|
The Northern Political Forum that took
place last week in Kaduna was a
significant attempt by the Jonathan
camp to win the PDP ticket that will
enable him continue with his presidency
until 2015, presumably. The meeting was
attended by some notable figures from
the three northern zones who, though
short of rejecting zoning totally,
unanimously approved the PDP ticket for
Jonathan in 2011, according to what was
shown on the national television. On the
one hand, their decision raised hopes
for Jonathan and, on the other,
generates some fears about his ability
to deliver on his promises. After the
welcome address by the Governor of
Kaduna State who spoke the usual
official language of Nigerian unity, the
ball was set rolling by Solomon Lar who
argued that zoning was adopted as a
temporary measure which was meant to be
disposed of when our democracy has
matured, literally saying now is the
time. Coming at his heel was Hassan
Adamu. After affirming that no one can
win the Presidency without the support
of the North and recalling how the North
has made sacrifices before to ensure
that the country remains united, he
posited that this is another opportunity
where the region will exhibit its large
heart. But this time, in return for its
support, the President must be given
what Adamu called a “northern agenda”
which will protect the interest of the
region. Adamu’s stand was strongly
supported by the Sokoto Prince, Shehu
Malami. The Deputy Speaker of the House
of Representatives, Bayero Nafada, also
called on the North to make sacrifice
for the sake of the unity of the
country. He was practical in his
argument. The North, he said, would have
sought the same ticket were it in
Jonathan’s shoes.
Then came the turn of zonal
representatives of the PDP. Barnabas
Gemade started by presenting the
position of the Northcentral. He drafted
God into the equation, saying zoning the
presidency could be man-made as it was
in 1999 or God ordained as it is in the
case of Jonathan. Impliedly, Gemade is
asking: Who are we to act against the
wish of God then? But more than that,
Gemade hinted the core argument of the
pro-Jonathan group: the ticket of
Yar’adua and Jonathan were joint and
inseparable. So Jonathan should continue
in 2011 as if he were Yar’adua. Kaulaha
Aliyu from the Northeast joined the
choir by arguing that zoning was a child
of necessity and it is not required now.
Ibrahim Ida presented the view of the
Northwest PDP. However, the NTA
transmission became inaudible and he was
cut short. But with Shagari and Shehu
Malami at the summit, I once can pretty
right predict what Ida said.
Women, for the first time were called to
express their opinion in such a
gathering. They said, in the words of
their spokeswoman, Mariam Waziri, that
they are indifferent to zoning as “they”
were not consulted when it was
introduced in the first place. Pubic
office, she said, should be given based
on merit regardless of one’s religious
and ethnic background. Jonathan merits
it, in short, according to “northern
women.”
So came the communiqué, read by Jerry
Gana the foremost propagandist of
Obasanjo’s third term bid, affirming the
support of the gathering to, one, free
and fair elections; two, the development
of the North, promising a seminar to be
held shortly on how the North would be
developed economically; and, three,
Jonathan’s ticket in 2011 election. The
voice was Gana’s, but the logic was
Gemade’s: the zoning ticket that
produced Yar’adua and Goodluck as
President and Vice-President
respectively was a joint ticket that is
inseparable; “the demise of one does not
invalidate the other”, said Gana. Shi ke
nan.
Of course, I forgot to mention the names
of people like Mantu, Muhammad Abba Aji
and so on. What these people said was
obvious. I am rather more concerned by
those I did not see, Adamu Ciroma, TY
Danjuma, Iorchiya Ayu, Waku, Atiku and
other proponents of zoning. Part of the
problem is the misappropriation of names
where any group today can claim to be
representing a region. Are we therefore
likely to see a counter-summit of
pro-zoning supporters from the North and
the Southeast? Or have they been beaten
to submission? It is curious to note how
appeal to national unity and patriotism
is used now to repeal zoning just as
they were used to introduce it in 1999..
If you have opposed zoning in 1999 you
were unpatriotic; if you support it now
you are still unpatriotic! Mhmm.
Politicians can be good philosophers, I
think. Even Aristotle cannot argue
better.
It is logical for a summit like this to
arrive at this conclusion given the
track record of the politicians who
gathered there and the nature of the
country’s economy. I cannot remember any
of the politicians at the summit who
owns a surviving factory from which he
earns a living. If anything, they have
only helped to ruin the few in the North
established by Lebanese and other
northerners. Our political class,
generally, is completely dependent on
government, a reality that makes them
compliant to the wishes of any
incumbent. That is why coups were the
only channels through which undesirable
regimes could be removed for most part
of African history.
Jonathan, therefore, must not see their
effort as genuine. It is rather an
expression of their dependency on
whoever is in power.
