Why did you decide to celebrate your 80th birthday and why the choice of your home-town, Atani, for the celebration?
When I was 70 years, some of my students came to me and said Prof., we want to celebrate you, I said no. At 75 years, they also came to me, I said no, that I didn?t think there was much to celebrate. They also came at 80 and said Prof., we must celebrate your 80th birthday, I said no, but they insisted that they are going to celebrate it in Atani, in this compound. That was what made me to change my mind because I was born here, I grew up here, I went to school here, until I went to secondary school and I love this community. So the idea of celebrating my 80th birthday here in this little community, where I was born, where I grew up, changed everything and I said, okay, we will bring the whole Nigeria to Atani, to know this place where I come from.
What is the secret behind your longevity, because at 80 you still look agile and strong?
People normally ask what is the secret behind my longevity? As far as I am concerned, there is no secret behind it. But we should avoid intellectual decay. We should not allow our minds to decay. Over the years, I stay in my library working, keeping my mind right and people will say Prof., you have written enough, when will you retire from this thing? Then I say to them no, I should retire and do what, allow my mind to decay? From mental decay, you get to physical decay, because mental decay brings physical decay. Inevitably, there is no way you can avoid it. So I keep on working and applying my mind. If I feel somehow depressed and I just get into my library and I start work, all that disappears, the mental incitement keeps me going.
At 80, are there a few things you feel you have not achieved as a man and a patriot?
If I may use the word achievement, I think I have achieved all that I wanted in life. I have been blessed by God or by nature with 10 excellent children - one a historian, two lawyers, two medical doctors, one petroleum engineer, one pharmacist, one economist, one fine artist, and one, the last still in school and 23 grand children. I have satisfaction and I have rapport with my children, they love me and I love them.
What is your aspiration for Nigeria? Are you satisfied with what you are experiencing as a constitutional lawyer?
Well, I was coming to that because your first question embraces all, before you interjected. Nigeria is not what I hoped it should be. When I returned to this country in 1952, after six years in Britain, we had beautiful ideas about this country and what we expected this nation to be. Today, you ask me the question you posed. I am not happy. Nigeria is not what I expected it to be. It is not what I hoped in 1962, when I came back to Nigeria that it should be. It is all disappointments everywhere. The country is indeed retrogressing, we have money, we have wealth, but not much to show for that wealth. Our value system has been thoroughly undermined. Truth does not mean anything in Nigeria today, principle does not mean anything in Nigeria today. It is all money, everybody wants money and in the process, we have destroyed the values we cherish. Truth does not mean anything.
These are the things that make me unhappy. Many a time I ask myself is it the Nigeria I returned in 1962 to fight for and work for? But I think all hope is not lost. Desperate as the situation is, all hope is not lost, but how do we revive it? How do we change the event? That is the big question facing all of us. The situation is so bad, so rotten, but as I have said on several occasions, we need a moral revolution. We need a social revolution in this country to change things. And when I said social revolution, I did not necessarily mean violent revolution. It may become violent revolution, but it may be the kind of revolution without violence. But if violence becomes inevitable, then we should be prepared for it. But we need to purge this country. We need to cleanse it, even if blood is needed to cleanse it. People are always saying revolution, revolution, who is going to lead it? Surprisingly, revolution has occurred in several places without identifiable leader at the initial stage. This happened in France. When their revolution started in 1789, without immediate identifiable leaders, one leader would emerge today, tomorrow he is gone. Another would emerge and take over until he made sure the revolution was on ground to take it to where France is today. It is that revolution, which was started by Napoleon in 1789 that made France what it is today in Europe. I don?t believe in disintegration, I don?t believe that everybody should disintegrate and go separate ways.
As a constitutional lawyer, do you subscribe to the new proposal by the President for a six-year single term for President and governors?
Is that a new proposal? It is not a new proposal, it has been proposed several times by the patriots. Do you know about the patriots? We have proposed it several times. I believe that in the circumstance of this country, it is highly desirable. I support it along with rotation. We must not just practise single-term, we must support it with rotation written in the constitution, so that if you are unable to achieve anything for the country, then after six years, you are thrown out with your party. So I think that is what the country should support. But it must be combined with rotation. The way to achieve justice for all the ethnic nationalities that make up this country is to give everyone of them the opportunity to get to the Presidency, that is the highest office in the country. If the single-term of six years is dominated by one group, we are not getting anywhere. We must give every ethnic nationality in the country the opportunity to get there. That is the way.
