www.yesneko.com

Fajuyi: Cultivating fellow feeling beyond ethnic boundary

By

Harry Akande

IT is not particularly gratifying that we are still talking about a handshake across the Niger, when we are actually supposed to have advanced beyond that to a lovely hug. But that is the reality of the Nigerian political condition and there is not too much time left for us to encourage ourselves to pursue an honest evaluation and proceed to secure the very oneness of our purpose as a nation under God.

Never in the history of our people has the need for a new vision been so desperately needed as today with the celebration of the life of our distinguished hero, Lt.-Col. Adekunle Fajuyi.

Col. Fajuyi joined and served meritoriously in a representative army and died in the hands of an unrepresentative army. The distinction between 'a representative army' and 'unrepresentative army' will be made clear as we go along. A 'representative army' is that which represents all interest groups within .

Col. Fajuyi's display of valour, professionalism and fellow feeling is legendary; it is a lesson for us all. It should be an object lesson for today's officers: that a professional military career should be a life without reproach, especially as officers, today, in the Nigerian armed forces, are caricatured in the Oputa commission of enquiry into human rights violation in Nigeria. These qualities, I am sure, have been well demonstrated in the book.

My responsibility is not to undertake another review of the book but to use the occasion to bare my mind on some of the vexing issues of today. I shall be speaking under the rubric, 'Vision for Nigerians'.

There is no Nigerian who cannot claim some affinity with a nationality group, like the people of the United States of America where the hyphenated nationality is reversed. We are all hyphenated Nigerians and this should be encouraged. We have Igbo-Nigerians, Yoruba-Nigerians, Kanuri- Nigerians, Edo-Nigerians, Hausa/Fulani-Nigerians, Ijaw-Nigerians and so on. It is how we use it to improve the ethnic nationality and the wider nationality that is crucial to the democratic development of Nigeria. Even with the British that colonised us, there is a time when one is Scot and one is Brit; unfortunately British colonialism never taught us to hold both identities.

There is no major town in the U.S. where you'll not find community centres associated with one nationality group or the other. We read of French-American, Polish-American, African-American and Portuguese-American. In the area where I live in the U.S., the Polish-American community celebrates the contribution of the Polish-Americans to the U.S. They use their power to ensure the development of Poland and other Eastern European countries such as the recent entry of these countries into the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO).

Those of us who live in a democracy with a long history of group life should be given some

visit us at www.yesneko.com www.yesneko.com

recognition in the development of democracy in Nigeria. I have been toying in my mind with the answer to the question: Why can't the Nigerian-American do for Nigeria what the Polish-American and other Jewish-American can do for Poland or for Israel? I shall use another forum to advance the argument for Absentee Ballot For Nigerians Abroad, which I have spent the last year advocating in America and Europe as one way Nigerians in diaspora can contribute to the democratic development of Nigeria.

The life and death of our brother, Col. Fajuyi, remind us of the 'representative character' of the Nigerian army, which we lost since 1966. For democracy to survive now and in the future, Nigeria must reclaim the lost glory in a Representative Army. This is the greatest tribute we can ever pay to Col. Fajuyi.

It is insightful that the last military posting of our hero, Col. Fajuyi, was at . He was in the midst of the Igbo-Nigerians as the Commander of the 1st Battalion at Enugu in 1964. He was due to hand over this battalion to Lt.-Col. on January 15,1966 when the first coup occurred. This was the 'representative character' of the army that I am referring to, where officers were deployed in a representative manner.

Here comes the accident of history or mere coincidence! Our brother, Col. Fajuyi, died in the hands of 'an unrepresentative army' still believing in the tradition that he was in 'a representative army'. He, a Yorubaman, died in defence of an Igboman in the Nigerian army who was his guest in , the heartland of the Yoruba-Nigerian. What lesson do we learn from this? The principal lesson here is that we are being compelled by the act of great omission of the Nigerian State, to remember a man who truly exemplified the pan-Nigerian vision on a regional platform.

Mr. Chairman, if there is any hard lesson that we have learnt, it is that we should return the Nigerian army to its pre-coup 'representative character'. What Nigerians lost as a result of the absence of these values are espirit-de-corps, and professionalism ñ virtues that were exemplified by Col. Fajuyi and Ironsi. The lesson from the account in the book titled: 'Tale of June 12', written by Professor Omo Omoruyi, is that the 'unrepresentable character' of the Nigerian army led to many acts of human rights violations.

The lesson that we must learn from the death of Col. Fajuyi and General Ironsi is that Nigeria must resolve the 'politics of the armed forces' as a condition for ensuring a democratic order. This is in part what Senator Abraham Adesanya will call 'Restructuring'.

