The South-West has articulated what it wants

This is my own summary and critical overview of what transpired when the leaders of the South-West geo-political zone met in Ibadan recently.

From newspaper reports of the summit, I gathered that “leading lights and members of the progressive hue in the South-West, converged on the region’s political capital — Ibadan, Oyo State — for three days, during which they dissected the current political arrangement in the country, identified its inherent multifarious flaws and suggested ways out of what seems a cul-de-sac.” The speakers were said to be some of those “who witnessed the golden era in the old Western Region, now comprising Oyo, Osun, Ogun, Ekiti, Ondo, Edo, Delta and lately, Lagos.”

Basically, the speakers at the occasion were unanimous in demanding an enabling constitution that would allow each region/state in Nigeria to develop at its own pace, in accordance with its human and material resources, as was the reality in the First Republic. They called for a return to true federalism in which there would be sufficient autonomy for each of the federating units.

Toward that end, the participants in a communiqué issued after the dialogue “called for the amendment of the Constitution to create a weak centre and robust states that could afford the federating units a level of autonomy to determine their pace and strategies for growth.” It was argued that “progress could only be achieved with a return to true federalism.” A suggestion for a “confederation” was not seconded, even though that might be what true federalism means in reality.

The question then arises: Can the National Assembly attend to the constitutional amendment that is necessary to effect the political restructuring demanded by the South-West summit? The participants’ answer is analytically, yes. Let me explain.

A prominent academic once submitted that: “The 1999 Constitution is Decree 24 of 1999. It is an outdated constitution foisted by Gen. Abdulsalami Abubakar. The Patriots described it as a fraudulent constitution that told a lie against itself. The National Assembly can amend it, but it cannot make a new constitution for Nigeria. It is anti-historical to give the task to them.”

Everything in that submission is okay except that Nigeria is not looking for a completely new constitution, because not everything in the 1999 Constitution is retrogressive. The Constitution contains many of the international norms found in preceding constitutions, like human rights norms. And so, since he agreed that: “The National Assembly can amend it”, that’s all we are saying. Let’s amend it.

I agree with the submission of former Governor Segun Osoba that: “In the First Republic, there was true federalism and extant laws did not prevent the development of the regions. Legislators should come up with laws in aid of the agenda. At the federal level, our legislators must lobby their colleagues for the review of extant laws that prevent regional initiative. Our legislators must know that without integration, there will be no development in the long run.”

Obviously, there is an urgent need for a fundamental review of the Constitution, because “the lopsided federal structure and over-concentration of power on the centre constitute constraints to regional autonomy and growth”. But “a fundamental review” is not the same as a brand new constitution that the legislators cannot handle. The challenge is before the lawmakers to brace themselves to. May God bless the organisers of the conference.