Nigeria runs a commandist federal arrangement, not federal system –Ashiru, ASUU chief

PRESIDENT Muhammadu Buhari recently made a statement that Nigeria needed true federalism now. What do you think he meant?

Well, the president as an individual, as a statesman, can desire for Nigeria what he calls true federalism, but theoretically and contextually speaking, there is nothing like true federalism.

Federalism is a system of government where powers are shared between a central government or a central unit and other component federating units. So, it is a power sharing arrangement in which you provide unity in diversity; and federalism is often context specific. What I mean by that is that states often determine the kind of federal arrangement that they will operate.

The foremost authority of federalism is K. C. Wheare, who had a postulation, an idea of how federalism should work. But in Nigeria, we have been using that parlance, ‘true federalism’ over the years. If what it means is sticking stricto censo to the federalist idea or the idea as postulated by K. C. Wheare, to that extent, he might be correct. But in theory, there is nothing like true federalism.

If there isn’t’ then, what do we have?

We have a federal arrangement, as I told you. There is the federalist theoretical perspective which stipulates that powers must be shared between a central government and its component units.

Not only that, K. C. Wheare advocated that in a federalist arrangement, no part of the federating units should either be bigger or stronger or more powerful or derive any form of advantage over and above the other. That is not the situation in Nigeria.

Then, what is it like in Nigeria?

The situation in Nigeria is what some scholars have described either a commandist federal arrangement; a federal system that is unitarist. By that I mean that rather than share powers, the central government in Nigeria is powerful as to be able to decree or dictate what happens to other units. That is antithetical; it is against the ideals, principles of a federal arrangement.

As part of K. C. Wheare’s postulation, there is also what is called fiscal federalism, which stipulates that revenue in funding central government and states should be by derivation. What I mean by that is that every federating unit would generate its resources and revenues and pay a royalty to the central government. That also is not the case in Nigeria.

The Federal Government appropriates all the resources; all the revenues and then shares. That is where you talk about revenue allocation. You talk about federal character and such other ideas about how to rijig Nigeria’s federalism. But if a federal system is functioning properly, the central government cannot and must not appropriate the resources of the federating units. And this idea is really not new in Nigeria. In the First Republic in Nigeria, revenue was by derivation. Each of the regions would collect its resources its revenues, and pay a certain agreed percentage to the central government and then, in most federal arrangements, the central government cannot appropriate all the powers and all the functions of the state.

In Nigeria, you have federal ministries of work, housing, power, road, agriculture, culture, education and so on. So, the Federal Government is biting more than it can chew and that is why federalism is not working in Nigeria.

There is a debate on state police. State police go without staying with a federal arrangement. It is just something you have to justify; you have to persuade people to be convinced. The argument I often hear is that governors would abuse state police, if they are in control. Is the Federal Government not abusing the police?

Now, let’s look at the 1999 Constitution; we say it is a federal constitution. If you look at the contents of the document, are they federal in nature. If so, does it not mean that what we are practising is against the tenets of the constitution?

Well, federalism itself derives from the constitution. The system that we are running derives from the constitution. Bear in mind that we were handed the constitution by a military junta and the military arrangement emphasises commandism, espirit de corp, unitary command and that is what the 1999 Constitution typifies. The 1999 Constitution contains Exclusive List. Every federal constitution must have areas or spheres of functions where each of the federating units can perform. So, the 1999 Constitution gave all the powers to the federal. All of the issues I have raised: works and housing etc, should make you ask, Federal Government building houses for whom? Roads, infrastructure, electricity, everything; it is a command thing and it puts on the Concurrent List a few items like education and all that; and then, created a constitutional confusion by the kind of autonomy it is granting to local governments.

Are we saying that right there in the constitution that we are operating, there is no autonomy for local governments?

No, there is; but in a properly functioning federal system, it should ‘the centre and ‘the federating units.’ So in be Nigeria today, which one is the federating unit; is it the states or the local governments?

Which one is?

I am asking; it is a rhetorical question.

How does it function elsewhere?

The way it functions elsewhere is to have a central government and the federating units and in this case, it could be the states. Each state should be able to determine on its own how many local units; local governments can function within it, in such a way that development can trickle down to the grassroots; and that is why, except for the state brigandage, nobody has been able to fault the creation of local governments or local council development areas pioneered by Bola Tinubu when he was governor in Lagos State. And you can see that most states are now following suit.

• Nigeria should work with other countries to tackle insecurity —Olawale

So, it should really be the business of state governments to create local governments in their domain. But as I speak to you, what is in the Nigerian 1999 Constitution, as amended, is that there are only 20 local government areas in Lagos State. So, the constitution itself, if we must operate a proper and federal arrangement, needs a lot of work to be done on it; a lot of review.

So, the actual foundation of Nigeria’s fumbling federal arrangement is the military commanding constitution we have at the moment.

Now we are talking about the local government; about the fact that President Buhari is now saying that there should be autonomy at that level of administration of the funds channeled to them directly. What would you say about the abuse that that arm of government had witnessed over the years?

It is an abuse because our institutions are not strong and the people are lethargic. It is not for the Federal Government to be decreeing autonomy for local governments. If we had a functioning democratic system of government, the people themselves would liberate themselves from the shackles of this abuse that you have talked about.

