National conference: We’re not afraid of Nigeria’s break-up – Northern elders • National Assembly backs Jonathan
Prof. Ango Abdullahi
By The Punch.
The Northern Elders Forum has said the
North is not afraid of the break-up of Nigeria if its citizens vote for
it at the end of any conference.
The spokesman for the forum, Prof.
Ango Abdullahi, said this in a telephone interview with one of our
correspondents, in Abuja, on Wednesday.
He was commenting on the national dialogue advisory
committee set up on Tuesday by President Goodluck Jonathan.
Abdullahi,who said he saw nothing wrong
with Nigerians sitting down to discuss their problems, explained that contrary
to the views held in certain quarters, northerners were not opposed to any form
of dialogue in whatever form or shape.
He said, “There is no problem with
Nigerians sitting down to discuss their problems whether in the form of
dialogue, whether in a form of conference, whether in the form of a meeting,
even in the form of a Sovereign National Conference.
His view on SNC is however not in tandem with
that of the foremost Northern socio-cultural organisation, the Arewa
Consultative Forum, which on Tuesday said it would not support any form of dialogue
termed sovereign.
However, Abdullahi, a former
vice-chancellor of the Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, said, “The SNC
that people are advocating; people are saying that it is a way for Nigeria to
break up. This shouldn’t be a problem. Even in Britain today, Scotland is still
agitating to opt out of the United Kingdom; even the Northern Island
problem is still there.
“In Spain, there are separatist groups agitating
for independence. Even recently, we had in the Soviet Union and it
has broken up into 11 different countries.
“India was created in 1948, in one year there was
Pakistan, in another year there was Bangladesh. So why shouldn’t it happen in
Nigeria if they (advocates of SNC) believe this is the way to go?
“We don’t mind any conference no matter the
outcome. I don’t think it should worry any Nigerian.”
The former VC said the earlier
Nigerians accepted that Nigeria’s ethnic nationalities could never dissolve
into one, the better.
He stated that it was left for
Nigerians to make something good out of the almagamation of Nigeria
by Britain in 1914.
Abdullahi also noted that it was probably out of
the desire to make something out of the situation that led to the several
conferences that had been held since 1914.
He, however, expressed fears that the current
attempt by the Jonathan administration to hold another conference when
the reports of previous ones had not been implemented was suspicious.
The NEF spokesman said the country had held
constitutional conferences in 1976, 1978, 1988, 1994/1995 and 2005.
He stated, “In each of these conferences, there
have been voluminous reports on what is the problem with Nigeria. It is not for
lack of information on the issues at stake.”
Abdullahi said that the country could still
gain from the reports of past constitutional conferences.
He added, “When you look at it from this point of
view, those who believe that Nigeria’s time is being wasted or that these are
diversionary tactics have a point.
“Because this is what (President Olusegun)
Obasanjo tried to do when he was looking for a third term and he thought
that he wouldn’t get it through another means except through constituting a
constitutional conference.”
National Assembly backs conference
The Chairman of the Senate Committee on
Information, Media and Public Affairs, Senator Eyinnaya Abaribe, in an
SMS to one of our correspondents in Abuja, said, “The
Senate supports the President in his choice of the members of the committee.”
The House of Representatives also welcomed
the committee and its membership, saying that Nigerians were entitled to
freedom of expression.
However, it clarified that whenever a
constitutional matter cropped up in the course of discussions at the
conference, it should be referred to the National Assembly.
The Deputy Leader of the House, Mr. Leo Ogor, who
spoke to The PUNCH in Abuja, explained that the National Assembly
remained the legally constituted body to resolve any constitutional issues in
the country.
Ogor added, “We are the true representatives of
the people. That is why constitutional matters must be left to the National
Assembly to handle.
“But, the constitution (1999) guarantees freedom
of expression and association. On that score, the conference is a welcome
development; to give people the opportunity to talk and share ideas.”
Project Nigeria, two other groups kick
The Project Nigeria Conscientious
Group however questioned the rationale behind the appointment of Senator
Femi Okurounmu as the committee chairman.
As the group kicked, two others faulted the composition
of the committee, saying it was not representative.
The PNCG, in its reaction on Wednesday, said that
appointing Okurounmu as chairman of the committee, might amount to an
embarrassment to Nwabueze.
The Secretary-General of the group, Mr.
Wale Okunniyi, told one of our correspondents on the telephone
that if the Federal Government had consulted well, Nwabueze ought to been
made the head of the committee.
Okunniyi said, “If they had consulted,
Prof. Nwabueze should be the chair of the committee. If he has to play a
role in the committee, he has to be the chair.
“Though Okurounmu is emminently qualified and he
is our own, he understands the issues. However when both Okurounmu and Nwabueze
are under the same roof to discuss the issue of national question, you know
what is right.
“So if that is not intended to embarrass
Nwabueze, then you know what is right and what is right in this case is that
Nwabueze should preside over the discussion.”
He said despite the development, Nwabueze,
would not reject the appointment as a member of the committee.
He added that the Senior Advocate of Nigeria ,
who is still abroad, might not return to the country until after the
swearing-in of the members of the committee.
“Prof. Nwabueze is scheduled to
return to the country on the 11 but the swearing-in is to take place on the
7,” Okunniyi added.
He stated that the PNCG which is led by
Nwabueze had done “the most profound research” on the national conference,
adding that it already had five models of how it could be conducted.
Okunniyi added, “Project Nigeria Conscientious
Group is the body that has done the most profound research on the
national question in the last two years. The group has come up with five models
with which you can conduct a national conference within the ambit of the
existing law. We don’t intend to rock the boat. We are not quarelling
with Okurounmu, he is our own, he understands the issue; he is qualified
but when you put both of them in one room, Nwabueze must take precedence.
“In the actual conference, he should chair it
because he understands the issues better. If it must
hold, Nwabueze is the most authoritative person that can chair it.
“This is good because we have to do damage
control. If they had consulted us, we would have told them what to do. We
want this thing to succeed and we are going to make sacrifice for it to
succeed. We are not going to criticise them too much; we are going to encourage
them.
A member of the committee, Col. Tony Nyiam
(retd), however, said they would take the assignment with the
highest sense of responsibility.
“This is not the time to talk. It is the time to
work. We know that we have a very important responsibility before us. We pray
that Nigerians will judge us based on our work,” he said.
Nyiam, who was part of an attempt to overthrow
Gen. Ibrahim Babangida’s regime, added that he was glad to be a part of those
planning the national dialogue under a civilian government.
He said there was the need for Nigerians to
determine how they want to co-exist and to encourage the country’s diversity
and promote its unity.
The Director, CCM of the University of Jos, Prof.
Audu Gambo, and the Executive Director, Christian Foundation for
Social Justice and Equity, Mr. Joseph Sangosanya, both faulted the
composition of the advisory committee.
Gambo and Sangosanya, in separate interviews with
one of our correspondents on Wednesday, said though the idea
of a national dialogue was a welcome development, it should be done in such a
manner as not to raise any suspicion about the intention of government.
Comments