Content uploaded by Osita Agbu
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Osita Agbu on Mar 17, 2024
Content may be subject to copyright.
1
Navigating Nigeria towards a Nation-State: Re-visiting The 2014 National Dialogue
Osita Agbu
Professor of International Relations
Department of International Relations and Diplomacy
Baze University Abuja
Chapter Contribution to the Book, “Reflections on Nigerian Federalism: Essays in Honour
of Professor Solomon Akhere Benjamin, edited by Rotimi T. Suberu et.al (2022), Kaduna,
Pyla-Mak Press.
2
Navigating Nigeria towards a Nation-State: Re-visiting The 2014 National Dialogue
Abstract
Introduction
It is common knowledge that the Post-colonial African state as inherited and managed is „work-
in-progress‟. A preponderant number of the problems post-colonial African states face are
fundamentally political, with implications for governance and sustainable development. In
seeking ways of making a success of this project, many have repeatedly impressed upon us the
need, indeed, necessity for „intense discussion‟ or „dialogue‟ among parties aimed at the
resolution of the many problems besieging the post-colonial African state. However, there are a
significant others who rightly or wrongly believe that this road is unnecessary and a waste of
valuable time, and would rather prefer that the status quo be maintained. In other words, a
national conference or dialogue is not necessary for a country to leapfrog its demons or
transform in a fundamental way against the backdrop of the usual constraints characteristic of the
African state. Still others sit on the fence, unsure of what action to take, afraid that embarking
on this tangent may implode an already primed and unstable political environment – towards
disintegration rather than positive transformation. This discourse aware that several conferences
had been held in the past in Africa as we will get to see, address contemporary issues
surrounding the call for, and dynamics of the National Dialogue held in 2014 in Nigeria,
identifying the issues, interests and lessons from this conference. The terms „Dialogue‟ and
„Conference‟ are used interchangeably in this discourse to mean the same thing. This chapter
takes the position that if the core issues around which Nigerians are divided are collectively and
transparently addressed, and the consensus reached dispassionately implemented, the potential
for eliciting and effecting transformation in the country would be attained. This done, it will be
easier to release hitherto suppressed energies and talents of its peoples for national
transformation and development.
3
National Conferences to the Rescue
The importance of national conferences in effecting fundamental changes in societies cannot be
over-emphasized. Infact, the experiences from Africa are significant in the quest for nation-
building. In the 1980s and 1990s several African countries, including South Africa, Burundi and
Sierra Leone resorted to either a Truth and Reconciliation Commission or an international
Tribunal to address violence and restore peace and justice in their countries. At the same time,
other African countries opted for what was called „national conference‟ to solve their national
problems and transform conflict into an opportunity for structural change. In February 1990, the
Republic of Benin for example, a small nation-state in West Africa, achieved peace through a
national conference. The national conference in Benin was a national gathering for crisis
resolution through social debates on critical issues facing the nation, and political decision
making for constructive changes. As a pioneer, Benin led the political change movement of
national conference, and was later followed by eight other African countries – Chad, Congo-
Brazzaville, Gabon, Mali, Niger, Togo, Central African Republic, and the Democratic Republic
of Congo (DRC) (Koko, 2008).
Today, most of the existing literature on the subject explores the phenomenon of national
conference as something of a prelude to political transition, to multipartism, Political re-
structuring, democracy and national transformation. Indeed, part of the literature depicts the
national conference as a civil coup d‟état, and recommends its institutionalization as a system for
democratic transitions. This chapter however, conceptualizes national conference as a necessary
and fundamentally holistic and intellectual intervention and discourse for the renewal of
structurally-troubled societies in a manner that is realistic and inclusive. By this, contentious
issues that affect the polity, economy, social relations, justice and equity are all addressed in a
comprehensive and sustainable way.
The Nigerian State and Crisis of Transformation and Development
What is the problem that warranted the need to convene a national dialogue in Nigeria? It is
„Nigeria‟ as constituted and governed. This is an entity bequeathed to the peoples in the
geographical space labeled Nigeria by the departed colonialist – the British colonial
4
administration. Since the initial political marriage in 1914 and political independence in 1960,
the country, in spite of its immense human and material resources has been unable to attain its
obvious potentials. And why is this so? The Nigerian state in its structural and distributive mode
is highly dysfunctional, counter-productive and lacking in innovation. Indeed, there is constantly
palpable anger and alienation in the land. A recognition of this and the imperative for change led
to previous efforts at re-designing the Nigerian State. Hence, there was the 1957/1958
Constitutional Conferences, The Constituent Assembly of 1978 that gave produced the 1979
Constitution, the 1994/95 Constitutional conference, the 2005 National Political Reform
Conference, and the Alfa Belgore Review Committee of the 2005 Conference.
In Nigeria, calls and agitations for a Sovereign National Conference intensified especially after
the annulment of the Presidential election of June 12, 1993. These calls came particularly from
the Civil Society Organisations (CSOs) and the academia. The Movement for National
Reformation founded by Anthony Enahoro in 1992, later the Pro-National Conference
Organization (PRONACO), the Movement for a New Nigeria (MNN) and the National
Democratic Coalition (NADECO) were all at the forefront in the call for a Sovereign National
Conference for Nigeria.
