One of the conveners of The Nigerian Indigenous Nationalities Alliance for Self-Determination (NINAS), Prof Yusuf Turaki, has said that Nigeria’s democracy has been turned into feudalism, adding that the 1999 Constitution is the greatest threat to the country’s unity.
In an interview with VINCENT KALU, the Middle Belt leader pointed out that Nigerians should be fair to the Igbo to produce the president in 2023, as their ‘clamour has legitimate historical roots.’
What is happening with your group, the Nigerian Indigenous Nationalities Alliance for Self Determination?
The primary objective of the force majeure is to raise the question of sovereignty and the 1999 Constitution, which the ethnic nationalities have rejected. The disputed constitution was only imposed upon Nigerians by the military without a referendum. This act violates the sovereignty of all Nigerians. The present Federal Government is being run by a political clique that does not serve the interests of the ethnic nationalities and Nigerians. The policies, administrative practices and attitudes of this political clique are contrary to the norms of democracy, unity and peaceful co-existence of all the constituent parts of Nigeria. The work of NINAS is to ensure the reinstatement of the sovereignty of Nigerians, which has been hijacked through fraudulent political schema. You cannot be wrong in pursuit of justice and the common good of all Nigerians. Constitutions are indeed products of arbitrariness and sometimes are far from social justice. This is the case with the 1999 Constitution.
Some people say that you people are seeking attention and merely blowing hot air. What do you say to this?
Do you expect the beneficiaries of the fraudulent 1999 Constitution not to cast doubts on the call for its repeal? You should expect such unrealistic rhetoric. Anything good that you want to do, there are always detractors. Fixing your eyes on the goal would not allow you to look sideways. You can only be distracted if you too are not sincere. We are seeing how gradually Nigeria is sinking into the abyss, and yet some are cynical or unconcerned.
What you read in the newspapers these days are: ‘Nigeria will break up,’ ‘Nigeria will not break up,’ and so on. Why should we still be talking in this manner when other nations are headed to the moon, mars?
It is because we do not want Nigeria to break up, that is why we are offering a natural justice approach. Reasonable and humane nations are built on the principles of social contract based upon sovereignty. Nigeria by now ought to have gone beyond feudalism and sectarianism, which are blatantly being display today in Nigeria. We have democratically elected our political officers, who have invariably turned our democracy into feudalism, despotism, fascism, apartheid, nazism. We are still battling with these besetting issues and therefore have lost all national values and standards of nationhood. The bane of Nigeria is its lack of a national ethic. We do not have common values that can moderate the excesses of ethnic, regional and religious values and interests. We are dealing with a nation, where all sectors are needy. They are in a perpetual state of want, which breeds self-centeredness, greed and lust. The forces of anarchy have been unleashed by unpatriotic Nigerians. Anarchy rules Nigeria. Nigeria is a nation without a viable and conducive vision of society: What we ought to be is a peaceful, viable nation. Each sector sees and defines Nigeria from its own standpoint. Nigeria in these years has given birth to nihilists who propagate the gospels of anarchy and violence. Nigerians are gradually drawn into accepting the gospel which preaches that salvation is found only in violence. Highly placed Nigerians have bought into this so-called redemptive violence. This is the reason for the massive rise of violence everywhere in the country. Nigeria is in a state of “survival of the fittest” and “might is right”.
In the 21st century, we are still talking about of cattle colony, grazing reserves, RUGA, what does it say about us as a nation.
For a typical herder who pushes his cows into the Nigerian streets in the cities, he thinks that that is civilization and cultural rights. Grazing cows in the deep South forests is freedom of citizenship. Cattle rearing to the Fulani is both cultural and agricultural, and that they are entitled to that. But hardly does one hear of the degradation of the landscape of the cows and massive killings and rape by the herders across the country. Here, culture is sacrosanct, but land and human beings are the fodder.
One has to define grazing reserves, cow colony and RUGA within that context. It is more than agriculture. Middle Belt peoples have a different definition to these. Theirs is not theoretical agricultural policies, but first hand practical experience of these. The Fulani herders, who are foreigners to the ancestral lands of the Middle Belt peoples, in these recent years, have become killer machines and with sophisticated firearms, they kill, rape and occupy the ancestral lands of the people and send them into IDPs. But the propagandists would say it is farmers-herders conflicts. A Fulani is an ethnic person, a religious person and a cultural person. These three social factors are inseparable. What government agricultural policy makers do not see are these three social factors about a Fulani person and he uses the three on other people. From practical experience of the peoples of the Middle Belt, South West, South East and South South, these federal agricultural policies are like Trojan horses of Fulani migration, occupation of the ancestral lands with both religious and cultural impact upon the peoples. These facts are very clear to them and cannot be fooled about it. This is like a move from the abstract theories of agriculture to immigration and land grabbing. These so-called agricultural policies have clearly revealed government’s one sidedness. The Fulani care overrides the interests, fears and suspicions of the indigenous peoples. Potential evil cannot be justified over the plate of agriculture.
Your group is talking about a new constitution for Nigeria, but President Buhari has said severally that the 1999 Constitution is very fair to everybody. Against this, is your group not wasting time and resources?
