DAWODU.COMDedicated to Nigeria's socio-political issues
2009 US DIVERSITY VISA LOTTERY INFORMATION
October 3, 2007 - December 2, 2007
LUNARPAGES.COM and IPOWERWEB.COM - Despicable WebHosts - Read My Story
|
The Challenges
0f Communities In The Development Of
|
Geopolitical zone |
Percentage |
||
|
1985/6 |
1992/3 |
1997 |
North East |
53.2 |
N/A |
68.0 |
|
48.4 |
N/A |
62.0 |
Middle Best |
48.4 |
N/A |
53.0 |
South East |
30.9 |
N/A |
79.5 |
South West |
42.0 |
N/A |
74.1 |
South South |
38.0 |
N/A |
78.6 |
Nation wide |
43.0 |
34.10 |
69.2 |
Source: Central bank of
From
the table, it can be seen that in 1985/5, incidence of poverty was lowest in
South East followed by South South. But in 1997, the situation has completely
reversed with the incidence of poverty highest in south East followed by South
South. Communities should hold government accountable for provision of
infrastructures and demand their basic rights thereby contributing to poverty
eradication.
3. Free and Fair
elections.-
One of the principles of liberal democracy is the requirement to organize
regular, free and fair elections. This entails equality of voters, freedom of
individuals to nominate candidates or stand as one, periodic revision of
electoral register and laws, independent judiciary, frequent elections, freedom
of campaign and conducting election according to the rules of the game. The
history of this country tells us that when civilian regimes conduct elections,
there are usually problems (1964 and 1983). The election that marked the end of
the first four years and transition of the first term of civilian rule in the
fourth republic to the second term was held in 2003. Although there appears to
be a successful civilian to civilian transition, the 2003 election in
4. Politics of
Integrity.-
Another challenge for communities in the Niger Delta is to mobilize credible
individuals to be involved in politics. It is unfortunate that many Nigerians
still see politics as a dirty game for people of dubious integrity. Politics in
the Niger Delta is dominated by mediocres. This attitude must change for us to
consolidate democracy in this country. Politics is too important to be left for
charlatans and people of doubtful integrity. Politics affects all facets of
life-
economy, religion, education etc. People of impeccable integrity from the communities must be encouraged to participate in Politics.
5. Conflict Prevention
and Management-
Conflicts have been a recurring decimal in the Niger Delta. These conflicts have
taken dangerous forms of ethnic and communal clashes leading to loss of lives
and property. Military incursion into governance has increased the frequency and
affected the pattern of these conflicts in the Niger Delta. At the same time,
the military by its nature suppressed the outward manifestation of some of the
conflict. Consequently, on return to civilian rule in 1999, the frequency and
intensity of conflicts increased. It has been estimated that in the first two
years of return to constitutional rule about ten thousand lives were lost to
different kinds of conflict and violence.[viii]
Government at all levels have failed to develop institutionalised mechanism for
conflict prevention and management. Instead, the Federal government and oil
companies continue to initiate, provoke and oil the conflicts. Communities in
the Niger Delta responded in many ways including fighting themselves (Itsekiri
Vs Urhobo; Itsekiri Vs Ijaw; Ijaw Vs Ilaje; Ogonis Vs Adonis etc). Another form
of response was kidnap of oil workers for ransom. Undoubtedly, these responses
are not sustainable and cannot bring development to the communities. It is
important for communities to design early warning signals so that conflicts can
be prevented and/or managed. Communities must refuse to fall prey to the
divisive tactics of the Federal government and oil companies. The militia
response to the problems of the Niger Delta is clearly not sustainable.
6. Democratizing a
Militarized Society -
It has been noted that “the prolonged nature of Military rule has constricted
democratic space, entrenched authoritarianism, and nurtured militarism while
economic crises and structural adjustment have battered Nigerians, and has
indeed led to increasing questioning, if not challenging the legitimacy of the
State.[ix] This view has been
corroborated by a recent study by the Centre for Democracy and Development. The
study documented the militarization of the institutions of the family, the
educational system, community relations, religion, the judiciary and the
economy. The report stated that there is:
“…….
