|
3RD Term, Joe Irukwu and Critics [1] By Emeka Oraetoka
Before the 22nd February 2006, declaration by Professor Joe Irukwu in Abakaliki, that Igbos want Obasanjo for 3rd term in office, or better still, to have a “fresh term shot” at presidency after constitution amendments, via the Peoples Democratic Party [PDP]. Irukwu had been embattled on all fronts particularly, from opponents of regime extension. Prominent Igbo elite wants him out as the President of Ohaneze Ndigbo before the public hearing. Their reason was that his tenure had expired upon the completion of his two years term in office. Interestingly, the leader of the group that wants him out of office, Senator Uche-Chukwumerije, doubles as the Anti 3rd term leader at the National Assembly in Abuja. It may not be wrong for people to assume that the battle for the removal of Irukwu led executive was the extension of the titanic supremacy battle between 3rd term forces and their anti- 3rd term counterpart. Anti-3rd term campaigners believe that as far as regime extension is concerned, Irukwu was on his own, in Abakaliki. In-fact, from criticisms, it appears the Igbos is totally against 3rd term for president Obasanjo, and other office holders in Nigeria. One notable outcome of the Abakaliki zone of the public hearings was that both the proponents and opponents of 3rd term recognized the need for the constitution to be amended to address the constitutional injustices against them-Southeast. The point of apparent departure was strictly 3rd term issue.
Objective pundits reasoned that the fact that, three [3] south-east governors spoke in support of 3rd term for all elected office holders in the country, proved that Professor Irukwu’s position was complementarily logical. He was even said to have insisted that since Ohaneze Ndigbo is a social cultural group, it is only natural they support the position of the holders of peoples’ mandate in the southeast- the governors. Quite unexpectedly, the position of the other two state governors on 3rd term for president and governors did not came to many as a surprise as it was tangential to the supersonic performances recorded in their respective states; or was it a case of quitting the stage when the ovation is loudest? Governor Kalu in particular was reminded that 3rd term would mean victory for reform minded progressive forces of which he is a member, over reactionary and retrogressive force that was said to have assigned 1.5million population figure to Abia State. Unconfirmed reports had it that in Governor Kalu’s first term in office, Abia states embarked on independent head count to ascertain the correct population figure of the state. Before the exercise was discontinued, three million [3m] houses were counted in the state; and the official population figure of Abia State is 1.5million people. Population experts believe that even if the counted houses were to be assigned [one to one person each], the population figure of the state would be three million [3m] people.
Political experts from southeast believe that the divergent opinions expressed by these leaders at the public hearing, were functions of different factors. For instance, they believe that the position of Dr. Chris Ngige as regards 3rd term was expected and understandable. To start with, the major beneficiary of 3rd term will be the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), and so on. Recall that not too long ago, Dr. Chris Ngige and his estranged godfather were expelled from the party. The party later pardoned Chris Ubah, upon restitution from him. On the other hand, PDP said Dr. Chris Ngige did not show any repentance, and therefore, reaffirmed his expulsion from the party, in their last convention in Abuja. Also, the fact that Dr. Chris Ngige may well be apprehensive about the outcome of the appeal court verdict on the 2003 gubernatorial election in Anambra State might still be an outside factor responsible for the curious opposition to “fresh term shot”. As things stand now, even if he agrees on 3rd term, he may not be a beneficiary. For Abia State, the perceived cold war between presidency and the chief executive of Abia state could still be the main factor that informed opposition to 3rd term. The presidential ambition of Governor Orji Uzor Kalu could be another factor. The fear that National leadership of the party may not want Kalu to continue after 2007 could still be an exterior factor.
Authorities in political matters are quick to inform that in politics, what remains permanent is Interest other factors fluctuate. For instance, while in the Trinity [Executive, Legislature and judicial arm of government], only the Chief executive could be said to be elected, all members of the legislative arm of government were elected; so when political battle gets to a decisive point, the legislators will certainly identify their interes t[s] and order their priorities accordingly. It will thus amount to sheer delusion of grandeur for the likes of Kalu and Ngige to think that their various assemblies will vote against “fresh term shot”, via PDP after constitution amendments. Requesting them to vote against “fresh term shot”, via PDP after constitution amendments could be tantamount to asking them to accept that they have failed in their responsibility as legislators. The question will now be: Has PDP government in both Abia and Anambra state not performed? Why won’t there be third term? The two governors were further reminded that they were elected into offices to execute not to legislate, in accordance with the principle of separation of power.
In the light of these analysis, it would have been wrong and suicidal for Professor Joe Irukwu to toe different line from pro-“fresh term shot after constitution amendments” governors; even though, experts believed that the position of the two anti-3rd term governors could generally be at variance with that held by people of their various states; otherwise they may not have succeeded in providing democracy dividends. Even if they are not interested in a “fresh term shot” via PDP after constitution amendments on any ground whatever, they should at least, not be against it; otherwise rational Nigerians may see them as Agents of reactionary forces. Unless majority of Nigerians and PDP through elected legislators, say no to constitution amendments. On the issue of local government creation in the country of which the Southeast was said to have been be seriously cheated, experts believed it will still not speak well of professor Joe Irukwu, not to support 3rd term for President Obasanjo, after constitution amendments, for the reason that the manifest injustices against southeast would have been addressed. To prove that the two governors opposition to “fresh term shot” could have been base minded induced, experts point to the fact that, the only guarantee after local government imbalance address is for the resultant constitution to be nurtured by the ‘head Trustee’.
It will be naďve on the part of critics of Joe Irukwu support for 3rd term to think that the forces enjoying the current order, will allow the constitution to remain as amended without the holder of the office of President guiding it to fruition. However, if PDP presents Obasanjo after constitution amendments, and he lost in the general election, it would have meant that Nigerians believe that other person can carry on with the task of guiding the ensuing constitution to maturity.
Professor Joe Irukwn’s position on 3rd term could have been informed by the cry from southeast and south-south geo-political zon es of the country for a shot at the presidency via zoning. Since zoning has become a popular option in Nigeria, the proposed constitution if guided to maturity, is capable of ensuring equity, fair play and justice along the line of zoning. As everybody could see, zoning on the basis of “gentleman agreement” could lead to misunderstanding and confusion; for instance, in the 1983,after the military coup that toppled Shagari/Ekwueme regime; Ekwueme himself insisted that the Hausa-Fulani oligarchy instigated the coup so that he, Ekwueme, will be denied power come 1987, when Shagari was expected to have served out his term. Who could vouch for the correctness of Ekwueme’s comment? To avoid such comment therefore, making zoning a constitutional matter is a sure panacea. The problem of “gentleman agreement” related zoning reared its ugly head yet again ahead PDP presidential primary between late December 2002- early January 2003.Recall, Gemade and Rimi contested PDP primary despite the existing agreement in the party. From the foregoing therefore, I think it will be wise for Irukwu’s critics especially, those from the Southeast to put themselves in his shoes and see how far.
Emeka Oraetoka. Information Management Consultant, Wrote in from Garki- Abuja. e-mail:oramekllis@lycos.com
|