In this interview with WALE AKINSELURE, Emeritus Professor of Political Science, University of Ibadan, John Ayoade renders his views on Value Added Tax (VAT) collection by states, Nigeria’s unity in diversity mantra, constitutional review, zoning, fiscal federalism and leadership recruitment process.
CURRENTLY, there is an agitation for being led by the Rivers State Governor, Nyesom Wike that state governments should be the ones collecting Value Added Tax (VAT) and not the federal government. What do you make of this call by the Rivers state government and some other state governments while putting into perspective the sustained yearnings for the true practice of federalism in Nigeria?
The VAT issue is one of the areas where we have misinterpreted federalism. It is welcome that Rivers state has decided to test the case in court. Initially, VAT was an issue for the states not for the federal. But under the military we were told that the states did not have the capacity to collect VAT. Therefore, the federal was collecting VAT on behalf of the states. That was an error because you don’t sublet in politics, because when you sublet it, you are sending the wrong signals. If the states don’t have capacity at that point in time, then empower them and give them the capacity to do so, so that they can properly do what belongs to them. Now that it has gone on for some years, the federal is now claiming what they were supposed to do on behalf of the states. I think the decision of Rivers state is welcome because if we do not put something to test, we will go on running errors. The courts are there as third party to interpret grey areas in the constitution. Rivers state did the right thing by going to court and the court has decided that it properly belongs to the state. I have always said that part of the problem we have in Nigeria is the fact that our governors are not testing the constitution. It is mis-governance not to test the constitution where there are doubts. In the second republic, Ambrose Alli went to court, on the issue of revenue allocation, and he won the case because, at that point in time, the federal government was talking about the percentages for each of the levels of government. But they do not talk about the quantum sum that is being divided. Two percent of X is variable, and therefore you have to specify what that X is. The court went ahead to say that without you specifying the quantity, the percentage has no meaning. So, you have to tell what the quantity is, then we can assign a figure to that percentage. The percentage becomes variable where the quantity is not specified. So, Ambrose Alli won that. Now that Wike has gone to court, the court has spoken and I believe that is a step in the right direction. The only way we can run a proper federation is for us to look at it and improve it as we go on, otherwise we will be operating errors which we have operated in the case of VAT for several years. A situation where someone in Abuja goes to Badagry to collect consumption tax is outrageous. Leave the government closest to it to handle it. That was the initial thing but because under the military, all governors, at the time, were posted by the Head of State. Therefore, they could not contradict the Commander in chief who posted them. Ibrahim Babangida was real Commander in Chief and there was nobody who could contradict whatever he said. I think that we have to start to think of what we want from a constitution.
In line of the VAT clamour and fiscal federalism, there is also the call for review of the revenue allocation formula to allow states have more fund to take care of their affairs. What do you make of some arguments about state governors not being tasked to think outside the box to generate revenue internally?
The issue of revenue allocation is about fiscal federalism. When you look at other federations, Nigeria is the odd one out, in terms of the allocation. Those who say that if you review it and the states get more, they will not be able to think outside the box, you ask if the federal itself has thought outside the box. They have not so why will the sinner complain about another sinner. The money is meant for the development of the people. The people live in the states, not in the federal. It is often said that all government is local. The people don’t live in this contraption that we call federation. The people live in Osogbo, Sokoto, Bauchi, Borno so send the money to the people. Whatever way you agree on the percentage, make sure the people get the money. The money is meant for the people not the government. What we have been doing is giving money to government by allocation. It is the services, needs of the people that are met by money not services of government.
Presently, there is an ongoing constitutional amendment process by the National Assembly. What do you consider the most fundamental aspects of the constitution that have to be looked into to have a true federal structure?
