I must hasten to thank the organisers of this very important conference for the thematic preference, ostensibly dictated by current happenings, globally. The acknowledgement of the indispensable essence of the tripod, justice, peace and abiding institutions, chosen as the sub-theme of this conference, and upon which the sustenance of a modern society rests, confirms understanding on the part of those who have brought us here. We associate, enthusiastically, with any endeavour designed to find lasting solutions to the perennial problems of the country.
Experts from all fields of knowledge must not be tired to proffer solutions to the myriad of problems encountered in the world and on the continent, particularly in our country, Nigeria. The nature of emergence and structure of the modern states in post-colonial states, especially in Africa, appears to be a fundamental reason for the crises of determination among the peoples brought together by colonial fiat. The quest for peace and progress has been elusive in most developing countries. Developed countries are not also spared their own share of crises. The business of peace-keeping is growing.
Many find ready solace in religion. There is little or no evidence to suggest that any serious attempt has been made to examine the present political arrangement with a view to determining the most suitable for our clime. The people are made to believe that the intervention of a benevolent angel is what is needed in a seemingly hopeless situation.
Some even advocate for the balkanisation of the polity for a lasting solution to the problem. Others want us to return to the regionalism of the colonial period. These advocates, however, have failed to explain why there are pockets of disturbances in those anticipated socio-political enclaves. There are those, whose ideology stands against tolerance and decency, bent on destroying everything that is good and noble in furtherance of bigotry. There are others whose main preoccupation is the perpetuation of misery among the masses.
Not a few persons conclude, rather justifiably, that the absence of justice, however defined, is largely responsible for the deplorable conditions militating against peace. The struggle among the peoples for scarce resources is a major factor responsible for the misunderstanding among those compelled to live together, not only by the colonial Administration, but also by the successive governments after independence. The boundaries created by the colonialists are artificial. Erstwhile kinsmen and women, separated by acts of political gerrymandering which ignored the fact of affinity through blood and established contacts fight, continually, for identity and representation.
Some opine still that the seeming fixation on the traditional mode of governance militates against smooth transition to the externally imposed political structures. This fact ensures a perpetual crisis of confidence between the people and their political leaders. The confusion engendered by the seeming resistance to the colonial structures, arising from lack of understanding and disconnect from the current realities, continues to undermine peace in the polity.
Current measures put in place seem insufficient to rescue the country from socioeconomic doldrums. Therefore, the preponderance of conflicts in virtually all parts of the country seems to suggest failure of the system. Working at these manifest lapses will assist, greatly. A country’s progress cannot be anchored on the wisdom and integrity of a super human being, even if discounting these virtues bears inherently destructive seeds in the life of a country. Institutions of state must be self-regulating. The basic law of the land, the Constitution, and relevant subsidiary legislations must be the instruments which determine the life and functions of any institution created to take care of the welfare of the people.
These institutions, recognised by the law of the land, must be above all persons and groups. All offices ought to owe their existence to them and their functions must be in strict contemplation of their provisions. Lack of ascertainable precepts and/or manipulation of the existing ones to suit capricious tendencies will, inexorably, promote dictatorship. This obnoxious phenomenon can never engender public good. Only a few stand to benefit from such a skewed arrangement. There are many examples of the so called developed countries of the world where the people live in abject poverty and slavery. The emergence of institutions must be the collective will of the majority of the people living in a society.
Our reaction to the invitation extended to us to speak at this forum flows, naturally, from our understanding of the known trajectories through which our careers have coursed. Law and politics; these two platforms seem to be the major determinants of this choice. A practice of more than four decades, culminating in service as the President of the Nigerian Bar Association, and a recent foray into the Nigerian brand of partisan politics, which has earned the trust of the people in us to serve at the highest office in Ondo State, evidently, account for why we stand on this podium to address this distinguished audience today.
The experiences garnered over time are rich indeed. Consistent interactions at both professional and political levels continue to confirm our position on the need to re-evaluate the current situation of things in the polity. Our country passes through serious challenges of definition at present. The socio-economic crises threaten the continued existence of the country as a corporate entity. There have been suggestions by persons of varied persuasions on the best way possible to chart the course which best guarantees progress. Some are of the firm belief that the current composition does not envisage real development. Colonial Administration was largely exploitative.