militarization of family and kinship relations with men assuming a militaristic
command attitude towards women and children, resulting in widespread domestic
violence, abuse and anti-democratic tendencies within the civil society. Adults
beat children all the time, men beat women, some were killed or maimed, while
the culprits were accountable to no one..…authoritarian orientation of the
civilian educational administrators and government officials who ban legitimate
staff and students Unions……Traders speak of the practice of using army officers
to collect debts or settle scores, the use of hired killers to murder rivals,
and the use of religious rituals and sorcery in the spiritual warfare that is
thought by some to accompany trade…..Transport companies routinely hire armed
escorts to protect the passengers from robbers but the armed men that the
passengers usually encounter are at the countless military and police
roadblocks, brazenly extracting illegal tolls from every passing driver, thereby
inflating transport fares…..some communities have adopted the barracks mentality
of “might is right” especially in the contest for elective political office,
characterised by thuggery and violence. Some traditional rulers run secret
cults with which they intimidate people in rural areas and extort money from
them as fines without due process.[x]
We have quoted elaborately
from this study to show how the Nigerian psyche has been militarised. The
militarisation was given greatest effect by the State in the Niger Delta. The
response given by many communities in
7. Constitution Review-
The constitution is perhaps the most important document in the governance of any
nation. It has been pointed out that a constitution is the foundation of the
State and of a democratic order; and it contains profound statements regarding
the political and economic purposes of government.[xi]
Despite the recognition of the importance of the constitution by scholars, many
citizens in
Constitution? Wetin be that? Me a never see
constitution before o. Na wetin e bi? Na book or na food? Abi na di name of one
new govnor? My broda, a beg make you talk the one wey poor man fit sabi.[xii]
Similarly, a survey carried out by the CFCR showed that the people have not seen or read the Nigerian constitution:
The survey showed that majority of the respondents
representing 64.5 percent of the sample admitted that they were aware of the
existence of the 1999 Constitution but only 55 percent had seen a copy of the
constitution. Similarly, majority of respondents (61.3 percent) have not read
the constitution. Many of those who admitted to have read the constitution said
they did not understand it. In the same vein, majority of the respondents (81.3
percent support the need for a review of the constitution.[xiii]
Meanwhile, at the return to
constitutional rule in May 1999, the new civilian regime had no choice but to
operate the 1999 constitution which was handed over to it by the departing
military regime. Majority of Nigerians agreed that the 1999 constitution was an
imposition and defective in many areas. In response, the federal government
inaugurated the technical committee on the review of the 1999 constitution in
It is instructive to note that
the 1999 Constitution was written by a Constitution Debate Co-ordinating
committee appointed by the Military regime of General Abdulsalami Abubakar led
by Justice Niki Tobi. The Tobi Committee had barely two months to consult with
all Nigerians before submitting its report. We have argued elsewhere that there
are two approaches to the making of constitution in
In the old approach, government appoints or
stage-manages the election of a constituent assembly, parliamentary committee,
technical committee, special task force or select committee of conservative
lawyers and politicians to write a constitution for the country. The process of
the old approach ensures that there is little or no debate, no consultation with
ordinary people and no referendum on the draft constitution before it is decreed
or passed into law. Even if the process allows some limited debate, the result
is predetermined and manipulated and not informed by the logic and content of
the debate. The old approach inevitably leads to imposed or authoritarian
constitution. The new approach is a process led and participatory approach that
puts a lot of premium on dialogue, debate, consultation and participation. The
new approach utilises diverse mechanisms such as appointment of an independent
commission to direct the process, elaborate public enlightenment and civic
education and in built mechanisms for making the people of the country to claim
ownership and authorship of the constitution.
[xiv]
From the history of
constitution making in
Meanwhile, scholars are in agreement that
The marginalisation, oppression and
underdevelopment of the Niger Delta has its roots in the Constitution of
Nigeria. There is not likely to be any meaningful change in the situation of
things in the Niger Delta without a fundamental reform in the constitution.
Communities in the Niger Delta must therefore take constitutional reform as a
topmost priority.
8. Fiscal federalism in
In
any Federal state, a formula is usually devised to share the revenue of the
federation between the federal government and the governments of the component
units on the one hand and among the governments of the component units on the
other (Oyovbaire, 1991). A large body of literature exists on
1.
The Phillipson commission of 1946
2.
The Chicks -Phillipson commission
of 1951
3.
The Chicks commission of 1953
4.
The Raisman Commission of 1958
5.
The Binns Commission of 1964
6.
The Dina Interim Revenue Ailocation
committee of 1968
7.
The Aboyade Technical Committee of
1977
8.
