Robert Clarke, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, SAN, recently called on President Muhammadu Buhari to hand over the government to the military temporarily in order to solve the security and economic dilemma Nigeria is facing. Clarke, who spoke on Channels Television’s Sunday Politics, on the 2nd of May, 2021, said that Buhari has the powers under the 1999 Constitution to delegate all his powers to the military who will now be charged with the task of getting the country back to six states. It’s important to note that Clarke was born on July 11, 1938, making him an Octogenarian of about 83 years. According to him, right from his youth, he had been a trade unionist because he loved and still love, to fight for the underprivileged. This led him to study Industrial Relations before specialising in legal practice after completing his legal studies. He is about 48 years at the Bar and was conferred with the Senior Advocate of Nigeria about 15 years ago. By his age, academic exposure and experience, we are talking about a thoroughbred human being that knows or ought to know the history of this country and the implications of his utterances.

Firstly, Clarke’s claim that “Buhari has the powers under the 1999 Constitution to delegate all his powers to the military”, with due respect, is not supported by any provision of the Constitution. For the avoidance of doubt, Section 5(1)(a) of the 1999 Constitution states “Subject to the provisions of this Constitution, the executive powers of the Federation shall be vested in the President and may subject as aforesaid and to the provisions of any law made by the National Assembly, be exercised by him either directly or through the Vice-President and Ministers of the Government of the Federation or officers in the public service of the Federation”. This is delegation of duty not dereliction or abdication of duty. On the other hand, the constitution rules out military intervention as a method of assuming power. Section 1(2) of the 1999 Constitution states that “the Federal Republic of Nigeria shall not be governed, nor shall any person or group of persons take control of the government of Nigeria or any part thereof, except in accordance with the provisions of this constitution”. There’s no provision where the President is authorised to hand over power to anyone, or the military, except the Vice President in appropriate circumstances in accordance with the Constitution.

This sudden outburst from this elder statesman is troubling and very embarrassing, especially when one considers the history of military incursion in our polity and its destructive tendencies on our people. There is no doubt that certain happenings around the world and in particular our country can begin to raise doubts in the minds of younger ones and youths, who did not witness the era of dictatorship, about the suitability of democracy as the most preferred system of government. Let us be clear, democracy is not perfect, it is as good as the people that practise it, but arguably, it has proved better than others. Chief Obafemi Awolowo said, “the worst civilian government is better than the best military government”.

The democratically elected governments govern by the Constitution and Acts of the parliament, while military regimes govern by decrees, which are the orders of the head of state, reduced to writing. In a democracy, the Constitution is supreme, in the military regime, the decree, which is the opinion of one man, is superior to the constitution. In democracy, the judiciary is independent and every dispute is settled by the courts. In military regimes, the military dictator outs the jurisdiction of courts and creates his own courts, which he calls tribunals, with which he tries anybody he doesn’t like and sentences him to any length of time in jail or even judicially kill the person through firing squad. In a democracy, there is an independent Legislature which makes the law, represents the people, subjects the executive to account, checks the excesses of the executive and can even remove a President who breaks the law. In a military regime, there is no legislature at all. The head of state does as he likes and is answerable to no one. He plays God and has the power of life and death. In a democracy, every position has term limits and no leader is allowed more than two terms, in a military regime, there is no term limit, the head of state can rule for ever if he so wishes. You can only remove him by force or kill him. In a democracy, problems are resolved through dialogue and mediation by statesmen who write justice on black and white, in a military regime, problems are resolved by ignorant men who write injustice on ground with bullets and blood. Democracy, therefore, is the only system of governance that guarantees the orderly and peaceful transition of power from one person to the other.

Related News

A reference to the first coup in Nigeria and its fallout will elucidate the dangers of military intervention. The 1966 coup was led by Major Kaduna Nzeogwu and this resulted in the killing of Alhaji Ahmadu Bello (the Premier of Northern Region), Sir Tafawa Balewa (the Prime Minister), Chief Okotie-Eboh (the Minister of Finance), General Maimalari (the Chief of Army Staff), Brigadier Ademulegun (Commander of the Northern Garrison), Chief Ladoke Akintola (Premier of Western Region) and so on. The coup did not succeed but the resultant chaos made Nwafor Orizu, the Acting President then, to invite the military to take over the reins of government briefly in order to restore calm and normalcy before restoring the legitimate democratic authority in power, completely in tandem with the call of Robert Clarke for military intervention temporarily to remove the irritations of insecurity before restoring democratic institutions.