Skill acquisition was limited, severely, to middle cadre administrative competence geared towards serving the colonialists. Erstwhile homogenous communities were carved into colonial dependencies for foreign interests. The seeds of discord were planted and watered systematically. All the former colonies were designed for a sole purpose namely, effective and efficient exploitation through subjugation and pacification of the natives. Boundary adjustments, drawn and executed to suit agreements extraneous to those affected directly did incalculable damage to the socio-economic life in the traditional societies.
The disruption was total and almost irreversible. The rural-urban drift came as its consequence. The new independent country became a vast land of agile, expectant but largely redundant mass. Communal clashes, put on the leash by the colonial Administration, resumed with unimaginable ferocity. Boundary disputes became pervasive. The perfection of this pernicious design by the local elites, after independence, seems to have sealed the fate of the peasants who lost their capacity to contribute meaningfully to the economy of the nation-state. The alienation from their environments, coupled with the alienating circumstances to which they were subjected, laid the foundation for future crises.
The inherited structures of exploitation are still intact at this present time. The successors to political leadership in post-colonial era have also failed, in the main, to appreciate the need to design a system which addresses the peculiar challenges and uniqueness of peoples who inhabit a geo-political space, corralled to conditions of shared destinies in a pseudo-independent state. In addition to this problem, there has been a consistent decline in the available of skilled manpower to maintain the bequeathed system.
The so called public service, created to actualise colonial expectations, became moribund and inefficient soon after the colonialists departed. And since it was not designed for the purpose of implementing policies of state conceived to produce, it became a heavy burden on the post-colonial system. The post-colonial civil service acted on the false assumption in the possibility of replicating the efficient and effective colonial system without capacity. The former system was established for a purpose. The inherited system is still at the stage of reinventing itself for service.
There is bound to be confusion sustained by these centrifugal forces. No society can achieve meaningful progress without peace. But there can be no real peace in an unjust ambience. The absence of strong institutions with the mandates to train, prevent, correct and maintain proprietary decorum in a society depicts the level of development in such a geo-political space. The misapprehension of the basic elements necessary for socio-political stability in a society often compels ad hoc solutions to fundamental challenges of nationhood. This is counter-productive.
Any aspirations towards development should take into account issues of origin and evolution of any particular human community. These collective yearnings should find expression in determination to achieve common goals. Peace is not achieved through mere wishful thinking. The concept of justice remains a utopia bordering on existential issues are confronted with a view to finding lasting solutions.
Experience and experimentation encourage conception and design of institutions which form the basis for development. These institutions should be beyond the whims and caprices of individuals. As desirable as the yearning for a benevolent dictator has been, assuming there is anyone capable of being a dictator and being kind simultaneously, strong institutions serve as veritable checks on the excesses of such persons. The accustomed acquisitive tendencies of men and women of power, which predisposed them to extend and deepen influence, will make it extremely difficult for the emergence of the much-sought rarity. Strong institutions are the basis for real development.
PEACE AND THE NIGERIAN STATE
The quest for peace in modern societies appears elusive. As sophisticated as most countries claim, it is disturbing to note that there is too much confusion in the world today.
There is virtually no continent or country that is immune from conflicts. Our world now recognizes the need to set up Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) camps and the new discussions seem to centre on how to maintain these new “trade” outposts. We should be concerned with how to prevent the occurrence of the tragedies which force people out of their communities to take refuge in places where they are more vulnerable.
Nigeria has had her fair share of crises since political independence from Britain.
The crisis of confidence among the political elite ensured that the whole country almost ceased to exist barely two years after independence. Prevailing suspicion among these elite led to a violent overthrow of government and the subsequent civil war. The end of the war witnessed another phase in the seemingly unending transition to nationhood. A military interregnum appeared to have halted the political progression to a truly indigenous, independent political entity.
The punctuation of the long intervention with a four-year civilian administration, in the Second Republic, deepened the crisis of identity as politicians employed the obnoxious instrument of ethnicity and religion to divide those who had just transited from being subjects to citizens. The new political leadership did not need a new device to create confusion. The British template of “divide and rule” sufficed and this was employed with murderous efficiency. It was not surprising, therefore, that the young Republic became embroiled in fratricidal war which claimed millions of lives. The war ended after three years but the effects are still with us, almost fifty years after.
The colonial and the immediate Pre-independence periods, attempts at civil rule during the First and Second Republics, the long military interregnum and the programme of long transition to civil rule and the eventual return to the current democratic dispensation are all pointers to the failure of the inherited system. The various reform programmes are mere cosmetic approaches towards solving a fundamental problem of existence; It will not work. The Nigerian State was not conceived to succeed as an independent political entity.
