consultations and debates. The volte face by the northern delegates amid the general demand for restructuring is therefore mischievous. They collected allowances for their work at the conference on the basis of their contributions to national development, and did not tell anyone that they had been hoodwinked or arm-twisted into taking the admittedly landmark decisions that they took. So, what has changed between 2014 and now?

It has been suggested by some concerned citizens that if there are certain contents of the Confab report that the northern delegates are averse to, they should list those issues, and not seek to legitimise the position of the current administration against the consistent and overwhelming demand by Nigerians for the restructuring of the country. But even such a step would be a wrong one because the decisions at the conference were arrived at by consensus, involving a lot of give-and-take by the conference participants, while action was stayed on the issues that could not be agreed on. The delegates are thus duty-bound to defend and project the conference report because it touches on their integrity. The right of the Nigerian people to a workable federation cannot have been taken away by the election of President Muhammadu Buhari.

For how long can Nigeria postpone the evil day in the face of the endless agitations by ethnic groups for the restructuring of the country?