TO THE CONFERENCE TABLE, O NIGERIA (2)

David Mark, Senate President

“Now, truth be told, it takes class suicide for a group benefiting from a given state of affair to work at changing it. That takes selflessness, courage and a zealous commitment to the greater good of the greater number within the polity. In this respect, I regret to state that in Nigeria, as the novelist would have put it, the beautiful ones are not yet born. In other words, it is unlikely that the 1999 Constitution will be reviewed. If it is, it will not be far-reaching enough to make any difference, because it is not in the interest of those currently at the helm of affairs to do so. Of course, there might be among them patriots willing to lose some privileges, if necessary, but they are in the minority. All of that is if we discount the fact that what Nigeria needs is a new Constitution and a sitting assembly is not equipped for such an assignment…

I did not plan to return to this subject, at least, not on the immediate. But reading the exchanges on one of the FB groups I have the privilege of participating in has kept my interest in the subject alive. One of the highlights of that discussion is the insistence by some very honest, very well-meaning, and absolutely patriotic people that the National Assembly is representative enough of Nigeria’s diversity, legitimate enough and therefore competent to handle the national question.

Opening the discussion on the subject in Nigerian Legislature Surveillance Group a couple of days ago, Eghes Eyieyien, a man whose passion for Nigeria is truly inspiring, wrote:

“The events of the last few weeks have increased the calls for a Sovereign National Conference (SNC). I still believe that the National Assembly, being comprised of duly elected representatives of the Nigerian people, is competent to handle any and all the issues which the SNC is to cover. The NASS successfully amended aspects of the Constitution in 2010 and can still be counted upon to do so especially since the members of the 7th Assembly are widely acknowledged to have actually won the elections that brought them into the legislature. Their legitimacy is incontrovertible...”

He went on to list some of the critical issues which, in his opinion, should be top on the constitutional amendment agenda of the National Assembly; issues which, if they did, would help put Nigeria on the path of unity and progress.

Tayo Akinola thought differently: “I really do not agree with you that the National Assembly should handle the SNC which everybody is gradually seeing as the only way out for us to get out of the crossroad we found ourselves and these are my reasons: 

“1. There is this tendency for the honourables to dance to the tunes of their parties and not the people of their constituency in arriving at a point.

“2. Part of the outcome of the so-called SNC will even affect the National Assembly members (it may not be the current set of NA members but definitely future ones). Allowing them to be the referee in a game that they are also a player will be unfair to the people of our country.

3. The duration of the SNC should be known from the beginning and I think it should be between 6 – 9 months and elected members to the conference should see it as a full time job for that period of time.

“4. The SNC should not be a reason for the NA for any delay in passing the other pending bills that they are working on.

“5. Decisions are usually arrived at in the NA through votes and this might most probably not work during the convening of the SNC. An example is the issue of State Police. If a part of the country wants state police and others do not want it, then does that means the part that prefer it should not have her wish? We should have it at the back of our mind that the SNC is an avenue to be 100% sincere with each other at least for once and also, the representatives of each community will for a very long time either be an hero or a traitor to his people.”

Many contributors chose to address the issues Eghes put on the front burner; issues like bicameral versus unicameral legislative arrangement and size of the legislature, while some raised the number of states etc. But as I read these contributions. I was reminded of the situation in 2009 when I found myself writing a piece titled, Who Will Save Nigeria?”

 I shall repeat here some of the points I made, because the factors that led to those observations then have not changed, even if the actors and the drama have changed a bit.

In that February 8, piece as I contemplated the melodrama about the National Assembly’s inability to even agree on the headship of their constitution review committee, I had this to say:

“Now, truth be told, it takes class suicide for a group benefiting from a given state of affair to work at changing it. That takes selflessness, courage and a zealous commitment to the greater good of the greater number within the polity. In this respect, I regret to state that in Nigeria, as the novelist would have put it, the beautiful ones are not yet born. In other words, it is unlikely that the 1999 Constitution will be reviewed. If it is, it will not be far-reaching enough to make any difference, because it is not in the interest of those currently at the helm of affairs to do so. Of course, there might be among them patriots willing to lose some privileges, if necessary, but they are in the minority. All of that is if we discount the fact that what Nigeria needs is a new Constitution and a sitting assembly is not equipped for such an assignment…

“As I write this, whether at the Presidency or at the National Assembly, all I see are people more interested in sustaining the status quo; with a bit of tinkering here and there. But it is not going to work.”

In that piece, I concluded by making the same point that I made here last week and in my NLSG facebook contribution as follows:

“One wise man said, no matter how far you've gone on a wrong road, turn back! There is a Biblical principle for it - it’s called the axe-head principle and it’s based on an incident recorded in the second book of Kings Chapter 6. The so-called children of the prophets had lost the head of a borrowed axe. It fell into River Jordan in the process of cutting trees for use in the building of a new camp. They sought the help of Prophet Elisha. The story climaxed in verse six like this: ‘Where did it fall?" Elisha asked. The man showed him the place, and Elisha cut off a stick, threw it in the water, and made the axe head float.’ It is generally agreed among dispassionate observers that we lost our way when we buried true federalism, and concentrated virtually all powers at the centre. We need to return to that spot to find our way forward. Will the beneficiaries of the aberration preside over the dismantling of their privileges? That is the question.”

We must make them do it. Time is running out.