Is it not a fact that we still consider all governmental actions and decisions in terms of ethnicity and religion? What efforts have we put in place to ensure that the different ethnic amalgams, which constitute the current Nigeria, understand one another? What makes us harbour such misplaced confidence with regard to expectations on prosperity and progress in an atmosphere of confusion? Can the present structure engender peace?
What manner of a system fritters a rare opportunity offered in the availability of the most agile and willing young men and women? Why is there an acute shortage of skilled labourers needed to fix the infrastructural deficits in the country? How useful is an educational system whose curricula fail to address the basic challenges in the land? In what specific ways do we hope to develop as a country?
Why is criminality adorning the garb of ethnicity and religion if we are truly desirous of having a nation? What practical steps have we taken to be self-sufficient to warrant our expectation of a peaceful and prosperous country? How genuine are the boundaries upon which our people continue to kill and maim one another? In whose interest is this current contraption which seeks to alienate the people from the institutions of state? Who is a Nigerian? What are his/her commitments to the national project? How prepared is he/she for the arduous task of nation-building? How ready are we to work for and maintain peace?
ON JUSTICE
There are pertinent questions to ask concerning the seemingly intractable socioeconomic crisis in the country. Many citizens and public commentators are of the opinion that there is injustice in the land. Several instances, which are alluded to, ranging from political representation, perceived exclusion from economic advantages, inequitable distribution of dividends accruable from natural resources and social visibility, among others, are showcased as evidence of marginalisation occasioning injustice.
While some positions taken may be considered as correct, considering some glaring cases of privation and neglect, it is simplistic to conclude that attending to these narrow agitations will solve all problems. There are those who subscribe to the ideology which supports further balkanisation of the country to create more states and the attendant proliferation of bureaucracies to take care of politicians. To this category of Nigerians, this will address injustice. There are others who claim to speak for the minority ethnic groups whose voices are suppressed in the national discourse.
The political appointments and contracts offered the local agitators are treated as representing the collective aspirations of the downtrodden in their localities. These potentates purport to speak for their peoples. They hardly stay with them to feel the negative impact of privation and wanton neglect. They hobnob with the very group which ensures that the status quo remains. Once some of the most outspoken critics of the perceived oppressive political system have been accommodated, the agitations for inclusions cease until the scramble for yet another contract resumes.
The struggle for political ascendancy among the elite who took over from the colonialists led to a serious political crisis shortly after independence. Only a few of these gladiators thought about the serious omission of pretending that all was well because of the new privileges which came with their new status. The country was thrown into a civil war soon after. The effects are still discernible today.
Any discussion on justice which leaves out the deplorable conditions of the people is self-serving. It is patently unjust to have the mass of the people depend on hand-outs from the political class having lost the capacity to contribute to the development of the polity. It amounts to a future annulled for the teeming youths of this country to remain without the necessary skills required for the development of the country. It amounts to a cruel paradox that a country, which is richly endowed in natural resources, should wallow in abject poverty. It is unjust that a parasitic elite class will watch while a whole generation of youths is wasted to assuage greed. Until and unless the identifiable geo-political zones are encouraged to realise their potential with a view to participating, actively, in the economic activities for growth and prosperity, there will be no end to crises.
ON INSTITUTIONS
The institutions of state are still very weak in most developing countries. This is why it is easy to see certain images of political leaders as representing their respective countries. Some even consider themselves as the state. This is very common on the African continent where it is possible to have an individual occupy the office of the President in perpetuity. These super men change the laws of their countries to reflect their preferences. There is no opposition in real sense.
Citizens are murdered or jailed for expressing their views. The press is gagged. There is no freedom of speech. Only the emperor stands for an election and his political party is the only official platform of hypocrisy. There is the charade of a periodic process of selection where only the preferred candidates are cleared to contest to occupy the parliament. The judiciary comes in handy to complete the drama of representation. No judge will dare to rule against the state. Anyone who merely attempts to be different faces a serious risk.
There is always the pretence to act as if all is well for as long as periodic elections are held to confirm treason. The government exists to serve parochial interests of a few persons. Legislators are bothered, mainly, by matters of personal interest. The judiciary is ever ready to put a stamp of legality on the brazen acts of dispossessing the people of their commonwealth. Judges only interpret the law as it is written. It is not their place to question the morality or otherwise of a measure.
