Thursday, 28th March 2024
To guardian.ng
Search
Breaking News:

Before we play the federal character card (2) 

By Obaje Sunday
08 October 2015   |   12:19 am
THIS man’s dilemma paints a picture of the challenge with the practice of federal character which is that on what premise can we situate it such that the coverage it provides truly and effectively provides adequate cover for every represented unit within the Nigerian federation? If, for instance, there are 60 positions for which the President must make appointments and he must reflect federal character, should he choose to define federal character along regional lines then the South East with predominantly Igbos would get 10 appointments.
President Muhammadu Buhari

President Muhammadu Buhari

Continued from yesterday
THIS man’s dilemma paints a picture of the challenge with the practice of federal character which is that on what premise can we situate it such that the coverage it provides truly and effectively provides adequate cover for every represented unit within the Nigerian federation? If, for instance, there are 60 positions for which the President must make appointments and he must reflect federal character, should he choose to define federal character along regional lines then the South East with predominantly Igbos would get 10 appointments.

Likewise the South West with Yorubas would get 10 and the South South with about 40 different ethnic nationalities would also get another 10 thus bringing it to a total of 30 appointments for the southern region. This then leaves the remaining 30 to be jostled for by the about 250 different ethnic nationalities in the northern region. Seemingly a balance of 30 appointments apiece is struck here along regional lines.

However, itemising the appointments if these appointments were spread across the constituent ethnic nationalities in these regions would reveal a great imbalance. While the Igbos and Yorubas would have 10 appointments apiece, other ethnic nationalities in other geopolitical zones would be lucky to have just one, all things being equal. Thus, would it be a reflection of federal character if while other ethnic nationalities are without a single allotment, some appear to have a surplus? Is there any plausible justification? Does the ‘‘misfortune’’ of geopolitical categorisation and numerical inferiority make any constituent ethnicity less Nigerian and less entitled to or deserving of the Nigerian ‘‘largesse?’’

Likewise, if there are 300 positions to be filled and the president considers federal character along ethnic representation as opposed to regional balancing, would it be acceptable for the North having 250 ethnic nationalities to be given 250 positions or 200 for fairness sake and the South given 100 with the South East and South West as zones receiving relatively lesser allotment on account of their ethnic homogeneity? More critically, does this strike a sense of balance?

Again, we merrygo-round back to the same question; which is more critical or effective in defining and providing an adequate national coverage for the average Nigerian, region or ethnic identity? And as such, which premise provides a more credible basis for the practice of federal character? Regional balancing or ethnic representation? This dilemma reveals an inherent deficiency in the federal character clause as an effective approach to providing adequate coverage and representation for every constituent element of the Nigerian whole.

Representation of and for every Nigerian must be such that the state performs its inalienable duties to every bonafide Nigerian or legal resident, not on the basis of ethnicity or region but simply on the premise of citizenship and settlership, in the case of expatriates. Anything short of this is nothing but a recipe for discord, dissonance and anarchy that compromises the Nigerian enterprise.

This suggests that the touted solution provided by the federal character is in itself an elaborate illusion. While the idea might seem genius, in practice, it is anything but when one puts a fine hair comb to it. If for the purpose of providing representation for certain interests, appointments are made on the basis of region, how does the appointment of a Fulani Moslem man from Kano provide representation for an Idoma Christian man from Benue simply because of same geographical classification? And if to satisfy and pacify ethnic sentiments, where would we ever find enough positions to go round? In which case, can we truly eliminate the perception of marginalisation via the federal character practice? Or is marginalisation okay so far as it only affects the so called ‘‘minority ethnic group?’’

Does this, therefore, mean that ethnic numerical superiority confers a somewhat ‘‘purer breed’’ status on individual members of the larger ethnic blocks that somehow means the Hausas, Yorubas and Igbos are more Nigerian and thus more equal than the rest of us and as a result, more entitled? And if this be the case, has the arrangement been accepted by the ‘‘lesser ethnic blocks?’’ Have they stopped complaining of marginalisation or should their numerical inferiority suffice to provide an unwritten incentive for them to just hold their peace and tag along and be grateful for any crumbs mother Nigeria deems fit to throw at them? Can we in all fairness assert that the federal character clause does indeed provide the requisite coverage and representation of all and sundry? These are critical questions we must ask and seek honest answers to.

Methinks that while our ethnic identities give vital characterisation to our sense of individual identity and of belonging, and as such a core part of our being, at least on a social level, it however, presents a very dicey and uncertain, even volatile premise for the clamour for representation on a national front.

Representation of and for every Nigerian must be such that the state performs its inalienable duties to every bonafide Nigerian or legal resident, not on the basis of ethnicity or region but simply on the premise of citizenship and settlership, in the case of expatriates. Anything short of this is nothing but a recipe for discord, dissonance and anarchy that compromises the Nigerian enterprise.

A patched fabric of individual ethnic consciousness and regional allegiance has too many fault lines and frailties and would surely be compromised. One way or the other we must find a way to forge Nigeria into a melting point of all and sundry to achieve the requisite seamlessness and oneness necessary to establish common cause, consensus of purpose and aggregation of efforts, resources, initiatives and strategies to birth a common future of gain and glory for one and for all.
• Concluded.
• Obaje is a philosophical theorist, a writer, public speaker and public affairs analyst.

0 Comments