By 1998, against the backdrop of the June 12, 1993 debacle and the fraudulent Sani Abacha
Constitutional Conference that produced five political parties, all endorsing Abacha as their
Presidential candidate, it was clear that Nigerians were getting tired of constitutional conferences
that led nowhere. Nevertheless, the Abacha conference attempted to address some of the
grievances of the time. It produced the six geo-political zones, 13 percent derivation for the oil
producing states, and the Rotation Principle in some political parties, which in spite of being
expunged from the 1998 draft constitution by the Abdulsalami Abubakar military regime became
the de-facto element of Nigeria‟s power sharing principle. The Obasanjo Reform conference of
2005 also led nowhere, as it was polluted by a tenure review controversy (Otubanjo, 2015:10).
The Report of that conference was aborted over the “Third Term Agenda” plot alleged to have
been forced through the back door into the recommendations. It was a scheme designed to enable
Obasanjo elongate his stay in power beyond the constitutionally approved two-term limit of eight
5
(8) years (Esajere, 2015:16). This was why many expected that the 2014 „National Dialogue‟
should truly be a Peoples‟ conference with clear goals.
At this juncture, we pause to note that it was the case that Late President Abacha‟s colleagues
hastily packaged a constitution drawing heavily from the 1979 constitution to serve as the legal
framework for the new civilian administration that was inaugurated in 1999. The general opinion
then and now is that this was not a People‟s constitution, it was an imposition, and was never
really published until it came into effect. The result of this is the consistent and increasing
haggling amongst members of the National Assembly on whether or not to amend some
provisions of this imposed document during the various debates. And these altercations are not
necessarily in the interest of ordinary Nigerians, but often for selfish elite and group interests and
objectives. While a state can be defined as that entity with a defined territory, population (albeit
with different interests) and monopoly of the use of force for the maintenance of law and order, a
nation-state is a state in which the people or citizens feel a sense of belonging, of patriotism and
of common destiny. This is at present not the case with Nigeria.
There is no-gain saying that the process of nation-building in Nigeria as elsewhere is „work-in-
progress‟. As observed, Nigeria is a country not defined in terms of values, nationality,
nationhood and feelings of one people. It is a nation only in name as loyalty lies either with the
various ethnic groups or some other affiliation, but hardly with the entity called Nigeria. There
was therefore, need to „talk‟. Nigeria had to go back and redefine or renegotiate their values and
nationhood, and these could not necessarily be achieved within the confines of law (Mon, 2015).
Hence, the call by then President Goodluck Jonathan‟s and inauguration of a National Dialogue
by 2014 was not unexpected. There is no-gain saying that Nigeria is at present a basket case
characterized by the increasing deterioration of public order, and general and personal insecurity
from armed robbery, kidnapping, banditry, insurgency, terrorism to outright calls for secession,
even as the Muhammadu Buhari ruling All Progressives Party (APC) government exerts itself to
addressing these issues. So what really is wrong? This chapter is of the opinion that Nigeria‟s
problems and dysfunctionality are structural; and at this juncture in the country‟s political and
economic development, citizens must have courage to recognize the enormity of the problem and
do something about it, even though their predicament is not wholly their fault. Some British
6
colonial administrators have in a way acknowledged this fact; and very drastic measures, not
„normal‟ measures are required to salvage the situation, and move the country forward. Infact
that Nigeria is from the onset a forced cohabitation of strange bedfellows is not far from the
truth. This is also obtainable in other climes; however, the problem is further compounded by the
inertia of opaque forces in addressing the dysfunctionalities created by this co-habitation.
The British while preparing to hand over the reins of government to Nigerians showed a clear
preference to hand over to leaders from the north, since the leaders from the south may prove
more difficult to control – they were more educated and the anti-colonial agitations came mostly
from leaders in the south. In a heart-rendering confession published in TELL Magazine Issue of
March 7 and March 21, 2005 and cited in Okurounmu (2014), Mr. Harold Smith, a colonial
Labour Officer in Nigeria between 1955 and 1960, who was then in his 80s, had this to say:
When we assessed Nigeria, this was what we found in the southern region:
strength, intelligence, determination to succeed, well established history,
complex but focused lifestyle, great hope and aspirations…. The East is good in
administration and commerce, law and medicine, but it was a pity we planned
our agenda to give power at all cost to the northerners. They seemed to be
submissive …The West led in the fight for independence and was punished for
asking for freedom”. Mr. Harold Smith went on to admit that the census result
“of 1952” was announced before they were counted. In his words: “despite
seeing vast land with no human but cattle in the north we still gave the north 55
million instead of 32 million. This was to be used to maintain their majority
votes and future power bid.” And he lamented, “I am sorry for the above evil
done to Nigeria, I can‟t say sorry enough.
With this confession, which came from a reliable source it is clear why Nigeria has been making
motions, without really moving forward or making progress; either because the average Nigerian
is scared or docile to take the necessary actions that are needed for transformation and truly build
a nation. However, there is a glimmer of hope as the recent End SARs protests in Nigeria in
October 2020 mostly led by the youth indicated the beginnings of revolutionary pressures on
otherwise conservative political class.
President Goodluck Ebele Jonathan should be acknowledged for facilitating a more credible
dialogue of Nigerians „talking to themselves towards building a genuine nation‟. More so,
against the background of pervading insecurity, with rampant cases of armed robbery in the
7
South West, kidnappings in the South East, oil bunkering and piracy in the South – South,
farmer-herdsmen conflict in the Middle-Belt, to religious/internationalised home grown terrorism
in the North East of the country.
