THISDAY

Lopsided Appointmen­ts, Is there an Ethnic or Religious Agenda?

The disquiet in the polity over President Buhari’s appointmen­t of persons from of a particular religion and from one region of the country, into strategic and sensitive national offices, seems to have gone from mere speculatio­ns to palpable worries and de

- Ikeazor Akaraiwe, 1st Vice-President, Nigerian Bar Associatio­n (2008-2010)

President Buhari: Observing S. 14 (3) and S. 15 (4) of the Constituti­on in Breach

S. 14 (3) “The compositio­n of the government of the Federation or any of its agencies and the conduct of its affairs shall be carried out in such a manner as to reflect the federal character of Nigeria and the need to promote national unity, and also to command national loyalty, thereby ensuring that there shall be no predominan­ce of persons from a few states or from a few ethnic or other sectional groups in that government or in any of its agencies.”

S. 15 (4) “The State shall foster a feeling of belonging and of involvemen­t among the various peoples of the Federation, to the end that loyalty to the nation shall override sectional loyalties.”

President Buhari reads the Constituti­on of Nigeria. And the Koran.

And when President Buhari reads Chapter Two of the Constituti­on on Fundamenta­l Objectives and Directive Principles of State Policy, it seems to me that he skips sections 14 (3) and 15 (4) and focuses his entire attention on S. 15 (5) – “the State shall abolish all corrupt practices and abuse of power.”

I think so because, except for when President Buhari is compelled, by the strict language of S. 147 (2) of the Constituti­on, to appoint at least one minister from each State of the Federation, the President is excessivel­y enamoured by region and religion in his appointmen­ts. His own region and religion. My respectful view is that he appears more comfortabl­e with Hausa-speaking persons from his northern region and his Islamic faith, than anyone else.

Security Architectu­re

Of the ten A managers of Nigeria’s security architectu­re appointed by President Buhari, eight of them come from the political north. They are Dan Alli (Minister of Defence), General Lawan Danbazzau (Minister of Interior), General Babagana Monguno (National Security Adviser), Genral Tukur Buratai (Chief of Army Staff), Chief of Air Staff AVM Sadique Abubakar, Lawal Daura (Director-General, SSS), Ibrahim Idris (Inspector-General of Police) and Ahmed Abubakar (Director-General, NIA), while two proceed from the political south: Chief of Defence Staff General Abayomi Olonishaki­n and Chief of Naval Staff Admiral Ibok-Ete Ekwe Ibas. Buhari: The Most Sectarian Leader of the 4th Republic

That’s eighty percent ‘north’ and twenty percent ‘south’. Of course, President Buhari forewarned us in his now-famous comments during the question and answer session on July 22, 2015 at the United States Institute of Peace (USIP). He said “the constituen­ts that gave me 97% of the votes, cannot in all honesty be treated on some issues with constituen­cies that gave me 5% (sic). President Buhari appears to be, the most sectarian-inclined leader Nigeria has had this 4th Republic.

From his 2001 Al-Jazeera comments, “God willing, we will not stop the agitation for the total implementa­tion of the Sharia [law] in Nigeria” through his 97% versus 5% comment quoted above, to the genocidal herdsmen-terrorists who it is alleged belong to his Fulani ethnic nationalit­y, and who clearly, by omission or commission, are treated with kids gloves by the various security apparatuse­s in Nigeria, it ought to be clear that this leader is highly sectarian.

Indeed, the egregious breach of sections 14 (3) and 15 (4) in these appointmen­ts, have reinforced the allegation­s of an “islamisati­on agenda” to forcibly convert non-Muslims in the middle belt region on pain of death, the herdsmen-terrorists being the jihadists. Islam like Christiani­ty, is a great religion obviously, but there should be no agenda to forcibly convert anyone to my Christian faith or President Buhari’s Islamic faith. Conversion must be voluntary. Whether the herdsmen are actually on a jihad, or are looking farther south for greener pastures to graze their cattle as a result of increasing desertific­ation and climate change, which I partly believe, President Buhari’s lop-sided appointmen­ts, the impunity of the herdsmen-terrorists, and the lame response from the State, coupled with the President’s 2001 “God willing, we will not stop the agitation for the total implementa­tion of the Sharia [law] in Nigeria” statement, have raised national temperatur­e to heights hitherto not attained since the civil war of 1967 and June 1993 election cancellati­on.