First, I am of the view that the National Assembly is not qualified to review that constitution. They are products of the constitution; they are beneficiaries of the constitution; and it is not likely that they will be objective in looking at that constitution. As long as the constitution provides an employment bill for them, it is an employment bill for them. To that extent, they cannot decide objectively what the constitution should look like. I believe that a constitution should be looked at by people who have a disinterest in the pecuniary outcomes of the constitution not somebody who stands to gain from the constitution. The National Assembly should steer clear of it. They were elected and when they were being elected, it was not part of the terms of reference that they will review the constitution. They have taken it as an accidental thing and it is improper. Let us get a professional, disinterested group to look at the constitutional. Second, I don’t think constitutions are written in the market place. A total of 450 people raising their hands for this section and that section is too much noise to be able to do justice and be able to look at the intricacies of the constitution. I bet it that if we take a poll in the National Assembly about people who have copies of the constitution, less than half of them will have copies of that constitution. Most of them are dealing with the constitution by hearsay and it is not in the interest of this country to be governed by hearsay. We need to get people who, by their work, by their training, and vocation have to deal with the constitution. They are people who know what it is, have comparative experience, are not thinking of what they will gain. They are not making to the law to govern themselves but to govern the country. I think that the National Assembly should steer clear of reviewing the constitution. I also believe that the Nigerian constitution lacks the foundation for a federation. The most important thing about a federation is that a federation is a democracy. It is democracy of the component units. It is one in which the component units have the right to govern in the interest of those units because as members of that federation, they also have separate interests. When we talk about a federation, we talk about interest within interest. There is the general interest and specific interest which is interest of the state. We cannot abrogate the interest of the sub-units for the sake of the interest of the general. In most federations, the central (general) exists because the units exist. I believe that, as many have said, the present constitution that we are operating was actually not decided by the people or by the nominees of the people. What happened was that there was the Abacha constitution which was not implemented and when Abacha died, all they did was to bring that old constitution and Abdusalami Abubakar put it into use. So, it was not a constitution that was really tested in terms of the people accepting it. It did not go through a process of confirmation by the people. I think that the people have a right to say that this is not their constitution and they have said so without mincing words. The problem with the constitution we are operating now is that it was established in the military mood by the military. It is “take it or leave it.” A democracy does not operate like that. A democracy has to have a word in what governs it. In federalism, there is what we call the subsidiarity principle, that Is, whatever that can best be done at a level, should be left to that level and no higher level should take it up. This is because the more distant to you are to a problem, the less knowledge you have about the problem and the less the ability you have to handle the problem. Our constitution for now dominates; it does not govern. We must look for a constitution that governs. Also, our rulers should rein not rule. When they start to rule, they are also dominating. Our constitution must be one in which everybody lives under the law; nobody should be above that law. There are things we are getting wrong about federalism. People talk about unity and I ask, unity of what and unity for what. A federation will get united because unity is a product that comes out of performance. If a country is not taking care of the welfare of the units, how do you expect unity from them? Unity is not foundational; unity is a derivative of the performance of government. I will love a government that caters for my welfare. It is not human to expect love from somebody that is oppressed. We go on talking about unity in diversity. Unity in diversity is a contradiction. If they are diverse, what unity do you want from them? That diversity shows that they have separate unique personalities. To unite those unique personalities is to disregard the diversity. It is important that when we deal with the constitution, we must know the fundamentals and know what a federation really is. No federation succeeds where one part of that federation decides all the issues. Wherever that happens, it means that the others are subordinates. That is not a federation. A federation is a collection of equal units; in terms of powers, they have equal powers in matters that concern them. So, if anything happens in the case of Oyo State, Oyo State is the final arbiter of what concerns Oyo people and it should not be something that should be decided from the top. One thing important about federation is that there is hierarchy of interests and that interests that belong to one level definitely have to be taken account of at that level.
You regard unity in diversity as a contradiction but Unity in diversity is the mantra of several of our leaders. In recent times, there have been threats to our corporate existence with a number of secessionist agitations. Are you saying those secessionists calls are in order? How should government address these agitations?