It was therefore the case that President Jonathan on October 1, 2013 suddenly announced his
decision to convene a National Conference, and immediately constituted a Presidential Advisory
Committee (PAC) under Dr.Femi Okurounmu as Chairman. Inspite of the initial opposition from
some segments of the Nigerian society, the PAC embarked on a successful six-week tour of the
country to sensitize the citizenry, and this led to a buy-in by many Nigerian. Expectations were
quite high, very early in the life of the conference, clear lines of differences began to manifest
amongst the delegates representing the various geo-political zones in the country.
The National Question and the National Dialogue
At the heart of the National Question then and now is the need for „political re-structuring‟ of the
entity called Nigeria. Stretched further, it is the decision on whether Nigeria should or should not
remain as one entity as inherited from the British colonial administration. This arose from the
dysfunctional character of the Nigerian state, hence the fervent efforts at seeking a solution.
Indeed, Nigerians have severally sought to determine what their organizing principle is as a state
(a nation) of nationalities. Should this just be the struggle for access to oil resources or some
deep attachment to the Nigerian state? (Agbu, 2005, 2015; Olukoshi and Agbu, 1995; Olukoshi,
1996). Answers were sought for problems pertaining to revenue derivation and distribution,
political re-structuring, form of government, indigeneship/settler dichotomy, minority rights,
national security and question of state police, local government autonomy, and rotational
presidency and so on.
The 1999 Constitution in particular was considered inadequate by many and an imposed
document. Arising from the constitutional amendment process of the National Assembly, experts
identified too many contradictions in this constitution. It is believed that the constitution opened
with a blatant lie that it is a covenant of “We the people” of Nigeria that made the constitution,
when indeed, in the absence of a referendum such a constitution cannot be one of and for the
people. There is the over-concentration of power at the centre in the 1999 constitution; it vests
8
too much power in the President, captured in 118 provisions; and there is the subjection of the
exercise of executive power of the state to the executive powers of the central government.
Against this backdrop, several portions of the constitution required amendment. The process of
amending the dysfunctional sections of the constitution has been ongoing, and as at 2015
awaiting Presidential assent. Still demands abound for further amendments and political re-
structuring. In the amendments, some socio-economic rights from Chapter II have been
transferred to Chapter IV and are made justiciable. Criminal immunity has been removed from
the office of the Chief Executives at the Federal and State government levels. Provision is made
for a referendum for the adoption of a draft constitution. Provision is made for the establishment
of Electoral Offenses Commission. Labour, pensions, railway and stamp duties are moved to
concurrent legislative list. There is new provision for Independent candidacy at all levels of
elective political positions, and citizenship by registration is allowed to read “any person who is
or has been married to a citizen of Nigeria…”
This process of constitutional amendments apart, the 2014 National Dialogue was convened and
mandated to discuss everything wrong with Nigeria save for a break-up. It was as close to a
Sovereign National Conference (SNC) as could be. President Jonathan had at the time said that a
section on Referendum had been inserted into the amended constitution. And that this could be
an entry point for adoption of the recommendations from the conference by Nigerians.
The 2014 National Dialogue
Preamble to the National Dialogue
Against the many problems of an obviously sick country, President Goodluck Jonathan initially
set up a high powered committee on the Review of outstanding issues from the constitutional
conferences in 2012 under Justice S. M Belgore. The Belgore Committee was mandated to
examine the relevance and currency of the recommendations of the previous conferences which
were not implemented, draft bills for consideration (where necessary) and propose policy
recommendations for the implementation of these recommendations (The Constitutional
Conference, 2014). Thereafter, the 13-member Presidential Advisory Committee headed by
Senator Femi Okurounmu was inaugurated October 7, 2013 charged with designing the
9
framework for the National Dialogue. The Committee toured 13 cities, 2 in each geo-political
zone and the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) and interacted with more than 7,000 Nigerians. It
had seven (7) Terms of Reference, and subsequently held interactive sessions (13) at the various
geo-political zones between 18thOctober and 13th November 2013 at Akure, Jos, Minna, Calabar,
Benin, Enugu, Umuahia, Lagos, Sokoto, Maiduguri, Bauchi and Kaduna. It later toured the
country for about 8 months drawing up a framework for the conference. It received thousands of
memoranda from individuals, groups and professional associations. The Committee submitted its
Report to the President in December 2013. The President subsequently accepted the Committee‟s
recommendations for the convening of a National Conference.
The National Dialogue held from March 17 to August 14, 2014 when the deliberations ended
proper. It lasted for four and a half months, with some break from August 4 – 11, 2014, due to
the enormous volume of work required to complete the draft resolutions. However, the official
closure of the Dialogue was on the 21 August 2014 when the Conference Report was handed
over to President Jonathan. The Dialogue was the culmination of several years of expectation of
Nigerians for a well organised conference that will find a solution to the „National Question‟.
Some questions puzzling the minds of Nigerians amongst others were - How could the 2014
Dialogue weave its way through the divergent demands for maintenance of the status quo and
the pressures for change through political re-structuring of the Nigerian state? What are the
fundamental issues for Dialogue? Who are the major interest groups in the Nigerian state? What
are the implications of the Dialogue outcome – legal framework and the future of the Nigerian
state? The Conference Secretariat had Eminent Jurist Honourable Justice Idris Legbo Kutigi as
Chairman, Professor A.Bolaji Akinyemi as Vice Chairman, and Dr. (Mrs.) Valerie Janette
Azinge as Secretary.
