Follow Us on Google
By Simeon Mpamugoh
A coalition of civil society organisations, (CSO), OneVoice, says Nigeria should be restructured on a step-by-step process.
At a media roundtable organised in collaboration with Human Rights Law Service (HURILAWS) and supported by National Endowment for Democracy (NED) held recently in Lagos, the group said that certain items on exclusive legislative list of the Federal Government guaranteed by the 1999 Constitution should be transferred to the states.
These, according to the group, included prisons, police, railways, fingerprints, identification, criminal records as well as the road safety corps.
Adedeji Adeleye, chairman, OneVoice media committee, in a paper, entitled: ‘Emerging trends from the clamour for restructuring in Nigeria,’ said that devolution of power to the federating states would have paved the way to rework the country for greater efficiency and ultimately lead to economic development and growth.
The group criticised the lawmakers for being selective on the 34 items slated for amendment, describing their action as self-serving and not in the national interest.
It blamed prolonged military rule from 1966 to 1979, and 1984 to 1999 for the country’s woes.
Adeleye noted: “Nigerians were forced to accept the authoritarian order of a very strong centre and very weak states, whereby the states now go cap in hand to receive hand-outs from Abuja in form of revenue allocation.
He expressed the need for any Nigerian citizen of any origin – Igbo, Hausa-Fulani or Yoruba – residing in any part of the country to see himself as an indigene of such areas whether or not they understood the customs and traditions of their local surroundings.
Executive Director, Centre for Constitutional Governance (CCG), Dr. Balogun Adewale, observed that what Nigerians were demanding by way of restructuring was a situation that would perfect the unity of the country. He noted that restructuring was not secession.
Senior Legal/programme Officer, Human Rights Law Service (HURILAWS), Collins Okeke, noted that there was no difference between devolution of powers and restructuring.
He expressed disappointment with the activities of the National Assembly, insisting that what was at the heart of the entire restiveness around the country was the issue of devolution of powers.
Approaching the issue from a legal viewpoint, Okeke observed that there were some powers the federal government could easily give to states to begin the process of devolution, which included the issue of drivers’ licence.
Calling that the issue be brought back before the floor of the National Assembly, Barrister Okeke warned: “If they miss this opportunity, it will be difficult for them to do something about it.”
He noted that the National Assembly was spending a lot of money but doing very little. “Since the time of former senate president, David Mark, the National Assembly has been appropriating almost N1billion every four years on constitutional alterations.
“If it is put into context, the figure hovers around N8billion and we have not made any progress and considering the amount already spent on the alteration, it would have been better to have an entirely new constitution.
“The National Assembly can go ahead to draw up a fresh constitution if they so wish, but this whole idea of spending N1billion every four-year just to alter sections of the constitution is very ridiculous.”
While allaying fear in some quarters that governors would misuse state police, National coordinator, Network on Police Reform In Nigeria (NOPRIN) Okechukwu Nwanguma said that their fears were normal.
He expressed the need for more informed debate on state police “so that we can have an agreement based on information on the whole dimensions of state police. What we see now is outright dismissal of the idea.“
He said that the civil society thought that that as a federal state, it would be consistent with federalism for federating units to have their own police.
He submitted that what was needed was for allowance to be given to states that could fund their own police, but assuaged the fears about control of states police by governors.
“There should be certain mechanisms that should be put in place – independent, external oversight – to deal with issues of indiscipline and professional misconduct.
“The state police are not going to be accountable only to the governors but also to the law and citizens through the parliament. Certain structures that would be put in place, such as Civilian Review Board, can address conflicts against the police.
“The approval of state police doesn’t mean that we will abrogate the national police. They will exist side by side. In America, every state has its own police existing side by side with Federal Investigation Bureau, (FIB), which is the central police,” Nwanguma opined.
