Some
fundamental issues are critical to the resolution of the ongoing crisis in the
Nigeria Governors Forum (NGF).
The
most fundamental of the issues is the process of emergence of the
leadership, the chairman. What is the
rule for his emergence? Is it by consensus or by election? What is the
precedent concerning the emergence? Is there an agenda by some party in the
crisis beyond what the ordinary people see? Who is right and who is wrong in
this unprecedented crisis?
There
is an outcome of the election that is now a contentious leadership. But was the
process that produced the leadership transparent? So many questions are begging
for answers on the debacle. Yet some party to the crisis is being presented as
the hero and the other the villain. The unfortunate aspect of the scenario is
that the ground is possibly being prepared for the death of the NGF.
Should
this happen, all the governors and their states will be the losers? When the
idea of the Governors Forum was mooted in 2002, it was noble; to forge a common
front for the states and advance the cause of democracy.
There
is a model in the United States (US) for peer review from which the NGF idea
was derived. In the US, the membership of the Governors Forum does not
recognize party affiliation. That you are a governor guarantees your membership
of the forum. So it was in Nigeria at the outset of the NGF. The membership cut
across all then 36 governors in the ruling Peoples’ Democratic Party (PDP) and
the opposition, All Nigeria Peoples Party (ANPP) and Alliance for Democracy
(AD).
The
NGF has helped to address some grey areas in our body politic, especially those
relating to disbursements from the Federation Account, constitutionally owned
by all the three tiers of government, that is, the federal, state and local
governments.
The
merit of the NGF notwithstanding, events have proved that the emergence of the
leadership can be a potential source of conflict, especially as all its members
have same status and the Chairman only being the first among equals.
Consequently, the founding governors ruled out election as the mode of
emergence of the NGF Chairman. They voted for consensus.
In
addition, they decided that the chairmanship should be alternated between the
nation’s two blocs — North and South — in line with Nigeria’s peculiar
political arrangement, every two years. The NGF chairmanship actually
alternated between the North and South every two years since 2002 until the
incumbent leader, Goveror Rotimi Amaechi of Rivers State, was to vacate office
early this year
For
the record, Amaechi’s predecessors are: Obong Attah (South— from Akwa Ibom
State); Adamu Abdullahi (North – from Nassarawa State); Lucky Igbinedion
(South—Edo State); and Bukola Saraki (North — Kwara State). Each of the former
NGF Chairmen spent only one term of two years in office.
They
all emerged by consensus. And the succession arrangement has been South (Attah)
— North (Abdullahi) — South (Igbinedion) — North (Saraki) — South (Amaechi).
The crux of the current crisis in the NGF is the obvious attempt by the Rivers
Governor to subvert the process that brought him into the office of the forum
chairman. He benefited from the North/South succession arrangement by taking
over from Saraki in 2011.
But,
today, Amaechi no longer believes in the novel idea put in place to bridge the
North/South dichotomy and preserve the unity of the country. The Rivers
Governor was a beneficiary of the consensus arrangement that eased his
emergence as the NGF leader.
Amaechi
benefited from the one term ONLY arrangement for the Chairman that has been a
recipe for peace in the NGF since 2002. He dumped the precedent. He now wants
to spend two terms. These are all the infractions the Rivers Governor committed
that have inevitably split the NGF into two, with Governor Jonah Jang of
Plateau State leading the other group.
Unfortunately, the lies
being fed to the public is that Amaechi and those in his group are the heroes
and the villainy tag hung on the Jang group. The Amaechi group is even
presented as the underdog in this conflict as President Goodluck Jonathan is
perceived as taking sides with the Jang group because of his purported
political differences with the Rivers Governor. Whereas all the Plateau
Governor and his colleagues on his side are saying is that Amaechi has broken
all the rules and convention of the NGF to perpetuate himself in the office of
Chairman.
Those close to the
Governors’ Forum said the Rivers Governor had everything worked out to
perpetuate himself in office as Chairman.
The plan to retain the
office of the NGF Chairman for second term against precedent was said to have
been hatched by Amaechi when he called for a constitution for the group to be
drafted ahead of its registration with the Corporate Affairs Commission. A constitution was reportedly actually
drafted but without provisions for either election for the Chairman or second
term for him. And the document was never adopted by the NGF as a group.
0 comments:
Post a Comment