President Goodluck Jonathan relying on the work done by the Presidential Advisory Committee
(PAC) generated delegates through nominations from stakeholder groups and interest groups.
These interest groups included the Northern elite (initially suspicious, cynical and ambivalent
about the conference, and to some extent in the South West), Southern leaders (quicker to
10
embrace the conference), Political Parties, the States, Youth, Professional groups, Ethnic
nationalities, Faith-based Organizations, Civil society groups, Traditional Rulers, the National
Assembly, Armed Forces and Police, Women, Diaspora Representatives and people living with
disabilities. Still some saw the conference as diversionary aimed at masking poor government
performance, and indeed, intended to herald a second term attempt and/or a stage for eventual
rebellion by the South South Zone.
Eventually, the conference had 492 delegates and 6 conference officials. This translated to 157
delegates from Mr.President and the State Governors – about a third of the total. Whilst the
President had 49 delegates, of which 37 were statesmen; the 36 Governors selected a total of
108, three (3) from each state. The President drew legal strength from Section 5 of the 1999
constitution in convoking the conference as it gave the President the power to do so. A Draft
Rules of Procedure was agreed upon for the Conference. It was initially agreed by delegates to
the National Dialogue that decisions of the conference were to be reached by consensus. Where
consensus was not possible after many attempts, decisions were to be reached by (75 percent)
majority vote of delegates.
The mandate of the conference as was stated by President Jonathan in his inaugural address was
to discuss any issue about Nigeria with particular emphasis on finding solutions to the problems
of national unity and development; come up with strategies to strengthen rather than weaken
Nigeria‟s unity and enhance a participatory and inclusive democratic system of government;
recognize the need to move the country forward and de-emphasize the narrow interests that
define our fault lines; spell out the modalities for the implementation of these resolutions, as well
as suggest any constitutional arrangement they consider best for Nigeria (Azimazi, 2015:16).
A rundown of most of the issues that came up for debate at the conference is captured in the table
below:
Table 1: Issues for Debate
1. National Security and defence
16. Civil Society and the Media
2. Devolution of Power from the central
17. Judiciary and Law Reform
11
government to the federating units
3. Political Restructuring and a
redefinition of the federating units
18. Ethnic Nationalities and Minority
Question
4. Agriculture and food security
19. Transport, Public Works and Infrastructure
– roads, aviation, waterways
5. Resource control and resource
allocation
20. Social Sector and Social Welfare
6. Forms of Government
21. Education and Culture
7. Deepening of Democracy
22. Citizenship
8. Party System and Elections
23. Immigration Matters and Cross-border
Crimes
9. Accountability and Transparency in
Government
24. Energy Crisis
10. Poverty and wealth creation
25. Land holdings and tenure
11. Economic Development
12. Religion and the State
13. Public Service
14. Foreign Policy and Diaspora Matters
15. Corruption and Development
Eventually, fundamental Issues were distilled and articulated in the mandate of the 20
Committees set up by the Conference as follows:
Table 2: Committees of the Conference
Committee on Agriculture and Water Resources
Committee on Citizenship, Immigration and Related Matters
Committee on Civil Society, Labour and Sports
Committee on Devolution of Power
Committee on Economy, Trade and Investment
Committee on Energy
Committee on Environment
Committee on Judiciary, Law, Human Rights and Legal Reform
Committee on Foreign Affairs and Diaspora Matters
Committee on Land Tenure
Committee on National Security
Committee on Political Restructuring and Forms of Government
12
The Committees worked for a period of six weeks and produced Reports which were presented
in the plenary on the basis of which conference took decisions. Conference Chairman,
Honourable Justice Kutigi, speaking on President Jonathan‟s disposition towards the conference
noted that:
Not once did you interfere or dictate to us in the course of this
conference. The only time we tried to consult the President during
the conflict over voting percentages at the very beginning of the
conference we were told that the issue was for us to resolve. At no
time after that did you meet with us or speak to us” (Terhemba,
2014:1).
The President‟s neutral disposition to the conference greatly helped in giving credibility to the
conference and its resolutions. Initially, sectional interests and groups went around with their
own „make-or-mar‟ agenda, and the interests of Nigerians suffered during the debates. Time was
wasted on pettiness and grandstanding until the core issues came up for debate. Debates on core
Committee on Political Parties and Electoral Matters
Committee on Politics and Governance
Committee on Public Finance and Revenue
Committee on Public Service
Committee on Social Sector
Committee on Religion
Committee on Science, Technology and Development
Committee on Transportation
13
issues on Devolution of Powers, true federalism and Derivation/resource control showed selfish
sectional interests and a hate mentality (The Guardian, 2014:14).
A critical analysis of the delegations at the conference would seem to indicate three major
discernable blocs of interests – South West/South East bloc; Minority zones (Middle Belt) and
South South blocs; and the core North. Delegates from the South West and to a lesser extent, the
South East, were eagerly anticipating fundamental changes in the status quo, such as a return to
regionalism and to the parliamentary form of democracy, and the substantial devolution of
powers to the regions or zones. Delegates in the second category, mostly from the minority zones
of the country, while supportive of the conference, were mainly concerned with issues touching
upon their marginalization. Thus, the Middle Belt opposed a return to regionalism fearing that
they may once again, come under the domination of the bigger ethnic nationalities in the zones,
from which state creation had freed them. They infact, wanted more states created for ethnic
minorities still entrapped in core northern states with Hausa-Fulani dominant ethnic majorities.