Do you think the time is ripe for that given the security lapses being experienced in some parts of the country now?
I don?t see anything security lapses have got to do with the single term. We are talking about the structures of this country. With the single term of six years and the office rotated among the component ethnic nationalities, there will stability of the polity.
Do you subscribe to the clamour for fiscal federalism?
Define your terms, what do you mean by fiscal federalism?
That states will be able to control their resources, take care of security by having their own police and others
State police have nothing to do with fiscal federalism, but now the federal system should be restructured in terms of the component groups, making up the federation. Thirty-six states are too many but I am not advocating the abolition of the states, because so many things are involved in that. Many people sacrificed so much to achieve it, but the load on the Federal Government is heavy. That was why we came up with the six geo-political zones. The component units that make up the federation should be these six zones. We can increase it by seven or eight but not more than that. Under these zones or regions, whatever term we choose, the present states should remain. We should restructure the zones. We should restructure them in terms of the component territorial units. When we are restructuring, we must also restructure in terms of political power. At the moment, too much power is concentrated at the centre. This country cannot continue with this kind of power structure. We must decentralise. The power structure of 1960-63 seems to be quite suitable. We must go back to that power structure and take away a lot of the powers from the centre to the zones. Of course, that is where the territorial structure is important because the 36 states as they are today cannot take on the large powers under the 1960-63 system. Under the zones, they can effectively exercise those powers. So we must take away some of the powers that are currently lodged with the Federal Government.
Is the issue of the minimum wage and the refusal by the Federal Government and the states to pay it not an affront to the Constitution, given the fact that it has been passed into law?
There is nothing constitutional or unconstitutional about it. If they decide to give workers N18,000 or any thing, they can do that without offending the Constitution. You amend your law and fix what you consider a reasonable minimum wage. It has nothing to do with the constitution. What the state government can afford to pay is a practical matter, you may have to change the allocation of revenue. The allocation of revenue may depend on the devolution of power and the allocation of revenue from the common pool of revenue must reflect the cost of carrying out function that is removed from the centre to the regions. You cannot give to the regions so much power and give them money and allocation that is inadequate to enable them exercise those functions. So, with all these things taken into account, the allocation of revenue within the centre or the regions is not enough to enable the state government pay this amount. You got to look at the whole system of allocation of revenue and that is what brings forth the issue of fiscal federalism. The allocation system of revenue is it fair between the centre and the region? There is so much money given to the centre and so much power is also given to the centre. That is why the centre is insisting on taking the greater part of the revenue. We have to look at all these things. If we must take away power from the centre, then we must take away part of the revenue allocated to the centre to the states or the region or both.
Do you support the call for a Sovereign National Conference to address the problem?
I have suggested this all the time, because when you talk about restructuring, it is not something that the government can do or the National Assembly as they claimed. This is something that the nation should sit down and discuss in form of a national conference. I have avoided using the word sovereign because it brings a lot of debate. What we need is a national conference, embracing or comprising all the ethnic nationalities in this country. When I said all, some are so small, but a national conference, forget about the word sovereign, where the ethnic nationalities will sit round the table and discuss the devolution of powers, discuss the territorial structures and discuss the revenue allocation.
What is the constitutionality of security votes given to state governors?
It is not the constitutionality of security votes; it is the constitutionality of the use of security votes that is the question. There is nothing that prevents you under the constitution from allocating money to governors or president for security use. They have to do it, there are so many things about security that you cannot predict. But the use that is being made of it is the issue. That is the abuse, the corruption in making the use of the money. How do you stop the abuse? That is part of the revolution I am talking about, how do you stop corruption in Nigeria? That is the issue.
Do you support the call for reform in the judiciary to make it really the last hope of the common man?
We need reforms not only in the judiciary but also in every facet of our national life that is indeed necessary.
Julian Assange Walking holidays Energy bills Winter sports Dennis Bergkamg Tottenham Hotspur
No comments:
Post a Comment