The restructuring imperative

The truth is that the demand for secession by the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) and other groups from the South East geopolitical zone; the various agitations for resource control from the South South zone; the demand for true and equitable federalism by elements from the South West and the North Central zones; the seeming oppositions to the tenor of the demands and the actual demands by groups from the North West and North East zones are all reflective of lack of satisfaction with the current processes and structures of Nigeria, such that there is a genuine need to harvest and put all these demands on the table in order to help Nigerians to consider them and come out with some workable agreements for better running and management of their country.

But it would look like the Buhari government does not understand the true implications of the current agitations and has therefore not been able to correctly respond to them. President Buhari himself set the tone for the inadequate appreciation when he dismissed the agitation from IPOB and other groups on the ground that Nigeria’s existence was non-negotiable and that his government was going to react with necessary force to put down the demand for resource control from groups in the Niger Delta. Appeals for caution, even from international observers, that these demands and agitations be considered legitimate and appropriately addressed, did not dissuade the government until the approach only bolstered the resolve of the agitators and rendered the Niger Delta inoperative for meaningful oil operations.  It was only after the demonstration of the futility of the force approach that the government started changing tune and tone and mandated the Vice President, Professor Yemi Osinbajo, to hold dialogue and negotiations with the aggrieved groups. We have since seen some restraint in the Niger Delta since the commencement of dialogue and the same sort of restraint is attending the IPOB struggle with the release of Nnamdi Kanu on bail.

We would have thought that the relative success of the dialogue approach would persuade the Buhari government to change its style and work on addressing in a substantial sense, the current quest for restructuring in the land, especially after the Acting President, Professor Yemi Osinbajo, indicated that the government was set to come out with its comprehensive response to the agitations. But this government is not about to change given the latest response from the Acting President in which he called many of those agitating for restructuring as those in need of appointments and insisted that Nigeria was never a ‘mere geographical expression’ as it had come to stay.

Evidently, the Acting President does not fully grasp the depth of the problems bedeviling Nigeria and it is quite unfortunate that even at the level of presiding over the affairs of this country, this is so. For it is precisely because Nigeria is today riven into contentious ethnic groups with no grand affiliation to the Nigerian project that the country remains a mere geographical expression. There is however the possibility of overcoming that deficit through proper restructuring geared towards ensuring a country underpinned by agreeable structures and principles. If, 57 years after independence, Nigerians are still hankering after ethnic groups and frantically raising the flag of secession, it must be clear that the sage, Chief Obafemi Awolowo, was only bluntly describing a visible reality when he described Nigeria in that term at the dawn of independence. Incidentally, that description was not to foreclose the emergence of a truly united Nigeria, but was meant indeed to signify to Nigerians the need and task to build that Nigeria that would command the intrinsic interest and loyalty of all its citizens on the basis of agreed and agreeable principles and structures.

It is in this respect that Nigerians must see the need to accommodate themselves and work together in the spirit of give and take within the context of restructuring for the emergence of such a country. Perhaps the Acting President, in this wise, has to be reminded about the lesson of history that no group could be forced to belong to any country ultimately as the inalienable right of such people to freedom would guarantee their separation in the last analysis. The existence of Nigeria, beyond the present level of ‘mere geographical expression’, therefore has to be negotiated by the peoples and groups making up the Nigerian project and not under the force or the wishful thinking of any government.

The reality is that Nigeria is not working at its utmost at present given the reluctance of many of its constituent groups to accept the current structures for its existence. Fortunately, many of these groups are now raising the possibility of working out new, acceptable structures and principles for a more inspiring existence for the country.  This is what is called the demand for restructuring and we would think that it ought to be clear that Nigeria necessarily has to confront this restructuring imperative if it is to have any meaningful existence going forward.

This demand has been there since independence, with many calling for regular frameworks for renewing the structures and principles for the running of the country. The demand has only now received wider currency because of growing recognition of many groups insisting on a fairer set of rules and principles in being part of and belonging to the Nigerian project. It would be disingenuous therefore to say that those calling for restructuring are those looking for appointment, as that would surely not describe the likes of Pa Ayo Adebanjo and others that have been consistently loud on this issue since the First Republic or the likes of former President Ibrahim Badamasi Babangida who recently voiced support for the agitation on the basis of the reality that every society must come to terms with the need to review its basis and structures of existence in order to give it new lease of life.

Confronting this restructuring imperative is not something that could be wished away; it is something whose time has come. And rather than the present government playing the ostrich and treating the various calls and demands with disdain, it should summon the courage to stand on the right side of history by providing the basis for Nigerians to address many of the ills they have come to identify in the running and working of their country. This is the courage that the Senate and the House of Representatives and their leaderships are demonstrating when they speak of their readiness to revisit some of the issues that would lead to devolution of powers as some basic indication of restructuring in the country after being condemned by many Nigerians and groups for rejecting the proposals for such devolution as part of the Constitution amendment.

We expect the government to embrace the current call and agitation for restructuring, as not doing so would only further heighten the agitation and show the agitators that they have to look beyond the present government in seeking to actualise their demands. That would only further perpetuate the present polarisation in the country with attendant negative consequences. It is therefore in the interest of all that the government should hearken back to the promise of the Acting President that the government had heard the cries and calls and demands of Nigerians for restructuring and was prepared to address them in the spirit of constructive engagement that would lead to the emergence of a more united Nigeria under the basis of widely agreed principles and structures.