In addition, they wanted urgent attention paid to the completion of the Ajaokuta Steel Complex.
The South South on its part was focused on the issue of resource control and resource ownership.
The third category consisted of delegates from the core north, they came with a very straight
forward agenda, which is to block any change and ensure the sustenance of the status quo.
The Southeast zone, which has only 5 states, while others have 6 or 7 states, felt that this was not
fair, and demanded an extra state to be at par with others. The Southeast also came to the
conference demanding fiscal federalism, devolution of powers, and a clear distinction between
religion and state and a realistic population census. They demanded a Nigeria that is free and
fair, and insisted that the conference deliberations and decisions be acted upon (Okurounmu,
2014:11). The Conference was expected to probably address these through some form of
consensus.
The resistance to change from the core north was understandable, and indeed, expected. The
status quo clearly places the north in an advantageous position relative to all other sections of the
country. Most of the military rulers who had fashioned out the 1999 constitution were all from
the region, and had erected the structures of state to favour their people especially in the
14
distribution of states and local governments. Furthermore, they had assumed that the north would
always control power at the centre, a consideration that gave rise to making the centre so strong
and the federating units so weak. They had also guaranteed by that constitution, that the north
would have a comfortable majority in the National Assembly, making it near impossible to make
any constitutional changes that would reduce their advantage (Okurounmu, 2014:11).
During conference deliberations on the very important issue of derivation, although 18 percent was
recommended, 5 percent for the development of mineral resources and 5 percent for national
intervention in case of disaster, for the North East, North West and North Central zones; this elicited
disagreements, especially from the three other regions not mentioned. The polemics went on until the
issue was referred back to Mr. President because as stated in the Report:
“allocation to states producing oil (and other resources) conference noted that
assigning percentages for the increase in derivation requires some technical
details and considerations, therefore recommends that Federal Government set up
a „Technical Committee‟ to address it”.
In other words, no final decision was taken on this very contentious issue that is at the heart of
Nigeria‟s fiscal federalism. Although, there were very many moments of anxiety at the
conference like whether President Jonathan had an ulterior motive, what constituted a „majority‟
decision, threats of „walkouts‟, „show-downs‟ and of „secession‟ to relatives across Nigeria‟s
borders, as well as the alleged subterranean attempts to „smuggle‟ in a new constitution into the
Report of the conference, somehow, the delegates managed to navigate through all these, as
Nigerians waited anxiously, but patiently. It must be said that at this stage in the existence of the
Nigerian state, its citizens have developed immense capacity for patiently bearing what many
regard as unusually unbearable.
Decisions of the Conference
The Report of the National Conference was submitted on August 21, 2014 in 22 volumes, and 19
other supporting documents to President Goodluck Jonathan. It had approximately 10,335 pages
and over 600 recommendations. Some of these included reforms in value orientation, moral
attitude, beliefs, inter-personal and inter-group relationships. The reforms also had implications
for the laws that govern Nigeria (Udemebraye, 2014). Many of the conferences‟ conclusions and
recommendations were outstanding, because they were negotiated and agreed upon collectively.
15
They were therefore, majority decisions. Indeed, very few persons would have anticipated the
consensual disposition of the delegates on many of the decisions taken.
Although, some delegates believed that the „draft constitution‟ was surreptitiously introduced
into the conference; this cannot be proven, rather, it appears to be a situation in which a capable
secretariat was able to discern the potentials of the conference and body language of
Mr.President, and as it were, decided to kill two birds with one stone by producing a draft
constitution as a basis for amendments as part of its submissions. The conference actually raised
a Committee of “50 Wisemen” to tackle intractable issues arising from the discussions. It is
instructive that decisions were arrived at on all issues, except the percentage to be allocated for
derivation. This conference could be said to be a conference of the people, and ordinarily should
have greater legitimacy than the military that gave Nigeria the 1999 constitution, which some
groups did not want to see tampered with. It is important to note that the Middle Belt, which
consists of 14 out of the 19 states of the north, dissociated itself from opposition to the „draft
constitution‟.(Terhemba & Tsokar, 2014:1).
Contrary to reports in the media, the conference did not draft a new constitution, but only made
recommendations for some amendments to be done on the document arising from decisions
taken at the conference. Infact, there was no decision taken at this conference that could be said
to be inimical to any part of the country, north or south. A perusal of the packaging and
presentation of existing sections and portions to be amended in the 1999 constitution showed the
veracity of this claim and the immense work undertaken by the secretariat. The draft constitution
fundamentally embodied the decisions of conference in a constitutional format. Further, the
accuracy of the Report from the conference was not in doubt or controverted by any person or
group. The concern, it appears, was that those against the draft constitution were not
psychologically prepared to receive the idea of a new or amended constitution, and this reality
was rather shocking to them.
