Guardian

Professor Ben Nwabueze, chairman of The Patriots, a group of eminent persons in Nigeria, and a member, Chief Solomon Adun Asemota (SAN), spoke on the state of the nation, including amnesty for Boko Haram members, and the need to convene a national conference as solution to the many challenges facing the country. They spoke jointly to SEYE OLUMIDE in Lagos.

WHAT are your fears for Nigeria?

That is a very large question. We are in a very desperate situation in the country and everyday, the situation gets more and more worrisome. At a point, we were optimistic that things would get better but now, we are beginning to nurse some sense of despair due to the development around us, with the persistent fear whether we would get out of this.

The economic problems are there; poverty, illiteracy, lack of development, poor infrastructure and others. Poor leadership, bad governance and what has complicated matters are things we have infringed upon ourselves.

President Goodluck Jonathan has offered amnesty to the Boko Haram sect; do you see this as a panacea to the security problems in the northern parts of the country?

The amnesty issue for Boko Haram sect is something I cannot understand. Should we be talking about amnesty for Boko Haram now? There is a dividing rank between amnesty and dialogue.

If the Boko Haram people could be identified, then we can talk of dialogue. But dialogue does not say we must grant amnesty. We need to find out who they are and let us talk. They should tell the whole world their grievances.

It is not right to compare the Boko Haram with the situation in Niger Delta. We all know the situation in the Niger Delta; we know what the anger of the Niger Delta militants are. Too much crude oil is being extracted from their region and serious pollution on their lands but government neglects them.

These are the factors that pushed the boys to resist but still, they were able to come out and dialogue before amnesty was granted to them. In the case of Boko Haram, nobody knows what they are fighting for. What are their grievances? Nobody knows.

They once talked about poverty but this is something general to the entire nation. Poverty is everywhere. Illiteracy and ignorance are also a general challenge to the country and government ought to address them.

This is the position of The Patriots: that a national conference can best solve some of these issues because everything seems to have failed in this country and therefore, we need to sit on a round table to discuss. This is the only way we can address all the problems that affect all sections of the country.

I found it very difficult to swallow that word ‘amnesty’ for people who committed criminal offences against their nation. The Niger Delta militants also committed criminal offences, terrorising, kidnapping, murders but they had good reasons and legitimate cause for doing what they did. But how do we describe the Boko Haram situation?

The Sultan of Sokoto, who is the Supreme Head of Muslim Faith in Nigeria, came out to ask for amnesty for the northern militants. Of course, that simple call turned into a clamour and now dominating public discussions. We now talk about nothing but amnesty.

Security in the nation is so precarious and this has given people like Dokubo-Asari the guts to make statements that should not have come from anybody. Although the presidency disowned him but he has made his statement, and other people are making similar statements.

So, where is the country heading? Where is Nigeria heading? To anarchy, of course!

The Boko Haram insurgent is there despite the setting up of an amnesty committee to look into their grievances; they are still attacking. It is a pity that the northern leaders are pleading with the sects to buy into the amnesty programme. But still, they refused and continued with their crime against the nation and against humanity. And instead of concentrating on how to curtail them, we are talking about amnesty.

But what is the position of The Patriot on the issue?

The position of The Patriots on the matter is simple and straight. We have met several times, deliberated on the state of the nation and issued many statements that Nigeria was heading into a situation of anarchy. We may not yet be in the state of anarchy, like General Theophilus Danjuma said that Nigeria was already in anarchy; but we are certainly heading towards anarchy.

Asemota cuts in… It is important to look critically the ideological implication of the present scenario in the country but before I delve into that, I will agree with all that Prof. Nwabueze has said.

In 2011, I was at a meeting with Canon Steven Davis, who is still in Abuja; he came in a few days ago, where the call to surrender by Boko Haram was made and they agreed that time. Their grievance was that Yusuf, their leader, was murdered and that they also had about 8,000 Almajiris.

We agreed in the meeting that the Governor of Borno State should provide a settlement for them and other needs. The details of how they would hand over their guns were brought up.

First, let me say that Canon Davis is an expert in reconciliation; he is in the Anglican Church in England and they have gone to various countries around the world to reconcile. He was the man behind the reconciliation of the Niger Delta, although most people do not mention him but he was the one who took Dokubo-Asari to Abuja to see the former president, Chief Olusegun Obasanjo and the cleric is still in Abuja.

The ideology has made it difficult for us to reconcile democracy and the Islamic extremism but what has happened over the years is that everything had been done to weaken democratic institutions. For instance, when you sack the National Assembly, you weaken democratic institution.

So, we have weakened the democratic institution and replaced it with traditional institution, religious institution and all sorts of institutions that have no place in the document we wrote as Nigerian Constitution.

Section 14 of the Constitution provides what government is set out to do and during our discussion for independence, we all agreed that we were going to have a democratic Nigeria, but in order to sabotage this, they set up an invisible government that promoted something outside the democratic institution. And if you have an invisible government, you must have an invisible army.

So, it is sad that this has generated big problem and even though we have rules and institutions, they are all weak. For instance, we have a Nigerian Police Force but at the same time, we have militants’ army. You cannot reconcile the two.

But the Nigerian Police Force has been so weaken today I begin to wonder whether it is the same police force that people like us were trained before independence, to take over from the white people when they were leaving.

My argument is if the ideological issues were not discussed and we continue the way we are going, Nigeria will collapse. Therefore, we need to convene a national conference.