We cannot discuss Nigeria's political problems in general and the 'politics of the armed forces' in particular today without the 'politics of oil'. We can only ignore these two issues to our peril.

Mr. Chairman, may I refer you to a similar reflection by General David Ejoor, a former Chief of Army Staff. In General David Ejoor's memoir, he was very definite about the relationship between the 'control of the armed forces' and the 'control of the oil resources'.

The question that needs answering is: Who controls both? Who actually controls both? This is a question for all to ponder over. It is debatable.

Any serious discussion of who would be leaders of Nigeria would be meaningless, if such a discussion were not based on the fundamental restructuring of the armed forces and the oil sector. We in this part of the country failed to do this in the past and it would appear we are paying lukewarm attention to it today.

Mr. Chairman, we have not been able to understand the relationship among these three variables: the 'armed forces', the 'oil resources' and the 'leadership of Nigeria'. We cannot deal with the three

visit us at www.yesneko.com www.yesneko.com

variables in isolation. This is why I am baring my mind, again, on the complex issue of Resource Control.

My prescription for the resolution of the 'politics of the armed forces' is the same prescription I am putting forward for the resolution of the 'politics of oil'. To understand 'Resource Control', an issue now raging in the country, we are torn between the old solution called the 'derivation' formula and the frightening one called 'self-determination' or the 'confederation' solution.

Under the system of revenue allocation via the derivation principle, the states in the oil producing areas want a return to a system of revenue allocation when the resources of the country were mainly agricultural products such as cocoa, groundnut and palm oil, etc. This system will not work.

Those who are advocating for the resolution of the matter on the principle of ownership and return to a true federalism are held suspect that the end could lead to a break up of Nigeria as a corporate entity. I call this group the 'pure federalists'. Of course, the President has been quick to call them "secessionists-in-the making" and to remind Nigerians that 'resource control' led to the civil war in the past.

These polar positions between the 'agitators for an enhanced derivation formula' and the 'agitators for self-determination or ownership idea' would only confuse the already charged atmosphere. We need a new approach to the 'politics of oil'. We need to introduce new vocabularies to the debate without violating the Constitution and without introducing any elements of fear as to the motive or intention of anyone.

The opportunity of this public presentation of a book on this esteemed and true Nigerian, who died in defence of Nigeria's corporate entity, should be used to explore new vistas. This is what I'd like to achieve today with the hope that our people can lead other Nigerians to lower the rhetoric on the matter.

My proposed solution is a business solution not a political one. After all, I am now a businessman in politics.

I am proposing a new concept of Shareholders to include the states in the area of oil production. This means a Joint Partnership between the Federal Government and the states in the area of production. There is nothing new in this approach as the Vehicle Assembly plants in various parts of the country had shares distributed to adjoining states. Why can't the Federal Government assign some shares in the oil companies to the various states in the Niger-Delta? Would this be in violation of the Constitution? I don't think so! Would this make the youth and the people and the government of the oil producing areas reassess their relationship and attitude towards the oil companies? Definitely, yes. Is this not a better option than the resort to court for what is essentially a political issue?

If the Federal Government agrees to share its holdings in the oil industry with the oil producing states, the people of the oil producing areas are likely to see the oil industry as their own. They are likely to see this as accruing to them not through the Federal Government but through their states. They are likely to realise more money from this policy than from the present derivation arrangement. This arrangement is likely to bring about peace in the oil producing areas, as the youths would not be abducting the oil workers, they would have no need to destroy the oil and gas pipelines in an industry in which they are part owners. This is a business solution. The policy would not face any constitutional hurdles.

We learnt that pipeline vandalisation of refined petroleum products had caused the NNPC a net loss of more than N4 billion last year and had claimed more than 2,000 lives and destroyed property

visit us at www.yesneko.com www.yesneko.com

worth billions of naira in the oil rich Niger Delta between 1998 and 2000. Incidents of vandalisation of petroleum pipelines have been on the increase in recent years. One of the worst cases was recorded in Jesse community in 1998 in Delta State where scores of people were burnt beyond recognition after a vandalised pipeline went into flames. The military and the police engaged in protecting these pipelines and oil installations should be deployed in more productive work like construction of roads, bridges and farming, etc. as it is done in the civilised world.

I am not unaware of the plan of the states in the oil producing areas to form companies to exploit oil; but this would be too expensive for the states concerned. The existing redistribution of shares under the joint partnership with the existing companies would be the most viable policy option to any other yet advocated in the country by the people in the oil producing areas. Making the oil producing states Shareholders is also superior to the direct development option such as the Niger- Delta Development Commission (NNDC) advocated by the Federal Government, which is colonial in style.