On delivering the Report of the Conference, the Chairman Justice Idris Kutigi did not ask for
delegates to second the motion moved by the elder statesman Adamu Maina Waziri for adopting
16
the Report, before putting the motion to vote. With Kutigi calling for a voice vote for the
adoption of the main and added motions, the delegates in a spontaneous response assented to the
amendment to the motion, which was consequently renamed “Draft Proposed Amendment to the
1999 Constitution”. This ended the fear over the likelihood of a rancorous conclusion of the
conference. Interestingly, the delegates enthusiastically sang the old national anthem “Nigeria
We Hail Thee….” to commend the consensus and compromise that led to the decisions taken.
Indeed, the old national anthem was recommended by conference to be reinstated. Chief Richard
Akinjide, one of the oldest parliamentarians was called upon by Kutigi to move the motion for
the conference to adopt the “to be amended Report”. This was followed by the call by the
Chairman to 24-year old Yadoma Bukar Mandara, a youth delegate and the youngest conferee to
second the motion (Terhemba & Tsokar, 2014:!).
On the specifics of some of the decisions taken, the conference resolved on the citizenship
question that Chapter III, Section 26(a) of the 1999 constitution should be amended to read „any
person who is or has been married to a citizen of Nigeria”. Further, it recommends in 26(b) that a
bill should be introduced guaranteeing the granting of special immigrant status with full
residential rights to non-Nigerian spouses of citizens of Nigeria who do not wish to acquire
Nigerian citizenship. It noted that there is an overarching need to liberalise the path to
naturalized citizenship.
On Devolution of Powers, while several of the items originally in the Exclusive Legislative list
were retained, some were however, moved to the Concurrent list. Census matters have now been
split into two – Census and National Identification; and Registration of Births and Deaths, which
has now been moved to the Concurrent Legislative List. Copyright matters have also been
moved to the Concurrent List. Concerning the Police, conference recommended that this be
moved from the Exclusive Legislative List to the Concurrent List (The National Conference
2014). A two-tier policing system was proposed such that besides the Federal Police, states with
the resources to establish, fund, and control their own police can do so. It was agreed that police
officers of the ranks of Deputy Superintendent of Police (DSP) and below should be deployed to
their states of origin where they can better relate to the socio-cultural setting. This it is hoped will
make for more effective policing.
17
On Land Tenure matters and national boundaries, the conference recommended that The Land
Use Act should remain in the constitution but be amended to take care of those concerns,
particularly on compensation in section 29 (4) of the Act to read; land owners should determine
the price and value of their land based on open market value.
On the much discussed Political Restructuring and Forms of Government, commenting on
federalism, Conference agreed that federalism denotes a political arrangement in which a country
is made up of component parts otherwise called Federating Units. Thus, in a Federation, political
powers are constitutionally shared between the central government and the federating units.
These powers basically represent the functions of each tier of the federation. It therefore
unanimously resolved that Nigeria shall retain a Federal System of Government. And that the
core elements of the Federation shall be as follows:
i) A federal (central) government with states as the federating units, and
ii) Without prejudice to states constituting the federating units, states that wish to
merge may do so in accordance with the constitution of the Federal Republic of
Nigeria (as amended),
iii) State Houses of Assembly shall be guaranteed by financial autonomy by law.
Pertaining to state creation, the Conference concluded that in the interest of equity, justice and
fairness that there shall be created an additional state for the Southeast Zone; and that all other
requests for State creation should be considered on merit. It subsequently approved criteria for
the creation of new states as follows:
a) Any new state should be economically viable
b) It should have human, natural and material resources
c) It should have a minimum land mass/water mass; and
d) The viability of the existing states(s) should be taken into consideration as well, so as
not to create a situation where new state(s) would leave existing state(s) unviable.
It further decided that state creation should be on the basis of parity between the geo-political
zones to ensure equality of zones. It recommended the creation of additional states in the six (6)
geo-political zones to bring the number of states in each zone to nine (9). This means that 18
18
additional states were recommended to be created. It recommends that the 1999 constitution be
amended to allow for less onerous process for creation of states. Although, this particular
recommendation appears like an overkill on this matter, it however, indicates the divergent
interests, and desires of the selected representatives of Nigerian peoples.
Another very important issue the Conference took a decision on is the issue of Local
Government Administration. Conference noted the alleged abuse of the Local Government
system by state administrations. In tandem with its recommendation under federalism,
conference introduced some necessary safeguards to guarantee the independence of Local
Government Councils and decided that states wishing to create Local Governments may create
them under the jurisdiction of the states and that the number, structure, form and administration
of Local Governments shall be determined by the states. Further, conference recommended that
the Joint Local Government Account be scrapped and in its place the establishment of a State
Revenue Mobilization, Allocation and Fiscal Commission (SRMAFC) with representatives of
Local Governments and a Chairman nominated by the Governor. In addition, the political and
financial independence of Local Government Areas shall be granted by law, State Independent
Electoral Commissions (SIECs) were scrapped and elections into Local Government Councils
shall be conducted by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC). The implications
of these decisions are that there will be no need for states with large numbers of Local
Governments to collect large sums of money from the Federal Government, while others feel
cheated. Secondly, The Joint Account is unnecessary where states now create and manage their
accounts.
On Forms and Content of Government, conference settled for a home-made model of
government that combines attributes of the Parliamentary system that promotes cooperation and
harmony between executive and legislature; and Presidential system, which embodies Principles
of Separation of Powers. It named this the Modified Presidential System. The key elements of
the Modified Presidential System are that the President is recommended to select not more than
18 ministers from six geo-political zones; while in the event of death, incapacitation,
impeachment or resignation, the Vice President shall act as President for a period of ninety (90)
days within which an election to the Office of President shall be held.