History, however, suggested that the military in 1966 did all but restore normalcy. They worsened the situation and nearly destroyed Nigeria. It was an unfortunate coincidence of history that Major Kaduna Nzeogwu, the leader of the 1966 coup that killed all those prominent persons has an Igbo ancestry, the highest ranking military man in the country, who inherited power from the civilian government of Tafawa Balewa after the coup, General Aguiyi Ironsi, was an Igbo man and the man who handed over power to him to restore normalcy in the country, Nwafor Orizu, was also an Igbo man. This raised the unfortunate suspicion that this was an Igbo motivated coup to foist Igbo domination on the country. Unfortunately for Ndigbo, this sentiment against them continued unabated and culminated in the counter coup of July 1966 targeted mainly against them. Their entire military officers from Igboland, including the Head of State, Aguiyi Ironsi, were murdered. This was followed by the pogrom and purging of Ndigbo, civilian or military, from the Nigerian system and led to the Nigeria civil war between 1967 to 1970 that inflicted heavy casualties on both sides and claimed more than one million lives. The resultant effect of this first military intervention tells you how dangerous, slippery and destructive revolutions can be.This is the kind of change Robert Clarke is advocating.

It is fortunate for us as a nation that the military institutions and hierarchy have become more democratic than Robert Clarke, SAN. Army spokesman, Onyema Nwachukwu said: “The Armed Forces of Nigeria remain fully committed to the present administration and all associated democratic institutions, we shall continue to remain apolitical, subordinate to the civil authority, firmly loyal to the President, Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, President Muhammadu Buhari and the 1999 Constitution as amended”. This is commendable. When you hear military regime, don’t be deceived by the term military, it is the government of one man, the Head of State. Indeed, the military is often the worst hit in a military regime. The head of state knows that it is only the military that can overthrow him by force, so immediately he takes over power by force, he finds a way to eliminate all the likely intelligent and brave officers who may outs him from power. President Babangida executed his best friend, Gen Mamman Vatsa, Major Gideon Orka, Wing Commander Ekele, one of the best airforce pilots and several other officers for trying to overthrow him. Gen Abacha purged the army completely of the so called IBB boys, who constituted the best of the military during that period, because of fear of being overthrown by them. He took it further to set up every military officer he suspected to be eyeing his seat in a coup, starting from his Deputy, Gen Diya. In a military regime, nobody is spared from the ruthlessness of the head of state. He is the state and the state is him. He came by force and he knows he must sustain his office by force or be killed.All these destroyed professionalism and cohesion of our military and affected their fighting spirit till date. Who is that military man in his right senses that will advocate a return to the anarchy that is called military intervention.

The nepotism we are facing today has its root from military regimes. Abacha appointed five Ministers from Kano State alone. They do this as survival technique not necessarily that they want to marginalise other sections, meaning that whoever is the Military leader will do same, no matter his state of origin. Loyalty is the basis of appointment not merit or federal character. Military regimes always come to power on the allegation of corruption and indiscipline against democratically elected governments. However, the military, after Buhari, ran the most corrupt regimes in our country. Abacha’s loot is still being recovered today. The reason for this was that Abacha died suddenly and did not have the time to cover his tracks. It is possible that other dictators may have looted more than Abacha, but because they left office peacefully, they had the opportunity to cover their tracks and made it difficult for Nigeria to recover their loots. Internationally, military dictatorship has been out-lawed by the African Union and attracts instant suspension from any country that gives its government to the military. It is gratifying to note that Robert Clarke concluded his statement by saying, “Now I’m going to propose about this security. I don’t know whether I may be right or wrong … if anybody feels I’m right, thank God, if they feel I’m wrong let them tell me.” With love and due respect to you sir, you are wrong. If you go ahead and apologise for this outburst, that will still be vintage Clarke.