Featured

ENUGU POLITICS AND THE LONG STANDING ZONING ARRANGEMENT

Published

5 years ago

September 9, 2020

By Ifeanyi Ogenyi Esq.

In recent times, so many jaundiced, accidental pundits/analysts have emerged, each claiming to be public-spirited and Public Affairs Analysts like one ONYEABOCHUKWU CHRISTIAN.

Recently, I came across an article written by the said Onyeabochukwu Christian in the Vanguard Newspaper of 04-08-2020 entitled ‘OF ENUGU 2023 ELECTION AND ZONING SENTIMENT’.

I feel compelled to respond to the article not because it worth it, but because of the inaccuracies, it conveyed and also to enlighten the unsuspecting readers and his social media fans.

I am not surprised by the tone, content, and intent of the article because the writer, the self-acclaimed Co-ordinator, Coalition of Enugu West Youth Organization has clearly shown where he is coming from. The article is one of the voices of Jacob but the hands of Esau.

However, it would have been better if the writer had started by telling us whom his sponsors are, why he has been hired to present this clueless article to the public just like Baalam in the scripture who was hired by Balak to curse the Israelites so as to stop their progress or is it due to some deliberate mischief?

The article would have been ignored because it stands logic and common sense on the head but to do so, however, will give credibility to falsehood and mischievous assertions designed to manipulate people’s perception of the realities on the ground regarding Enugu politics and it’s the long-standing power-sharing formula.

While I agree that the writer has the right to free speech, I don’t think such right should exceed the boundary of sound reasoning. Having said all these, it is now proper to address his hatchet job and in doing so I will restrict myself to the issues he raised.

A textual analysis of the article would throw up two key points namely:

That political zoning and other power-sharing arrangements have overshadowed liberal democracy; and
That Zoning is undemocratic and it encourages sacrificing meritocracy on the altar of mediocrity.

Zoning as a political arrangement is as old as man himself. It has been in existence for decades. In Nigeria, for instance, Zoning of key political offices in the country dates back to the second republic era when it was adopted in the 1979 Presidential election and the arrangement produced a Northern Nigerian President and Southern Vice President in the persons of Alhaji Shehu Shagari and Dr. Alex Ekwueme respectively. It would have been possible for the North to produce both the President and Vice President then and vice versa.

If not zoning, what does the basis of agitation for the Igbo Presidency come 2023? Or do we think that the southeast or South-South in Nigeria can attain to such a critical leadership position in Nigeria without zoning? The answer is capital NO!

Zoning is one of the practical solutions for bickering and disregard for others especially the disadvantaged minorities in the present Nigeria political landscape. It makes for every recognized zone or section in the country or state to be given a sense of belonging; and any zone that gets its turn should be magnanimous enough to allow others to get their turn.

Zoning as a political arrangement has engendered and promoted fairness, peaceful, equitable power-sharing, and representation at all levels of government.

Zoning though not entrenched in Nigeria Constitution is an acceptable democratic principle for power-sharing at federal, state, and local government levels in Nigeria.

It has become an acceptable practice that the major key political positions rotate among the recognized zones.

As a matter of fact, one of the key decisions reached at the National Confab of 2014 and which was recommended for implementation was the rotation of Presidential Position among the six Geo-political zones and Governorship position among the senatorial zones to ensure equity, fair play, and harmonious existence in the polity. This recommendation was well received and applauded by all well-meaning Nigerians especially those from the Southern part of this country including those that are now clamoring for zoning jettisoning.

Even at the National Assembly is widely adopted in sharing of the key positions and the zoning principle in place has made it possible for the sharing of the key positions in the National Assembly among the six geo-political zones; and most people whom their allies are today calling for questioning of Zoning are beneficiaries zoning arrangement at various times in their political carrier.