So, it is not right for the Federal Government to be decreeing autonomy for the local government; it is only a matter of exigency, because of the kind of experience that we have had in the past. Even right now that we are talking about autonomy, is it not that some people sit down somewhere and write the names of local government chairmen and ensure that they win elections? Until you change that system, you can’t decree autonomy. Only the local governments themselves can get autonomy on their own. It is act of stealing for state governments to hijack local governments’ funds, because there is really no democracy, there is no power, I mean people’s power at the grassroots level.

What we should really work for is to build that democratic empowerment from the grassroots to be able to demand autonomy from the respective governments at the next level. This rhetoric has been on for a long time that local government will get their funds and all that. So, what I think we should do is to say that such amount of money will go to the state government and let the state government allocate to each local government the sum total of what is due to each local government. To say you will be the one to guarantee autonomy to local government will be a misnomer. What would be right to be done is to empower people reasonably enough to be able to demand autonomy from the federating units.

From the look of things what you are saying is that nobody can decree autonomy for local governments except the constitution allows such. Are you now suggesting that there is need for Nigerians to sit down again at a national conference to fashion out a new constitution for the country?

Of course, the desire for a new constitution, a new federal constitution, is long overdue. What some of us have quarreled with is the modus operandi of getting such constitution. You will recollect that under President Gooluck Jonathan, there was a national conference which some of us have described as national jamboree; jamboree in the sense that you are asking people to come and discuss the future of their lives, half of the people that were at the conference were nominated by the incumbent administration. Not only that, every delegate to that conference was paid more than N10 million from the state coffers. That tells you that no meaningful discussion, critically speaking, could have came out from that arrangement.

That was why l lent my voice to the need to review the current 1999 Constitution as we have it now. In doing that, the modality for getting delegate should be democratic, democratic to the extent that all shades of interests and opinions will be represented at that conference – students, market women, artisans, name it. And that the expenses of such delegates must be borne by those who are sending them to that conference so that they will take only the message of the people as agreed in their respective constituencies to the conference.

If government is to pay those who would be at that conference, it would be the same usual old story, because everybody now goes there with the latitude and the autonomy to say what he cares, not what the people of his constituency have asked him to say. If their cost of living, etc. are to be borne by those who are sending them to that conference, I am convinced that genuine aspirations, hopes and desires of people would find their way into the constitution. But if we go in the usual way, l am afraid we are also going to get the same result like we got in previous conferences.

No doubt, the 1999 Constitution is long overdue for a review. What should be done is in the modalities for those who would sit down at the confab to review the constitution.

Finally, let us know your view of current situation in the country. Is the country okay? If otherwise, what do you think is wrong with it?

No country can be okay. So, what aspect do you want me to comment on?

Let us look at the way the country is being governed now. Do you think it ought to be better?

Certainly, a lot still needs to be desired. The country really can be described as a vehicle with a capacity to run 200 kilometres per hour, but is currently running at about 10 kilometres per hour or less. And if you take some key indicators, if you look at the economy, it is still mono-cultural, relying only on oil, still importing fuel, after many years of flag independence. So, in terms of economic development, and in spite of all the good statistics that say Nigeria’s economy is growing at six per cent or ten per cent per annum, the fact still remains that the economy is still mono-cultural and is not functional.

Politically, the institutions are weak; corruption is endemic. There is what I can call disquiet in governance, especially the executive/legislative/judiciary squabbles. The legislature is always on the executive’s neck, the executive is always trying to find a way to deal with the leadership of the legislature and more recently, the judiciary.

So, you will find out that we are running a government of individuals and not of institutions, because if we run government of institutions, it doesn’t matter who is in the saddle, the wheel of government will run smoothly.

Educationally, in terms of its philosophy and its entire framework, it is not liberating; it is a dependential system of education which has terrible implication for the entire society. The point to note is that our society is not functioning optimally and it is not doing that because of the structural baggage that it is currently carrying, as well as the nature and character of the state and that of its ruling elite.

The way to reverse all of these is to go back to the foundation of the state, particularly in terms of its federalist arrangement. Let the federating units enjoy what has been described in literature as devolution of powers; devolve powers to the federating units, take government to the grassroots, adopt a bottom-up approach in policy decision, not the other way round. And then, ensure that the system functions in optimal manner.

For us to do this, we also must revisit the nature of our politics. At the moment, our democratic arrangement is hinged on the first pass the pole, market- oriented democratic arrangement where the winner wins everything and the loser loses everything and if he is not careful, he can even lose his life. We must begin to look for a more consensual arrangement; an arrangement that would bring us together, rather than divide us; an arrangement that everybody can win in that competition. What I can describe as more consensual arrangement is one in which you win and I win. If everybody is a winner in a competition, you will certainly agree with me that it will reduce the premium we place on power which allows for the kind of brigandage, killing, arson and terrorism that we often witness during or after elections. It will reduce the very humongous amount of money, time and energy that we spend on this kind of democracy that we are currently running.

So, the way to review this is to create an environment where everybody is a winner and to drive home my point, I will give you an example. As we have it today, it can be better. There are six geopolitical zones in Nigeria. In an election this year, if we say vote one candidate from your zone into a presidential college, there would be six people in that college.

Let us assume that each individual in that college rules Nigeria for only two years, before it goes round, that would be 12 years. It means we will hold another election in another 12 years and nobody loses anything. This idea is not novel; there are countries in the world where they operate this kind of system. Why are we not emulating that? Why must it be this acrimonious, divisive, violent, non-competitive electoral process that we would stick to? Why can’t we look inward and adopt a system that brings us together and not the one that will divide us. If we are able to do this, at that level, we can begin to restructure Nigeria, restructure our federal arrangement and ensure life more abundant for the people of Nigeria.