19
On Rotation of Powers, conference agreed that the Electoral Act and Constitution of the Federal
Republic of Nigeria (as amended) should provide for the Principle of Zoning and Rotation of
Elective Offices at the federal and state levels on the basis of excellence, equity, gender and
justice. The Office of President was recommended to rotate between the north and the south and
amongst the six (6) geo-political zones. Further, the Office of the Governor shall rotate among
the three (3) Senatorial Districts in the state. And the Office of a Local Government Council
shall rotate within the Local Government Areas.
Religion, another emotive and contentious matter in the Nigerian political environment was
effectively addressed by conference. In consonance with Section 10 of the Nigerian Constitution
of 1999, conference resolved that government at all levels shall not utilize public funds to
sponsor any religious pilgrimages for any category of citizens and government functionaries.
Indeed, conference decided that government shall discontinue the sponsorship of official
government delegations on any pilgrimage.
The immunity in civil and criminal matters as enshrined in section 308 of the constitution was
recommended by conference for removal and relevant cases of corruption and misconduct by
public officers to be investigated by an independent grand jury. The conference even went
further to recommend the „The Nigerian Charter for National Reconciliation and Integration‟.
Article 20(b) of the main conference Report even stated that the right to self-determination by
states as federating units shall be extended to ethnic nationalities within the state. More inspiring
was the recommendation that Nigeria should revert to her old national Anthem “Nigeria We Hail
Thee…”, instead of “Arise O Compatriots”, which according to many embodies the unity, peace
and prosperity aspired for in Nigeria. Indeed, the old anthem evokes more patriotic sentiments
and followership from Nigerians than the present anthem. In addition, the conference
recommended that the Federal Government should focus on tertiary education while state
governments regulate and control secondary education and local governments do the same for
primary education.
These succinct issues presented, not necessarily all of the major decisions taken at the
conference, are evidence of the tremendous amount of work, negotiations and concessions that
20
took place at the conference. From the nature and depth of decisions taken by Conference, the
country indeed, finally took the right step towards improving its unity and growth and building a
nation-state. In line with resolutions of the conference, the Reports were prepared to cover
constitutional issues based on amendments agreed upon by the delegates; policy issues meant for
implementation by the President; and legislative issues earmarked for enactment into the laws by
the National Assembly.
Conclusion: From State to Nation?
It is therefore obvious at this stage that the process of nation-building in Nigeria as elsewhere is
work in progress. By whatever name so called – „dialogue‟ or „conference‟, it was important that
Nigerians stopped dancing around the problem of the „political re-structuring of Nigeria‟ and get
on with the task of creating an environment conducive for the release of the abundant energies of
its peoples. Nigeria as presently politically constituted is stifling, retrogressive and anti-
federalist. Many of the ethnic groups that clamoured for a Sovereign National Conference (SNC)
or National Dialogue as we later saw were calling for nothing less than the legitimacy of the
Nigerian state as constituted. The conference was calculated to have cost about N10 billion (at
the exchange rate of N160 to $1). This appeared to have been money well spent, moreso, when
the country is able to implement many of the decisions of the conference. These decisions were
well articulated and presented in three main volumes by the Conference; The National
Conference 2014: Main Report; The National Conference 2014: DRAFT BILLS; and the
Proposed Amendments to the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, as Amended.
It is germane to re-state that Nigeria was painfully adrift, and courage, foresight and
predisposition were needed to engage and pilot to a logical conclusion a conference aimed at
addressing the „National Question‟ if not for the present, at least, for the sake of the future.
Experience has shown that conflicts are not necessarily caused by „diversity of peoples‟, but
rather the way the diversities are managed (governed) and how they relate to the structure of
power – the way nationalities relate to power in Nigeria is unprogressive and unsustainable. The
powers that be need to change their way of engaging with Nigerian nationalities.
21
Let us remember that a key objective of this conference was for Nigerians to talk to themselves,
and ultimately enhance development in the country. This objective was achieved. Nigeria needed
a truly People’s Constitution, and a new nation. Again, President Goodluck Jonathan deserves to
be commended for taking the courageous step needed in initiating this action. Since the decision
to institute a National Conference is sensitive and long-standing, and we have an idea of the
likely position of older generations of Nigerians and of the political elite from previous
conferences; the government and younger elements at the National Assembly will do well by
listening more to the youth from the different parts of the country, than the older generation of
Nigerians many of whom find it difficult to change and embrace a new Nigeria.
The decisions produced from this conference should ideally be subjected to a referendum of the
peoples of Nigeria. This is because sovereignty really belongs to the people, and against the
backdrop of our not too credible political processes and elections, ensuring legitimacy of the
outcome of this conference is only sure through a referendum. Indeed, Section 14 of the 1999
constitution expressly states that sovereignty belongs to the people and that each organ of
government derives its legitimacy from the people. However, the problem is that there is no
provision for a referendum in the subsisting 1999 constitution. Nevertheless, Section 9 of the
1999 constitution provides that (1) The National Assembly may, subject to the provision of this
section; alter any of the provisions of this constitution.