Zoning is not only democratic but it’s also a veritable mechanism for political stability and fairness as it diffuses the negative reactions and tendencies of a particular section, group or zone to remain in power as long as possible and to use the commonwealth of the people for the service of its sectional interests.

I am persuaded to state without mincing words that zoning in Enugu politics is a long-standing and acceptable political arrangement that has remarkably set Enugu State apart as a peaceful state where politics is played with little or no rancor and bickering.

It helps to narrow down political contests to a particular zone or section, thereby making the leadership recruitment process easy and manageable.

Since the inception of our evolving democracy, Enugu has always adopted the zoning principle in the sharing of key political positions since 1999 till the present administration. It has always been the case that at every dispensation, one Senatorial zone would produce the Governor of the State, another zone produces the Deputy Governor and it has been working perfectly that way.

The writer unguardedly asserted that zoning encourages sacrificing meritocracy at the altar of mediocrity. In response, I wish to state that zoning does not in any way undermine merit or having competent hands in leadership positions. There is no zone in Enugu State that does not have capable, competent, and qualified persons that can take leadership positions in Enugu even at the larger context of Nigeria politics.

In fact, zoning allows varieties of competent personalities from various zones to showcase their endowed good leadership qualities, perception, and innovative approach to leadership.

So the writer should not insult our collective senses of reasoning with his competence and best brain fallacies.

It is a well-known and acceptable fact except for those who want to distort the existing political arrangement in Enugu that it is the turn of the Enugu East Senatorial Zone to produce the next Governor of the State come 2023 and Enugu East Senatorial Zone has eminently qualified, experienced, the competent and best material for the position.

I make bold to say that Onyabochukwu’s assertions regarding zoning were made mala fide and contrary to his ill-motivated assertion that “zoning is like a prescription that kills instead of heals”, I submit that zoning is a democratic drug for fair play, equitable power-sharing formula and representation; and an effective cure and panacea for marginalization. It gives a sense of belonging to the various interest groups within the system including the perceived or the so-called minorities in the system.

Onyeabochukwu Christian’s metaphors of a leader giving to Agbaja 5%, giving Nsukka 90%, or Ndi Awgu 80% and Nkanu 15%, and other innuendoes contained in his article are mere trivialities that do not require dissipation of energy. It only shows how desperate and clueless the writer was as he is just hobbling and nobbling without making any sensible point to his readers except the gullible public and his social media fans.

Onyeabochukwu Christian, the self-acclaimed Coordinator of the Coalition of Enugu West Youth Organization should better support the long-standing zoning arrangement and age-long good practice; and wait for the turn of Enugu West Senatorial Zone.

Enugu people are wise and intelligent; and as such, they cannot accompany Onyeabochukwu Christian or whatever name he called himself, his allies and cronies on this reckless journey on the path of ignorance which they say is a disease

Share on Facebook

Business

Tax Reform Bills: The Verdict of Nigerians

Published

1 week ago

March 6, 2025

The Gleamer

Ismaila Ahmad Abdullahi Ph.D

The public hearings conducted recently by the two Chambers of the National Assembly have elicited positive responses from a broad spectrum of Nigerians, cutting across regional interest groups, government agencies, civil society groups, concerned individuals, the academia, and Labour Unions, among diverse others. Contrary to a few dissensions hitherto expressed in the media, almost all the stakeholders who spoke during the week-long sessions were unanimous in their declaration that the hallowed Chambers should pass the tax reform bills after a clean-up of the grey areas.

The public hearings were auspicious for all Nigerians desirous of economic growth and fiscal responsibility. They were also a watershed moment for the Federal Inland Revenue Service, which had been upbeat about the tax reforms. Indeed, the public hearings had rekindled hope in the tenets of democracy that guarantee freedom of expression and equitable space for cross-fertilisation of ideas. Without gainsaying the fact, the tax reform bills have been unarguably about the most thought-provoking issues in Nigeria today, drawing variegated perspectives and commentaries from even unlikely quarters such as the faith-based leaders, student bodies, and trade unions, which speaks much about the importance of the bills.