The National Assembly has tried to experiment the review of the 1999 Constitution but it has not succeed in bringing about any change. The Patriots are saying we should have a national conference of ethnic nationalities and if you read our position paper on it, you will discover why we want it to be on the basis of ethnic nationalities and not on political parties.

I hope that those who are enjoying whatever they think they are enjoying today are working very hard towards reconciling aggrieved people so that they can come out someday to say, ‘yes, we will have a national conference but it must be on political parties.’

The question is; the parties we have today in the country are made up of whom? If you go to the National Assembly, we have soldiers, policemen and all former armed forces men. How many people, who were outside the establishment of the armed forces, are in the National Assembly? This is a big problem for us.

So, I believe we must sit down and talk not just about Boko Haram but there is the need for us to reconcile ourselves, and point out those areas that are very cogent. Those that are benefiting from the present system do not want it, but I want them to realise that evil does not triumph forever. It is only the good that triumphs forever.

The debate to convene a national conference is not new; has The Patriots found out why government has been shying away from it because, it’s a surprise that some of those who clamoured for it changed the tune immediately they found their way into government?

The reasons that successive governments have been dodging the call may be different. For instance, the objectives of Obasanjo’s government were personal power. It was very clear that Obasanjo was pursuing an agenda of personal rule.

He operated what we generally referred to as constitutional dictatorship. That was what Obasanjo operated for eight years and he wanted a third term of an indefinite tenure. He didn’t want anything that would diminish his stay as a dictator.

He saw a national conference as something that would diminish his power and he subdued all the institutions of government and subordinated them — the judiciary, the National Assembly, anti-corruption agencies, even oil and gas, among others, to himself.

He labeled some of us, who were clamouring for a national conference, as troublemakers; those who simply wanted to use a conference as an avenue to divide the country. But that is not true. A national conference will not divide the country.

In 2007, the late President Umaru Yar’Adua took over but we cannot really say much about him because he did not last in power. Even the little period he spent in power, he was so ill that he could not perform. While he was in power, the demand for a conference was not so strong.

When Jonathan took over, he said publicly that he was in support of a national conference. We have discussed with him and also written a letter to him on the subject of national conference and we are waiting for his reply. We expected that he would give our letter the necessary treatment.

The memorandum we sent to the president contains all the arguments that could be advanced in support of a conference. We are not only after drawing up a Constitution, there are other important things we included in the memorandum, including the near collapse of Nigeria and how it could be addressed.

Why would you insist on a conference based on ethnic nationalities?

Why we emphasised that the conference must be on the basis of ethnic nationalities is because they are the ones that wear the shoes; they are the people whose interests are at stake. We should bring them together to discuss how this nation could move forward as one entity.

Everybody wants this country to continue as one entity but we must discuss certain things, including the Boko Haram insurgents, the Niger Delta issues, marginalisation and others. Everybody has grievances; let us put them on the table and discuss with good intention.

We believe that when this is done, an acceptable Constitution could be agreed on. This country is without ethical morality; no ethical justice; nothing, we are just going.

We hear about dangerous cultism, kidnapping, corruption and money laundering everyday but we believe that all these can be properly discussed and addressed at the national conference. This country can be transformed if we do the right thing and that is what The Patriots believe.

Jonathan, as far as I am concerned, has the unique opportunity to transform the nation. He can transform this country or at best, start the process to transform it. If Jonathan says he is ready today, we, The Patriots, will give him support. We will go with him to anywhere to address rallies or even dialogue on the need to organise a national conference. We will be there to help him.

But the North seems not to agree with your position on a national conference, as the Northern Governors Forum once opposed such a conference?

We are in a correspondent with the Arewa. We have exchanged in black and white; we have agreed on the need for a national conference but the modalities are what we are still looking at.

We agreed on the ultimate need to hold a conference but the modalities are a bit different but that will be settled given goodwill.

The Arewa wanted the conference to be on political party basis but we say it should be a conference of ethnic nationalities. This must be the vocal point because it will make no sense if the ethnic nationalities are not the major point of consideration for the conference. They are the people feeling the pinch of the crisis.

Nigeria does not contain one set of people; whosoever is saying that we are a set of one people is deceiving himself and the country. Nigeria contains peoples; peoples make up Nigeria and that is why it is necessary to come to a round table based on ethnic nationalities and not on political parties to discuss our differences.

The Patriots also have modalities that will ensure that all the ethnic nationalities are well-represented. We have the number and list of all ethnic nationalities at hand. We have ascertained every ethnic nationality in this country, big or small; they are 389 in the list.

We have included these in our Memorandum to the president. We will bring them one by one to the conference. Let the president give this opportunity for the people to speak one on one to themselves.

Obasanjo has played his part and left; he did not want it for the reason best known to him. Jonathan is in position; let him demonstrate, in real term, that he actually supports the conference. Our letter is on his table and any day he calls us, we will go and meet him and talk to him. The title of the Memorandum is, ‘National Transformation Through National Conference’

A serving member of the National Assembly once said that it was a waste of time for anybody to think that the government or National Assembly would organise a conference…

We are operating under the rule of law. The Constitution does not say a national conference should be convened without the backing of a law; otherwise, it becomes illegal. We must have a law to back the conference and that law has to be made by the National Assembly.

In our Memorandum to the president, we also attached a Bill called the ‘National Conference Referendum Bill’, which urged the president to present the Bill to the National Assembly and we hope the president prevails on the lawmakers to pass the Bill into law.

But supposing after all these efforts, the government and National Assembly say no; what would happen?

That is the most difficult question to ask. When we get to that bridge, we will cross it.