The state of embarrassing poverty on the richest continent should, therefore, not surprise anyone. The institutions meant to drive agenda for real development are either moribund or designed to serve narrow purposes. There can be no real production in an environment which depends almost solely on the ideas of an individual and his group of lackeys. Countries where dictators hold sway are mostly unproductive. Crass consumerism is the logical option in a society with weak institutions. Crime and dissidence are among the regular features. Underdevelopment is assured; tough conditions of living will appear normal. There can be no peace in such a country.
It is important that some of the features depicting a poor and underdeveloped country are discussed for better understanding as we round off this speech. As a lawyer with an active presence at the Nigerian Bar, spanning over four decades, and an elected representative of the people serving at the highest office in Ondo State, I stand on a firm ground to discuss the institutions of the Nigerian State and the effects of their weakness. A few examples will suffice at this point. I shall leave eminent scholars and other distinguished guests at the Conference to look at other areas which I may not touch.
As has been noted earlier, modern governance is deliberative. Elected or appointed representatives of the people should work within structures of the institutions of state for optimal performance. Accountability is only possible where these institutions don’t just exist in name. Public officials must be held accountable for all their deeds. Business of the state must not be shrouded in secrecy. Those who claim to represent the people must be compelled to do so. And this position will not be a mere wishful thinking if the following suggestions are taken seriously.
THE EXECUTIVE
The Executive arm of government, in a modern democracy, must act in conformity with the law of the land. They must uphold the tenets of the rule of law in all their dealings. There should not be any instance when the interests of these ephemeral office holders should stand against those of the generality of the people. They hold their offices in trust. Sovereignty belongs to the people and resides with them at all times. The periodic surrender of power to any elected representative is not absolute. Until the Executive arm of government is made to observe these basic principles, there will be no peace.
THE LEGISLATURE
The legislative arm of government is a very important institution. Members of this body are direct representatives of the people. They are drawn from constituencies and, consequently, should be the closest to the people. They should know the challenges encountered by their constituents and must be willing to present same at the parliament. They must subordinate their personal preferences for the general will. A weak legislature is dangerous to the health of the society. In the same vein, a needlessly combative parliament is disruptive.
The people’s interests are best served by an assembly of representatives guided by discernible ideologies and manifestos. It is only a strong legislature which possesses the capacity to rein in the excesses of the Executive.
THE JUDICIARY
The judicial arm is the third in a democratic system. It serves as the veritable check on the Executive and the Legislature. It is the duty of this arm to interpret the law. This arm must be independent of the other two arms of government save for the constitutional provisions guaranteeing control. Judges must not dance to the whims and caprices of politicians. They must be above board in all their dealings. A weak judiciary will spell doom for any country.
POLITICAL PARTIES
A truly democratic government must embrace a multi-party system to avail the people the benefit and liberty of choices. Political parties must present their manifestos to the people based on perceived challenges. They must suggest ways to ameliorate the living conditions of the people. Their ideologies must be known to the people. The fluidity of movement from one political platform to another just contest for an elective post will be difficult. Members of a political party must enjoy equal rights and not be denied access to express their intents based on extraneous factors unknown to the law of the land and the party’s constitution. Party functionaries must be accountable to the party and not some individuals.
FREE PRESS
A democratic system of government must promote free press. Freedom of speech must be respected. At no time must journalists be gagged from performing their statutory functions. The courts and not politicians, either elected or appointed, should determine when a journalist or a media house flouts the law.
CIVIL SOCIETY GROUPS
A free country should encourage genuine advocates to present alternate views to the government and the people. A strong presence of civil society organisations deters Executive recklessness. All the other arms too will not be spared.
CONCLUSION
On the whole, Nigeria will only be in a position to discuss sustainable development if there is peace. The absence of strong institutions can only perpetuate poverty. Periodic elections held do not necessarily signify progress if the impact of governance is not reflected, positively, on the people. Legitimacy is not conferred on the so called elected representatives for the simple reason that they win at the ballots. Results of elections are not indices of performance.
Every society must strive to develop and sustain its institutions. Strong and charismatic leadership will function, optimally, in a country with strong institutions. Real development will ensue afterwards. Development should be about the people.
This is the surest panacea for peace in the modern world.
Keynote address delivered at the Biennial Conference of the Centre for Peace and Strategic Studies University of Ilorin, Kwara State, held at the University of Ilorin Auditorium on Monday, 25th November, 2019.
and then