What the government is doing is dealing with the symptoms but it should be dealing with the cause. If my association is giving me what I want, why do I want to exit? It means that the association is not satisfying my interests and then what are those interests. For example, people have complained about the mode of appointments in this country. If 30 appointments are made today, who and who are the ones appointed? Where do they come from? If 30 people are appointed today, what offices do they hold? There are people who have offices without power. So, even if you distribute the positions equally, are the contents of the positions equal? These are issues that we have to deal with. Federal character says let’s make sure everybody gets something but after everybody gets something, each person has a right to look at what he or she got and compare with what the next person got. Are the equals equal? That is one problem that has not been answered in this country. Of course, not. If an equal is not equal, will an equal agree to be second fiddle to his other equal? It is human for people to look at what they have and compare it with what the other person has. I have heard that most of the people who get to high places in this country, get there at the instance of some powers in the North. So, if my livelihood, in spite of the fact that I am a human being like any other human being, depends on somebody else, then I am not equal to him. We have to deal with this issue of equity, equality, fairness. It must not be only be fair but also be seen to be fair.
Spokesperson of the Northern Elders Forum (NEF), Dr Hakeem Baba-Ahmed said the North had the majority of voters and will continue to lead Nigeria and whoever is uncomfortable should leave. Baba-Ahmed’s assertion must be justifying your argument on equals not being equal in a federation.
I talked about one area that makes a federation weak which ultimately makes federations to collapse, that is, one part deciding the fate of the other parts and doing so ad infinitum. A situation where you there is only one victor in a situation is not a federation. The other thing that makes a federation to collapse is that where a section of a country has a monarchical feeling. When you think you are born to rule, that federation is collapse. Human beings enjoy and appreciate their freedom. Once you want to put people in what now becomes a perpetual bondage. When you say you will determine who becomes President all the time and whoever doesn’t like it can go away, then, that is not an association of equal people. It is an association where there is a boss and the others are servants. The Nigerian federation must also put people who have loose mouths into check; they are destroying the federation. If anyone goes out in public to make such a statement, such a person is an enemy of Nigeria and should be so proclaimed. For us to make this federation succeed, we have to put all hands together to make it succeed. From all the Holy books available to us, we were not told that anybody was born to rule. So, that kind of dirty speech is unfortunate, unfair and destroys the federation itself.
Do we blame Lord Lugard for the configuration of a structure that looks imbalanced?
Nigeria has been independent for over 60 years and it has not been able to handle itself. it is possible to argue that the British constructed the edifice. But if you bought a house, which someone else built according to his or her taste, you have the right to modify the house. Both of us share the blame. We can blame the person who constructed the house but the person who constructed the house, constructed it for himself. The British were interested in making money. They were interested in spending less and getting more so they looked for a situation where if they marry North and South, they will spend less of British tax on Nigeria. That is legitimate and they were thinking right. But, when we now became independent, we should look at what was handed over to us and ask if it is suitable for our future and we should then reconstruct and correct it. If at 60 years, we have not been able to correct it, that is also our fault. And if there are people who make it difficult for us to correct, it means they are benefitting more than others from it. And we should sit down and talk about whether Nigeria is for one part alone or it is for all of us.
Several things you have said point to leadership, how do we improve our leadership recruitment process?
I think our political parties have failed us. They are the people who screen the leaders and put them up for us to vote. If you vote for either of them, you are voting for the same set of people. What is the difference between six and half a dozen. There is no difference because the process has not produced the right people. And if the process does not produce the right people, our elections are futile. After all the politicking and fixing, they put them up to the electorates as candidates. The parties themselves are not truthful, not thinking of the people to the governed. They are thinking of that political caucus and they produce this leadership which they themselves know were produced through a process that is faulted. I have had occasion to write a book on Buhari’s administration in the first term. Nigeria is running a one-party state because someone who says he is PDP in the evening becomes APC the next morning and he is admitted without any initiation ceremony, training. So, he is as good as someone who has been in the APC before, and in fact, could be better because you immediately give the person ticket to run for election. Our parties have no ideologies, no ethics, no philosophy and it is a free flowing water and anybody can get into it. Today, we are being disturbed by people jumping from pillar to post; some have done it five times and they are still in the race. Where you have parties that only caters for party connoisseurs, they taste beers, parties all over the place. What they taste in the morning saying it is beautiful, by 12noon they now tell you that this is the worst party on earth. Is there really anybody to vote for in that kind of group? We are running one party state. The people are not presented with any choice because the choices we have are the same bad set that exist.