In the build-up to the public hearings, not many people believed that the bills would make it to the second reading, much less the public hearings. Even the Northern stakeholders who seemed unlikely to support the passage of the bills have softened their stance and have given valuable suggestions that would enrich the substance of the bills. The Arewa Consultative Forum came to the public hearings well-prepared with a printed booklet that addressed their concerns. It concluded with an advisory that the bills should be “Well planned, properly communicated, strategically implemented and ample dialogue and political consensus allowed for the reforms to be accepted.”

The concerns of ACF ranged from the composition of the proposed Nigeria Revenue Service Board as contained in Part 111, Section 7 of the bill, the unlimited Presidential power to exempt/wave tax payment as proposed in Section 75(1) of the bill, the family income or inheritance tax as contained in Part 1, Section 4(3) of the bill, to the issues around development levy and VAT. On the development levy, the ACF stated that unless the Federal Government is considering budgetary funding for TETFUND, NASENI and NITDA, it does not see the “wisdom behind the plan to replace (them) with NELFUND”.

The position of the North was equally reinforced by the Supreme Council for Shariah in Nigeria, Northern Elders Forum, Kano State Government, Professor Auwalu Yadudu, and the FCT Imams. Like the ACF, these stakeholders lent their respective voices to the Section on the Inheritance Tax in Part 1 of the bill and the use of the term ‘ecclesiastical’, which, in their views, undermines certain religious rights and beliefs. The Kano State Government, represented by Mahmud Sagagi, affirmed that “we support tax modernisation” but cautioned that “we must ensure that this process does not come at the expense of states’ constitutional rights and economic stability”. Professor Auwalu Yadudu, a constitutional law professor, drew attention to the use of the ‘supremacy clause’ and cautioned that the repeated use of “notwithstanding” in the bills would undermine the supremacy of the Nigerian constitution if passed as such.

Other stakeholders that made contributions at the sessions included the Nigeria Liquefied Natural Gas, Fiscal Responsibility Commission, Revenue Mobilisation Allocation and Fiscal Commission, Federal Ministry of Industry, Trade and Investment, Institute of Chartered Accountants of Nigeria, Chartered Institute of Taxation of Nigeria, Nigeria Customs Service, and a host of others. While most of their concerns bordered on technical issues requiring fine-tuning, they were unanimous in their support for the bills. They aligned with the position of the Executive Chairman of the Federal Inland Revenue Service, Zacch Adedeji, Ph.D. and the Chairman of the Presidential Committee on Fiscal Policy and Tax Reforms, Mr Taiwo Oyedele, which is that the extant tax laws and fiscal regulations are obsolete necessitating reforms aimed at creating a fair and equitable tax and fiscal space to grow Nigeria’s economy.

In one of the sessions, Dr Zaach Adedeji expounded on the criss-cross of trade activities in the Free Trade Zone whereby companies misuse tax waivers as exporters to sell their goods or services in the Customs Area at an amount usually less than the price the operators in the Customs Area who pay VAT and other taxes sell theirs thereby disrupting business transactions. This way, the operators in the Free Trade Zone shortchange the government in paying their due taxes by circumventing extant regulations, which are inimical to the economy’s growth.

Overall, the presentations were forthright, foresighted, and helpful in elucidating the issues contained in the bills. According to the statistics read out at the end of the hearings at the Senate, 75 stakeholders were invited, 65 made submissions, and 61 made presentations. At the House of Representatives 53 stakeholders made presentations. By all means, this is a fair representation. Given the presentations, it is evident that the National Assembly has gathered enough materials to guide its deliberations on the bills. As we look forward to the passage of the bills, we commend the leadership of the National Assembly for their unwavering commitment to making the bills see the light of the day.

Abdullahi is the Director of the Communications and Liaison Department, FIRS.

Share on Facebook