ETHNIC DIVERSITY IN NIGERIA I

     In this review, we look at the problems of ethnic diversity in Nigeria, its causes and its prospects. The country has suffered various economic damages so far and I do ask my myself, 'Is democracy effectively working in this country?'; actually 'no'. Democracy is a government of people with the same mind, vision, and ideology, not for a country like Nigeria.
     In my own opinion, the genesis of the insurgency, corruption, election crisis and mismanagement of resources that lies in the heart of the country can be traced to the amalgamation of 1914.
     Ethnic differences is a major factor militating against the peace of the nation and most analysts have criticized the 1914 amalgamation with the strong idea that the country should be divided according to the major ethnics. Some on the other hand, fear that the division of the nation will lead to lack of resources in some dependent parts. Well, I don't share this view because the fear of having little resources is not really necessary, and somehow, that is the situation where foreign trade is introduced.
     Most developed nations don't have all resources, they trade what they have with what they don't.
The dissolution of Nigeria will result to the greater good and regions with their own rightful leaders and equal minds. It will be a great start of a new history and breakthrough in each region.
     On the 16th of July, some youths from the Arewa Youth Development Foundation in Kano protested for the division of Nigeria ahead of the 2015 General Election. The protest was held outside the palace of the Emir of Kano, Alhaji Muhammadu Sanusi II who appeals to the disgruntled youths to maintain peace; (a peace that never existed with the killings, bombs, abductions that haunts in the northern region). Sanusi II told the protesting youths, "It is only natural that people of different and divergent culture to live in one entity as a nation, and I enjoin you people to imbibe the lesson of peace considering your role in nation development". How can we imbibe the lesson of peace while people are being slaughtered and women are being adopted by Boko Haram? It is definitely not possible, unless the dissolution of Nigeria is taken to effect, which is the only viable option on ground.
     Taking a step back to review the history of this country, most conflicts, wars, has been has been as a result of ethnic differences due to the fear of domination by regions. It all started with the colonial leaders who structured and unified the country neglecting the consideration of religious, linguistic and ethnic differences.
     During the 1940s and 1950s, the Western and Eastern parties wanted an independent Nigeria organised into small states so as to prevent the Northerners from dominating the country due to their large region and population, while the Northerners on the other hand were fearful that the Western elites would dominate the economy of the country and its politics.
On January 15, 1966 (just six years after the sought independence we believed would bound us together) was the country's first revolutionary coup that led to the killing of the prime minister, a federal minister, two regional premiers, and top army officers from the Northern and Western regions. Northerners officer's dissatisfaction to the manner at which the coup plotters were handled by Gen. Aguiyi Ironsi led to a counter-coup on the 29th of July, 1966.
     All these signifies that there can't be peace, harmony and a stable government in Nigeria unless the country is divided. Our leaders seem to be ignoring this fact due to reasons we can only speculate on, but no matter how hard they try, the dissolution of Nigeria will occur. It may only take time to realise what we've denied ourselves all these years.
     A Northern Nigerian Muslim nationalist leader once described Nigeria "the mistake of 1914" while a prominent Southern Nigerian Christian nationalist figure called Nigeria "a mere geographic expression". The 1914 amalgamation was an act of colonial convenience. It occurred mainly because British colonizers desired a contiguous colonial territory stretching from arid  Sahel to the Atlantic Coast, and because Northern Nigeria, one of the merging units, was not paying its way while Southern Nigeria, the other British colony, generated revenue in excess of its administrative expenses.
     So far, it has resulted into political disagreements, suspicions between the two regions, mismanagement of national resources and misrule by multi-ethnic and multi-religion coalitions of successive rulers, religious conflict between Christian and Muslims, and the present Boko Haram attacks in Nigeria.
     Boko Haram seeks the establishment of an Islamic state in Nigeria, and thus opposes the westernizing of Nigeria society that has concentrated the wealth of the country among a small, mainly southern elite and they won't stop stop killing unless they are stopped or their demands are met. And how do our government intend to stop them?
     On 21st of May, the United states deployed 80 troops to Chad to augment efforts to find the schoolgirls taken hostage by the Islamic sect and President Goodluck Jonathan vowed earlier in January to put an end to Boko Haram activities in the country; its months now, the bloodshed and abductions still continues with no hope of seizing, yet we are been urged to promote peace and unity that never existed.
     Where there is no equality, there can never be a meaningful peace. Where there is ethnic and religious differences, there can't be unity. 

Chronicles: FAYOSE'S ELIGIBILITY AS EXECUTIVE GOVERNOR

Chronicles: FAYOSE'S ELIGIBILITY AS EXECUTIVE GOVERNOR:                   The qualification of Mr. Ayodele Fayose for the Governorship Election in Ekiti State has left so many questions at the ...