Probably in the spirit of fairness, political parties adopt zoning to determine their candidates. Should zoning be a major basis parties use to spring up candidates?
Our problem is that this is a developing democracy. We have not really arrived at a formula for settling the issues between all of us. Zoning is not part of the constitution. It is just a device and extra-constitutional. So, if anybody flouts it, there is no penalty. The only people that can penalize a party for flouting it is the people. But the people are not politically savvy enough to know how to do that. We have not been able to tame our political parties; rather the political parties continue to tame us. Zoning would have been good but when you are zoning, you should zone quality. It is not just zoning personalities. The people that we eventually select by zoning should also be people that are equal to the task. I believe there is no part of the country that does not have people who are capable of dealing with the issues of this country. But, in our selection, the corrupt process brings out the worst. Zoning is geographical but after that geography, we should look into quality. We should look into experience, character, honesty. We should just because we have zoned to South South pick anybody there. It is not anybody who can govern. So, it is important for us to redefine zoning.
Academics like you have been limited to roles of electoral officers, returning officers. When will academics, with all their knowledge, join mainstream politicking and vie for positions?
A colleague of mine in the University of Pennsylvania once said, a political scientist is a failed politician. What goes on in politics is scary. Another person said, politicians work at night. It is not only that they work at night, their mind is also in the dark because what they tell you is not what they mean to tell you. So, for somebody who is used to searching for truth to go into a situation where people are working for fraud, lies, deception, he is not likely to succeed. He won’t make it if he goes there. Also, our elections are too expensive. There is nobody who relies on 30 days make one pay who can run an election in Nigeria. Put him at the highest grade level of level 17, if he wants to contest as local government Chairman, his 30 days make one pay will not be enough. So, why will an academic go into an area which he knows he does not fit in? He cannot afford it. If he wants to be able to afford it, he will have to align with some big brothers and godfathers and then he will no longer be academic. So, the best thing is to watch them and plead with them not to ruin us. To get in there is to go and swim in a lake of sharks, they will deal with you.
Considering our challenges in terms of insecurity and hardship which has not abated, are those who say we are a failing, if not a failed state in order?
We have failed. As long as the state does not provide the legitimate needs of the people, it has already failed. I remember that years ago, I have left Ibadan for Lagos at 8pm. I travelled without looking left or right and I will get there. In some parts of towns, you cannot be staying outside at 8pm because kidnappers could pick you up. A situation where our welfare is no longer total; where people sleep with one eye closed is not what we expect of a state. We should not think that a state has only failed when there is civil war, a state fails in different dimensions. Nigeria has failed in some of those dimensions. In terms of security, this country has failed. There is no single day, in the last six months that you do not hear of one kidnapping case or people going to burn down villages, deaths or people asking for ransom. When people go and kidnap 200 students from a school and ask for money; when people go into the citadel of security, Nigeria Defence Academy, kill officers and captured a Major, what else is failure if that is not? We should not kid ourselves, we have failed. The primary school I attended was about five kilometers from my village. I was seven years old then and my parents didn’t go with me. They only put my bag on my shoulders and bid me bye. I walked through the bush and came back home. It will be a mad parent that will do that now to his son or daughter. We are in a state of regression. If going back is not failure, what else do you call failure? We have failed.
YOU SHOULD NOT MISS THESE HEADLINES FROM NIGERIAN TRIBUNE
We Have Not Had Water Supply In Months ― Abeokuta Residents
In spite of the huge investment in the water sector by the government and international organisations, water scarcity has grown to become a perennial nightmare for residents of Abeokuta, the Ogun State capital. This report x-rays the lives and experiences of residents in getting clean, potable and affordable water amidst the surge of COVID-19 cases in the state…
and then