The president is president because of the 1999 Constitution. But Nigerians see it differently from the perspective of sovereignty. The greatest obstacles to Nigeria’s unity today are the serious issues arising from use and application of the 1999 Constitution. Power and sovereignty lie with the people.
What is the greatest threat to the corporate existence of the country?
There are twin current greatest threats, namely, the 1999 Constitution and the current Federal Government. Former presidents of Nigeria and well meaning Nigerians have stated this fact over and over that Nigeria is more divided today than ever, discounting the civil war. Some say this government does not listen to the yearnings and cries of the people; while some say nepotism, insecurity corruption and poor economy. Others say that, “it is a cabal that rules Nigeria and not the president whom they elected.” With all the resources that Nigeria has, it is capable of dealing with the issues of nepotism, insecurity, corruption, economy and the aloofness of government. That is why the greatest threat to Nigeria’s corporate existence is the ineptitude and the attitude of the current government. This government has God’s given opportunity to initiate and implement policies that can unite every sector of Nigeria and create unity, harmony and peaceful co-existence of all Nigerians, regardless. But the political will to do this is frozen.
Boko Haram, bandits, Fulani herdsmen, unknown gunmen and so on are ravaging the country, from the North to the South. What gave rise to these and what must we do to enjoy peace in the country?
These recent movements of anarchy and militancy must be examined from both historical and contemporary social factors. It would be valuable to bring in all the social factors from historians, sociologists, religionists, politicians and philosophers. But this is not necessary here. I will only choose one of the social factors. It is the role of government. The government is the potent key in addressing this menace. The instruments of the state are there for its full use. The major problem is that of the operators of the instruments of government. At the moment, Nigeria does not have the right people in government to address these issues. We lack transformational political leadership that can address the current issues. No amount of suggestions or solutions that can be brought to this government for a better change for such to be effected. Here, Nigeria is stocked like the brow of a ship in the sand. A weak and insulated political leadership cannot do the job of creating a free Nigerian social environment.
It is very clear that the government does not have the political will to address the issues of Boko Haram, Fulani herdsmen, kidnappers, bandits and terrorists. Knowing this fact, Muslim and Christian leaders and the traditional rulers should come in and address these issues. The motivations for these forces of anarchy are rooted in ethnicity, religion and culture. Sheikh Gumi understands these socio-religious factor in the crises that had engulfed the Northern states. Since the security agencies are incapable of eradicating this state of anarchy, the Muslim, Christian and traditional rulers should wade in. The jihadism of Boko Haram is rooted in Islam religion as they claim; this factor should be addressed by both Muslim and Christian leaders. The herdsmen, kidnappers and bandits are mainly ethnic, religious and cultural people, Muslim and Christian leaders, and traditional rulers should also address these social factors. People know the camps and the abodes of these social anarchists. In some places, they are trading camps. The government and its security agencies have never been willing to flush out the terrorists from their hideouts. This has been a great concern of the people, the constant and incessant attacks and harassment of the people.
Politics of 2023 is heating up. Some Northerners say power should remain in the North. The South-East people say for the sake of equity, fair play and justice, the region should produce the president. What is your position on this?
I liken politics to a football game. The centre of attraction is the little round football. In politics, the centre of attraction is “power”. With power at hand, one can decide these things: Distribution of resources, statuses, rewards and determining values. This makes politics very attractive and inviting. The British Colonial masters founded Nigerian politics upon three major pillars: Ethnicity, religion and regionalism. Nigerian political culture and practice are rooted in these. These primal social factors were moderated by the principles of representation. This approach rules out individual participation in the political process, but for ethnic, religious or regional representation. What the Igbo are asking for is not peculiar to them, but the general norm and it is in line with Nigeria’s political culture and arrangement. Buhari is in and suddenly, the Fulani, Hausa and Kanuri occupy the Federal institutions to the vivid neglect of others. If presidential politics has rotated to the Far North, and Nigerians can see how this region has dominated national political life, which region of the country would not want to be in the same position? Nigerians must be fair to the Igbo. This clamor has legitimate historical roots.
But the political culture rooted in ethnicity, religion and region has been the undoing of Nigeria. Nigeria must gorge a new political culture that transcends these besetting primordial social factors. Nigeria will never become a developed nation so long as ethnic, religious and regional parochialism and proclivity set the political agenda. Nigeria has been inundated with such negative exclusivist and divisive policies, such as, RUGA or Cow Colonies, CAMA, Water Resources. It is as if, when your group or region is in power, you impose your parochial values, views and interest upon Nigerians, whether they like it or not. If this is the nature of raw political power, who then would not like his own to be in power? Thus, Nigeria has become stunted and dwarfed by ethnic, religious and regional bigotry and intolerance.
When they say power remains in the North, do they also mean the Middle Belt?
Why would a section of the country be afraid of power sharing among all regions? Could it be that they assume that they are natural rulers or born to rule? Because the historical foundations of Nigerian politics are rooted in ethnicity, religion and region, these facts make rotation imperative. We should not make it strange for a president to have come from the least expected region. The human values of equality, justice and fair play, rights and freedom are the foundations of human societies and that good nations are built upon the principles of harmony, unity and peaceful co-existence. Nigerians cannot be and do less in politics of representation.