FAYOSE'S ELIGIBILITY AS EXECUTIVE GOVERNOR

        
         The qualification of Mr. Ayodele Fayose for the Governorship Election in Ekiti State has left so many questions at the feet of the electoral body of the nation and law makers as well, prior to his fraud related offenses which led to his impeachment in 2006.
        The PDP presenting a candidate like Ayo Fayose is a great risk that has been questioned by analysts as to whether the Section 182 (e) and (I) of the Nigerian Constitution still exist.
 
Section 182. (1) No person shall be qualified for election
to the office of Governor of a State if -
 
(e) within a period of less than ten years before the
date of election to the office of Governor of a State he has been convicted and sentenced for an offence involving dishonesty or he has been found guilty of the contravention of the code of Conduct; or
 
(i) he has been indicted for embezzlement or fraud by a Judicial Commission of Inquiry or an Administrative Panel of Inquiry or a Tribunal set up under the Tribunals of Inquiry Act, a Tribunals of Inquiry Law or any other law by the Federal or State Government which indictment has been accepted by the Federal or State Government;
          
The electoral body and the People's Democratic Party may have forgotten but the indication of forgery in his HND qualification, fraud related offenses and the murder trial for killing of one Omojola in Ifaki which was suspended for Fayose's being at large still lingers in the memories of Ekiti people!
Some analysts believe that for a state like Ekiti State whose by its motto "Land of Honour"; for them to vote Fayose as Governor will be no surprise because a state that lies with poverty and large percentage of voters are unemployed young graduates, paupers, okada riders, artisans, farmers and peasants whose loyalty and allegiance can be easily bought or swayed by bags of rice and garri and few naira notes at the expense of a disclosed future.
A once impeached governor presented again by the same party at the same state is a tragedy in Nigerian Politics that can never occur in any law minded country and its simultaneously a stain to the honour of Ekiti. Is it the corruption that breeds in the blood line of PDP members or blindfolded Ekiti people???
        If this misconduct can happen under the noses of the electoral body and with the president himself contributing to it, then God help us all.

THE REMOVAL OF IMMUNITY CLAUSE FROM THE 1999 NIGERIAN CONSTITUTION

          

There has been debates around the country whether the immunity clause of the Section 308 of the 1999 Constitution should be removed or not. At the ongoing National Conference, delegates had voted overwhelmingly for the removal of immunity clause from the constitution. The delegates had expressed the feeling that the immunity clause has contributed immensely to the corrupt practises by elected officers in the country's polity.
           By the resolution of the National Conference on Thursday, both the President and elected officers can now be dragged to court over criminal and civil cases.
In this section, we look at the proponents of the removal of the immunity clause from the constitution as voted by delegates during the National Conference. The country is taking a huge turn recently as the delegates are hoping to battle crime and corruption among leaders by removing the immunity clause protecting them; looks like a change is around the corner. There has always been issues of inexplicable actions and cases of unaccountability of public funds surrounding The President and State Governors in recent years while enjoying the benefits of the clause which has serve as a shield.
           Section 308 of the 1999 Constitution of Nigeria states that elected officers mentioned in sub-section (3) of that section are protected from arrest, prosecution, imprisonment, civil and criminal proceedings while their tenure lasts. And if there has been a case standing against any of them before being elected into office, such a case shall terminate or atleast be put to abeyance during the continuation of there tenure in office.
           The former Deputy National Chairman of The Peoples' Democratic Party, Olabode George on Saturday said the immunity clause for presidents and governors should be deleted from the Nigerian Constitution.
Bode George who was convicted for corruption in 2009 and jailed for 30 months supports the idea that it should expunged, proposing that it will start to assist the growth of the nation.
"In America, nobody is above the law. We still remember the Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky case while Clinton was in office."

":Exponents say that the fact that people trusted you to manage  their resources does not make you a super human being".

"But the opponents said Nigeria was at the level of Democratic practice where removal of immunity will lead to frivolous cases,". he stated.

"I support the idea that it should be expunged because it will start to assist the growth of the nation," he said.
A cleric, Rev Yinka Adedokun, of the Holy Ghost Harvest Church, Ilorin, on Monday also said the removal of the clause would make leaders more responsible and responsive to citizenry.
"The removal will no doubt make our leaders more responsible and responsive to the yearnings of the people, just as it has the capacity to strengthen our democracy."

"The fear that it will cause distraction is unnecessary, instead it will bring about accountability and probity in governance." he said.
With more people supporting the removal of the clause and few opposing its recommendation, the coming months will tell if the delegates made the right decision.