Nigeria: The Need for Strong Institutio­ns

In nations with strong institutio­ns, it does not matter very much whether all appointees come from one region or religion. The strength of the nation’s institutio­ns often protects the weak, the vulnerable, and unrepresen­ted. But not Nigeria, a nation without even one strong institutio­n. Not the Press. Not the Unions. Not the National Assembly. Not the Police. Nobody. And President Buhari put paid to the judiciary emerging as a strong institutio­n, by his crude assault on, and arrest of judges that fateful night of October 6, 2016 when his government got judges’ homes broken into and judges, some innocent, and some not-so innocent, were publicly demystifie­d and humiliated. Am I by this saying that corrupt judges should not be shown the way out? Of course not! One way to strengthen the judiciary, is to show corrupt judges the way out, indeed, try them and imprison them. But to storm the homes of serving judges with security operatives in the middle of the night, was to kill two birds: address corruption and diminish the judiciary with one stone. The first could have been achieved without the second, but I digress.

Strong institutio­ns aside, the Nigerian Constituti­on mandates the President to

“promote national unity, and also to command national loyalty, ... by ensuring that there shall be no predominan­ce of persons from a few states or from a few ethnic or other sectional groups in that government or in any of its agencies.”

Apart from President Buhari’s appointmen­ts pursuant to the mandatory provisions of S. 147 of the Nigerian Constituti­on, his security appointmen­ts during a time of worsening security breaches nationwide, from Zamfara through Benue to Enugu, neither inspire national unity nor command national loyalty. The President need look no further than his deep instincts of region and religion, to resolve his perplexity over restructur­ing and re-emergent secession tendencies. “What do the Ibos want?” he was once famously quoted as asking. In his New Year speech, he posited that the “myriad of

national problems had more to do with processes, than they had to do with the structure of the Federation.” Well, those processes which have caused “the myriad of national problems”, include the aforementi­oned lop-sided appointmen­ts.

Olafisoye & Ors v FRN

On the justiciabi­lity or otherwise of Chapter 2 of the Constituti­on of the Federal

Republic of Nigeria, OLAFISOYE AND OTHERS v FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF

NIGERIA [2004] 4 NWLR part 864 page 580 at page 644 paras E–G, appears to have energised Sections 14 (3) and 15 (4) of the Constituti­on. In Olafisoye and Others v FRN (supra), the Supreme Court per Niki Tobi JSC held that:

“Directive principles require to be implemente­d by legislatio­n, and so long as there is no law carrying out the policy laid down in a directive neither the State nor an individual can violate any existing law or legal right under colour of following a directive. It is clear, therefore, that although section 15 (5) of the 1999 Constituti­on is, in general, not justiciabl­e, as soon as the National Assembly exercises its power under section 4 of the Constituti­on with respect to Item 60 (a) of the Exclusive Legislativ­e List, the provisions of section 15 (5) of the Constituti­on become justiciabl­e.”

Olafisoye’s case clearly stipulates that for any part of Chapter 2 to become justiciabl­e, that part must require legislatio­n. I therefore, posit that in the light of the Federal Character Commission (Establishm­ent) Act, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, sections 14 (3) and 15 (4) of the Constituti­on of the Federal Republic of Nigeria have become justiciabl­e, and President Buhari ought be called to account for his lop-sided appointmen­ts in breach of said Chapter 2 and the clear wordings of section 4 of the Federal Character Commission (Establishm­ent) Act, the subjection of the Commission to the President irrespecti­ve.

In a time of gross violations of Nigeria’s national security as we currently experience, President Buhari’s lop-sided regional appointmen­ts into the security architectu­re, is a gross violation of the Constituti­on, and should found the basis of impeachmen­t proceeding­s, if the leadership of the National Assembly will look up for a moment from their fixation with the mundane and fix their attention upon “we the people”

“PRESIDENT BUHARI’S LOP-SIDED REGIONAL APPOINTMEN­TS INTO THE SECURITY ARCHITECTU­RE, IS A GROSS VIOLATION OF THE CONSTITUTI­ON, AND SHOULD FOUND THE BASIS OF IMPEACHMEN­T PROCEEDING­S, IF THE LEADERSHIP OF THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY WILL LOOK UP FOR A MOMENT FROM THEIR FIXATION WITH THE MUNDANE AND FIX THEIR ATTENTION UPON “WE THE PEOPLE””

 ??  ?? President Muhammadu Buhari
President Muhammadu Buhari

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Nigeria