As this arrangement derives from the vehicle industry, it should also apply to other federal owned establishments as the ports. There is no reason why the Lagos State Government, for example, should not be a shareholder in the ownership of the Lagos Ports. Neither should there be any reason why the Niger State Government should not be shareholder in the hydro electric projects and dams in their states.

Let me attempt a definition of the notion Restructuring in a Plural Society like Nigeria. Restructuring to me means the conscious act of the political class to make a case for all groups to be Shareholders in a poly-ethnic Nigeria.

The inability to provide for all groups in Nigeria from the position of equality of groups irrespective of the size, is a problem afflicting the country since 1900. It was complicated by the 'politics of armed forces', the 'politics of oil' and the 'politics of who rules' in terms of national leadership. The only way to handle this is to develop Restructuring as a Vision for the country. We should all be in the leadership of developing such a vision for Nigeria.

As the scripture says, people without vision perish; this is the problem with Nigeria since independence. We do not want to perish. We as Nigerians in the past have been found wanting in the area of a National Vision. What we called vision has been too restrictive, too narrow and too ethnic-based in anticipation of the imminent break-up of Nigeria. This is a contingency plan and not a vision. Instead of making contingency plan a vision, we Nigerians should cultivate a National Vision. To this end, the proposed plan for a National Conference should be strongly supported by all.

To borrow the words of Mike Leavitt, a famous American politician, 'there is a time in the life of every problem when it is big enough to see, yet small enough to solve'. I believe that time is here regarding the inter-group relationship between the Igbo and the Yoruba. Think about it, there is no way Nigeria will not survive if we both discard our differences and embrace a common line of action. There is no way this action will not soar away from the current morass and state of near- ruination, if those two crucial legs are standing together.

And there is no point for others in the Nigerian nation to be suspicious, because it is my deep- seated conviction that such a unity will surely have an ultimate positive multiplier effect on the entire federation. But first, our leaders have to get down to business to cross the T's and dot the I's. What are the significant issues bothering both the Igbo and Yoruba and how do these affect the entire nation?

And because Igbo-Yoruba issues are not by far the only crucial matters to be resolved in Nigeria, the idea of a Sovereign National Conference - or whatever name we call it as long as its decisions

visit us at www.yesneko.com www.yesneko.com

are not tampered with - seems to me to be imperative. The procedure for amending the Constitution is not easily attainable, thus the National Conference provides a more easily attainable alternative. This is one bone we all have to continue to pick with the current civilian leadership of Nigeria. Those who say we cannot have a National Conference are only hiding under a smokescreen. Some of them fear that Nigeria may disintegrate from such an exercise. I do not think so. What I believe is that a country, at this time and age, cannot be forced on any group of people. To do so would be tantamount to contemporary slavery. Therefore, all the groups in Nigeria have to be encouraged to freely subscribe to the idea of a united Nigeria.

The political position of INEC vis-a-vis registration of new parties and independent candidature have become a burning issue in Nigerian politics of recent. So far, there is no Electoral Act of the National Assembly, and consequently INEC's present powers in relation to registration of political parties and associations are those enshrined under Section 222-229 of the Constitution. INEC does not have the powers at the moment, to regulate or organise political parties, since the Constitution has not vested it with such powers.

I just wonder if Nigerians have given thought to the implications of Decree No. 63 of 1998, and the purported supervision of political parties now being conducted by INEC even before the INEC bill before the National Assembly is passed into law. This is a subject for discussion another day, another time.

I stand here as a fervent advocate of one Nigeria. But I will respect the views of those that differ with me and hope that we resolve our differences peacefully. Without a doubt, the strength of this country can be found, in part, in its size. Even the kind of international clout and leverage that we can aspire to is essentially due to that size-factor.

It is time we examine our various ethnic agenda in terms of the Nigerian agenda. The life of Col. Fajuyi teaches us that we should cultivate a fellow feeling beyond our ethnic boundary; it teaches us to get rid of the past if we, as Nigerians, want to move forward and develop a Nigerian Vision. Above all, the life of Col. Fajuyi teaches us that we should be in the forefront in tackling the two neglected issues, the 'politics of the armed forces' and the 'politics of oil'.

The Afenifere, Ohanaeze, Arewa and other political groups should consider the points made here as my contribution as a leader in the All Peoples Party (APP) to the search for a new way of looking at the Nigerian problem.

Being text of a paper presented by Chief Harry Akande, Chairman, Board of Trustees, APP, at the launch of a book on late Lt-Col. Adekunle Fajuyi.

visit us at www.yesneko.com