The Okigho Presidential Commission
of 1979
9.
The T.Y Danjuma Fiscal Commission
of 1988
A
participant at the CFCR colloquium on Fiscal Federalism argued that the position
of the various commissions tend to shift to suit particular constituencies and
that their analyses are not informed by logic but preconceived self or sectional
interests ratioinalised and justified by theories (CFCR Report on Fiscal
Federalism Colloquium).
An
analysis of fiscal federalism in postcolonial
The
data provided in the table below shows graphically how the change occurred with
the war strategy on the Niger Delta People.
Table 1: Federal - State
percentage share in petroleum proceeds
Years |
Producing State(%) |
Federal Govt
(%) |
Distributable Pool(%) |
1960-67 |
50 |
20 |
30 |
1967-69 |
50 |
50 |
- |
1969-71 |
45 |
55 |
- |
1971-75 |
45 minus off-shore proceeds |
55 plus off-shore proceeds |
- |
1975-79 |
20 minus off-shore proceeds |
80 plus off-shore proceeds |
- |
1979-81 |
- |
100 |
- |
1982-92 |
1 and half |
98 and half |
- |
1992-99 |
3 |
97 |
- |
1999- |
13 |
87 |
- |
Source: Sagay, 2001
In
his analysis, Sagay argued that:
“Even a superficial political analysis of the
situation will reveal that the fate of the mineral resources of the Niger Delta
minorities particularly the trend from derivation to Federal Government
absolutism, is itself a function of majority control of the Federal Government
apparatus. In 1960, there were no petroleum resources of any significance. The
main income earning exports were cocoa (Yoruba West) groundnuts, cotton and
hides and skin (Hausa /Fulani) and palm oil (Ibo East). Therefore, it was
convenient for these majority groups usually in control of the Federal
Government to emphasize derivation, hence its strong showing in the 1960/63
constitutions. However, by 1967 and certainly by 1969, petroleum, particularly
the mineral oil, was becoming the major resource in terms of total income and
foreign exchange earnings in the country. It was therefore, not difficult for
the majority groups in the Federal Government to reverse the basis of revenue
allocation with regard to petroleum resources from derivations to Federal
Government exclusive ownership. They were in control of the Federal Government
and their control of the mineral resources by virtue of that fact effectively
means that the resources of the Niger Delta were being transferred to the
majority group in control for the Federal Government at any point in time.
Again, these oppressive measures are not the results of accidents or errors.
They are deliberate acts of policy implementation founded in the belief that the
owners of the petroleum resources being minorities can be deprived of their
resources without any consequence. This is the attitude and mentality that led a
senior Federal permanent secretary in a memorandum concerning Federal
expropriation of the resources of the Niger Delta to make the following Freudian
Slip, some years ago: “Given however the small size and population of oil
producing areas, it is not cynical to observe that even if the resentments of
the oil producing states continued, they cannot threaten the stability of the
country nor affect its continued development” (quoted in lyayi 2002).
We
cannot but agree with the analysis and position of Professor ltse Sagay. It is
important to note that even the meager allocation while implementing the war
strategy against the Niger Delta people was not even given to them. This can be
seen graphically from allocation to OMPADEC, which was created to develop the
Niger Delta in 1992. Table two below shows the expected and actual allocation to
OMPADEC from 1992 -1996.
Table
2. Allocation to OMPADEC (1992 -1996)
|
|
1992 |
1993 |
1994 |
1995 |
1996 |
1. |
Expected Allocation to OMPADEC(N’m) |
6,041.54 |
6,413.36 |
6,621.32 |
27,826.87 |
38,586.48 |
2. |
Actual Allocation to OMPADEC(N’m |
1,614.09 |
2,618.85 |
2,628.84 |
3,215.37 |
3,077.14 |
3. |
Allocation shortfall to OMPADEC(N’m |
4,427.45 |
3,794.51 |
3,992.47 |
24,611.50 |
35,509.34 |
Source: Horsfall (2000:53)
As lyayi has analyzed, between
1992 and 1996, the commission received less than 12 percent of the funds due to
it from the 3 percent derivation fund. Whereas the commission was allocated
about N86.4 billion for the period, it actually received NIO.9 billion” (lyayi,
2002:5). This pattern has continued with the Niger Delta Development Commission.