For now, their support will sound like
music to his ears, but he must not
forget that the same class were
responsible for the failure of all
previous leaders. They rundown the
Shagari government and rigged the 1983
elections (Shagari attended the summit);
they toed the path of IBB in ruining our
economy to non-recoverable levels and
participated in his ill-fated transition
program. They served as ministers of
Abacha and approved his actions until
when he failed to handover power to
them. They brought Obasanjo to power and
assisted him in running the most corrupt
government and the worst civilian
dictatorship. They conscripted Yar’adua
knowing very well that he was terminally
ill after failing to convince Nigerians
to allow Obasanjo a third term. (One can
say that majority of those who attended
the summit were pro-Obasanjo,
reincarnating the fear that Jonathan
represents Obasanjo’s third term) And
now, they are racing to support Jonathan
by doing everything possible to deny the
zoning they enacted ten years earlier
when they wanted to sell a southern
ticket to Northerners.
It is understandable and expected that
the President is becoming expedient in
his bid to win the PDP ticket. However,
I have a number of fears. First, I am
afraid when I heard them speak at the
summit about a “northern agenda” that
will take care of the interest of the
region which they will present him with.
Are they genuinely expecting Jonathan to
correct the injuries they inflicted on
the North or are they using such
expression as subterfuge to make us
believe that they have the North at
heart? When in the communiqué they said
they support free and fair elections, we
are bound to ask when did any of them
ever in his life practiced free and fair
elections? Did not they rig in the NPN?
Did not they abandon June 12 and
followed Abacha? Did not they rig in
2003 and 2007? Only a fool would believe
a person that has been rigging for fifty
years but who suddenly claims to be a
prophet of free and fair election.
Secondly, I see a lot of danger in their
argument, for Jonathan, for the North
and for the so-called zoning formula.
They have created a room for further
confusion in future in order to return
and use the North again as a bargaining
chip with the President in 2015. By
hinging their support to Jonathan on the
argument of “joint ticket” with late
Yar’adua instead of issuing a totally
new one to the incumbent, they created a
room for the argument to be revisited at
the expiration of the eight years of
Yar’adua/Goodluck ticket, i.e. in 2015.
The President will then need to come
back and beg them for another term. Then
we will be taken again through another
circle of arguments and summits on
zoning, allowing charlatans to raise
emotions of religion and sectionalism
again. The Yar’adua/Goodluck ticket is a
northern ticket, they said. When it
expires in 2015, are we expecting a
bonafide southern ticket? Why did they
find it difficult to declare the demise
of zoning, once and for all, by
accepting Baba Lar’s argument that it
was only a temporary measure which does
not suit Nigeria today and forever?
Incidentally, they are free to do so
because no other party is supporting
zoning. I hope the PDP will be bold
enough to scrap zoning in their NEC
meeting this week such that the matter
dies, once and for all, though not
without some implications for the future
of politics in the country.
Thirdly, the methods of Jonathan in
gaining the ticket leaves a lot to be
desired and I hope they are only
short-term. The manner in which he
sacked the PDP chairman portrayed him as
bereft of any superior talent than
Obasanjo. Power is the end. The type of
people he recruited as foot soldiers in
his ticket campaign suggests that he can
hardly lead the reform needed by both
his party and country. This inevitably
leads to the fourth fear: that he may
not be committed to free and fair
elections, after all.
Going by the above, which people and
methods would Jonathan employ to garner
his winning votes in 2011? We all know
that it takes more than Jega’s INEC to
achieve that. In fact, most of the work
remains with the President who must
contain the military, the police, and
security agents who in the past have
been at the forefront of election
malpractices. He must convince the 27
PDP governors to respect the votes of
citizens bearing in mind that none of
them was voted before freely and fairly.
He must subdue his party to give up
rigging, its greatest strength and
largest constituency. He must abandon
people like Obasanjo who tells him that
nobody can conduct a free and fair
election. Finally, in case the elections
are rigged on his behalf, he must allow
the judiciary a free hand to decide on
his fate and that of his PDP governors.
I am beginning to feel that this is a
tall ambition. Jega cannot do this on
his behalf. I have raised this doubt in
a previous article when I said that the
chances of free and fair election are
bright only if Jonathan himself is not
running.
In conclusion we will advise the
President to urgently review his methods
if he wants to live above the level of
mediocrity of many past Nigerian
leaders. It is difficult in politics,
admittedly, but not impossible. But
merit always comes with sacrifice. He
can still reach out to credible people –
even within his PDP – in all parts of
the country, run an open campaign and
genuinely win if he is able to achieve
the confidence of the majority. His
present approach and companionship,
however, compel us to start entertaining
the fear that under him business will
remain as usual. We have so advised his
immediate two predecessors. None of them
listened. Would he make a difference?
Only time can tell.
Tilde,
19 July 2010
|