It was just two days on 27 May, 2014, before President Jonathan was to hand over power to
General Muhammadu Buhari who won the 2015 Presidential elections on the platform of an
opposition party – the All Progressives Party (APC) that he submitted the Report of the
conference to the Senate and urged the Upper House to act on the document. He drew the
attention of the Senate to the fact that the Report had been deliberated upon and approved for
implementation by the Federal Executive Council (FEC) at its meeting of March 18, 2014
(Azimazi and Onochie, 2015:6). Addressing the Senate, the President reiterated that the
recommendations of the conference on implementation modalities of the resolutions are
contained in Chapter Six of the Report, while the resolutions are classified into three broad
categories including constitutional, legal and policy issues. The Report indicated the nature of
22
the actions to be taken, and the objectives to be achieved, as well as the agency that will execute.
However, there were doubts whether the then newly inaugurated APC government under
Muhammadu Buhari will go ahead and implement the resolutions of the conference. So far, the
government has kept silent on the Conference Report and pretended that it never took place. It
was this same party (now government) that campaigned on the imperative for political re-
structuring in Nigeria. This is because the President‟s political base, the north, may continue to
prefer an all-powerful central government that will be to their advantage. This has been the bane
of Nigerian federalism. In a working democracy, citizens must ensure that resolutions of
conferences like this are not just made, but implemented. Therefore, the Report of this
conference cannot be left in the hands of the Government alone; citizens should organize and
insist that the resolutions of this conference be implemented.
Indeed, the Executive and the National Assembly, it appears reconciled after some disagreement
to have the 4th amendments to the 1999 constitution signed into law after reaching agreements on
certain contentious sections of the constitution. All things being equal, the National Assembly,
logically cannot, but accept the wishes of the people, where real sovereignty lies. The most
credible conference in our present circumstance is one that has sovereign powers to transform the
current pseudo-federal constitution to a truly federal constitution that embodies the wishes of
Nigerian peoples. This will make for a better organized entity worthy to be called a nation in no
distant time. Indeed, the National Conference 2014 in Nigeria was able to bring Nigerians
together and provided a platform that enabled them discuss extensively those issues that bothered
them.
Progress is often the result of change arising from healthy debates, and the conference provided
this; the fact that there was no consensus on a few issues could not reasonably be said to have
taken anything away from the successes achieved at the conference. Whilst several lessons
could be learned from the Nigerian experience of convoking this conference, a major lesson from
the conference is that Nigerians, and indeed - other politically troubled countries, should
continue to dialogue and seek solutions to their problems through dialoguing with each other.
Those who thought that the conference would end in fiasco were gravely disappointed, as day
23
after day, the conference resolved thorny issues, with the conferees ending the dialogue by
hugging each other. Great pains were taken in this chapter to have the genesis, processes,
dynamics and resolutions of this conference tracked, analyzed and documented, as a way of
pointing forward a clearer and more sustainable path to transformation in Nigeria and achieving
the nation-state project. The day the Nigerian political elite begin to use reason and not
sentiments in engaging themselves on national issues, that day the contours of a great nation
would have been formed.
References
Agbu Osita (1996), „Political opposition and democratic transitions in Nigeria (1985 – 1995),
Adebayo O. Olukoshi (ed.), The politics of opposition in contemporary Africa ,The Nordic
Africa Institute, Uppsala.
Azimazi Momoh Jimoh and Bridget Chiedu Onochie (2015), „Jonathan transmits confab report
to Senate, urges action‟, The Guardian, 28 May, p.16.
Daka Terhemba and Karis Tsokar (2014), “Southern N‟Central, M‟Belt confab delegates back
draft constitution”, The Guardian (Lagos), 4 August, p.1.
Daka Terhemba et.al 2014), „National confab report goes to Council of States, National
Assembly‟, The Guardian (Lagos), 22 August, p.1.
Esajere Akpo (2015), „Post-election agenda: The place of 2014 National Conference
recommendations in fighting corruption‟, The Guardian (Lagos), 9 March, p.16.
Koko L. Jacques (2008), National Conference as a strategy for conflict transformation and
peacemaking: The legacy of the Republic of Benin model, London, Adonis and Abbey
Publishers.
Mon Rommy (2015), „Conference: participation to what end‟, The Guardian (Lagos), 15 May.
Okurounmu Femi (2014), After National Conference, whither the nation, Being Lecture Address
delivered at the Annual Luncheon of the Lagos branch of the Government College, Ibadan Old
Boys Association (GCIOBA), 8 June, P.1.
Olukoshi Adebayo and Osita Agbu, „The deepening crisis of Nigerian federalism and the future
of the nation state‟, Liiisa Laakso and A.Olukoshi (eds), Challenges to the nation-state (The
Nordic Africa Institute, Uppsala, 1995).
Osita Agbu (2015), Elections and governance in Nigeria’s fourth republic, CODESRIA, Dakar.
24
Osita Agbu (2005) „Rights and crisis of governance in Nigeria: A potential terrain for
constructing social consensus‟, The Constitution, Lagos, Centre for Constitutionalism and
Demilitarization (CENCOD).
Otubanjo Femi (2015), „We need a separation clause‟, The Guardian (Lagos), 23 June, p.10.
The Conference Report 2014: main report, Federal Government of Nigeria, 2015, p.17.
The Guardian (Lagos) (2014), „Editorial – National Conference: truth in retreat‟, 23 July, p.14.
Udumebraye John (2014), “Jonathan, national conference and transformation”, The Guardian
(Lagos), 1 September.