Communities in the Niger Delta must insist on proper fiscal federalism for
9 The Struggle for
Resource Control
It
has been documented that the plundering of the resources of the Niger Delta
people and their struggle against exploitation, environmental degradation and
control of their resources dates back to the slave trade era in the sixteenth
century (Okonta and Douglas, 2001). This continued into the colonial era up till
date. However, the publicity and tempo of the struggle increased with the
formation of the Movement for the survival of Ogoni people (MOSOP) in August,
1990. In October, 1990, the Ogoni Bill of Rights was presented to the Nigerian
government and people. The Ogoni Bill of Rights among other things demanded for
the right to use a fair Proportion of the economic resources in Ogoni land for
its development and the right to control their environment. In October, 1999,
the movement for the survival of the lzon Ethnic Nationality (MOSIEND) was
formed. They presented the lzon people charter which among other things demanded
for the right of the ljaw to control their natural resources. On
“All land and
natural resources(including mineral resources) within the ijaw territory belong
to ijaw communities and are the basis of our survivail. We cease to recognize
all undemocratic decrees that rob our people/communities of the right to
ownership and control of our lives and resources, which were enacted without our
participation and consent. These include the Land Use Decree and the Petroleum
Decree e.t.c” (kaiama Declaration, 1998).
It is
important to point out that the declaration affirmed “we agreed to remain within
For there to be development of
the Niger Delta, there is the need to empower communities to take control over
their material assets, intellectual resources, and ideology. In addition, there
is the need for enlightenment and mobilization of the orcommunities to challenge
the power relations of the society as presently constituted and create new
agencies and institutions that would deliver sustainable development. This
requires active participation of the people in social movements. This is perhaps
the only assured strategy to reverse the underdevelopment of the Niger Delta
with the attendant environmental degradation and widespread poverty.
It is crucial that communities
in the
If the communities are to
achieve the above objectives, four issues are critical:
Advocacy for change by the communities with
special focus on governance issues and problems | |
Unity | |
Networking with other progressive forces
| |
Joining forces for mass action to compel the
rapacious and insensitive ruling elite to put the development of the Niger
Delta on the agenda. |
We are confident that if the propositions in the paper are adopted, we will be on the way to the development of the Niger Delta.
ENDNOTES
[i]
Dimitrov, C. (2000) “Development of Multiple Transformations and the
Importance of Building up Sound Institutions” in Factors of Success and
Failure of the Democratic Process in South Eastern Europe.
[ii]
Fayemi, K (2001) Preface in Agozino, B. and Idem, U.,
[iii]
Obadan, m. i. (2002), Main Factors in the General Deterioration of the
Poverty Situation in
[iv]
Federal Office of Statistics(FOS), “Poverty Profile in
[v]
Central bank of
[vi] World Development Indicators, 2002h
[vii]
Transition Monitoring Group (2003), Do the Votes Count? Final Report of
the 2003 General Elections in
[viii]
Citizens’ Forum for Constitutional Reform (CFCR)(2002), Memoranda
submitted to Presidential Committee on provisions for and Practice of
Citizenship and Rights in
[ix]
Jega, A. M. (1997), “Organising for Popular Democratic Change in
[x]
Agozino, B. and Idem, U. (2001)
[xi]
Egwu, S; Adelakun, F and Igbuzor, O. (2003), National Scientific Survey
on the 1999 Constitution of the 1999 Constitution of the
[xii]
Ihonvbere, J. O. (2000), Towards a New Constitutionalism in
Translation of
Quotation: “Constitution? What is that? I have never seen a constitution
before. What is it? Is it some type of book or food or the name of a new
governor? My brother, please say something else that a poor person will
comprehend.
[xiii] Egwu, S; Adelakun, F. and Igbuzor, O. (2003) Op cit
[xiv]
Igbuzor, O., “Making Democracy Work in
[xv]
I-IDEA (2000) , Democracy in
ActionAid
Plot 461,
Wuse II,
Tel: 234 9 4130986,4130987
Fax: 234 9 4130988
Mobile: 234 8033039797
E-mail:
otivei@actionaidnigeria.org
© 1999 - 2006 Segun Toyin Dawodu. All rights reserved. All unauthorized copying or adaptation of any content of this site will be liable to legal recourse. Contact: webmaster@dawodu.com Segun Toyin Dawodu, P. O. BOX 710080, HERNDON, VA 20171-0080, USA. This page was last updated on 10/27/07. |