MISMANAGEMENT OF NIGERIA’S DIVERSITY: PUBLIC PERCEPTION
Kefas Bangripga
Recently, Secretary to the Government of the Federation, Mr. Boss Mustapha berated Nigerians for badmouthing the country on the ground that the country is not working. According him there is power in the tongue. Which means that, the things people say about the country will manifest in reality. But then, it is a normal social reaction to see this type of resentment from the people when the system is hijacked by the political class hence it apparently leads to a multidimensional social injustice. In such situations people have no option than to fall back to group interest. For instance, currently some people want Nigeria divided, some want the country restructured whilst the demand goes on and on. So the pertinent question is; What is responsible for making people lose hope on their country?
The separatists’ agitations, dissention and revolts against Nigeria by Nigerians in various regions are creating a serious national integration problem as well as reinforcing the question of sustainability of the country’s unity beyound the timeframe predicted by the United States. This phenomenon has two basic forms; ethnic and regional . This is however understandable due to the polarity of the Nigerian sociocultural fabrics; hence, what made it more complex, is the emergence of terrorism and banditry.
Deep in our subconscious “Nigerian” as a means of identity falls on the lower rung in our identity layers. What we have is Northern and Southern dichotomy, then further broken down to Christians and Muslims in the North. So, basically; presently Nigeria a is composition of different groups of people loyal to their small subsets’ and individual affinities rather than the country.
Our greatest undoing was allowing this mentality to penetrate our political system. The political actors inject the ethnic, regional or religious pills on the masses to gain their supports and win election. Sadly, “Nigeria” is just a dead abstract entity in minds of many.
Such orientation is one of the fundamental reasons why those saddled with the responsibility of governance see themselves as regional and ethnic or religious champions rather than servants of the State.
Even though some writers argue that, the amalgamation of the northern and southern protectorates in 1914 was against the wishes of the people… hence they described Nigeria as a mere geographical expression and a forced brotherhood (Kayode 2015). This justifies why leaders often lack the political will to holistically address our problems without bringing these variations into bear, which by extension impede our democracy and overall development.
Democracy as a system of governance is systematically prolific that it accommodates any society regardless of its sociological complexities. For instance; Federalism best suited for multiethnic societies and Unitary best suited for homogenous societies; these are all Democratic principles of systems of governance. Nigeria is not the only multiethnic country that practices federalism. Unlike Nigeria, Canada and the United States have a reputation of sufficiently managing their diversities for the overall development of their respective societies.
Advanced civilisations started off on the cradle of equity and fairness. All of these encapsulated are the principles of good governance. They are the pillars that hold the realm, the governors and the governed. The concept of Fairness and Equity is anchored on balance of power, in favour of marginalised groups that have been deprived of different rights. Coming from the background of theory of justice, the principle of equity and fairness was described by Shafritz and Russell (2007) as a situation where public administrators are tasked not only with administrating laws fairly and equitably, but also promoting equity through maintaining a diverse workforce with equal opportunities and providing moral leadership and inspiration for citizens to behave fairly.
The drafters of our constitution in view of our diversity and the importance of these principles in good governance came up with the federal character principle. Adopted in 1976, the Federal Character Principle was defined by the Constitution Drafting Committee of 1975 as thus; “the distinctive desire of the peoples of Nigeria to promote national unity, foster national loyalty and give every citizen of Nigeria a sense of belonging to the nation notwithstanding the diversities of ethnic origin, culture, language or religion which may exist and which it is their desire to nourish, harness to the enrichment of the Federal Republic of Nigeria” (Ammani, 2014).
Furthermore, the provision stipulates that; the composition of the Government of the federation or any of its agencies and the conduct of its affairs shall be carried out in such a manner as to reflect the federal character of Nigeria and the need to promote national unity, and also to command national loyalty, thereby ensuring that there shall be no predominance of persons from a few states or form a few ethnics or other sectional group in that government or any of its agencies.
Due to the fact that the Federal Character Principle is predicated within the political units (states at the federal level), it therefore does not guarantee equal representation of the all ethnic nationalities in the federal executive council and agencies, as such we will continue to see the imbalance and political domination coming from the religious and ethnic standpoints. More so, because the Federal Character Principle only covered the appointment of Federal Ministers and agencies while leaving some critical aspects of our State’s institutions as the exclusive prerogative of the President to appoint (like the service chiefs) creates a loophole which political actors have devised ways of exploiting, thereby circumventing the federal character principles. What we see today is a gross mismanagement of our diversity and the absolute rejection of Federal Character Principle. Nepotistic tendencies have override the ideals of the Federal Character Principle as well as meritocracy in our institutions.
Within the context of Fairness and Equity, the complexities of our current problems can be attributed to the fact that, nepotism has replaced meritocracy and competency. This has created public perceptions of double standards and selective justice about the government’s management of our diversity. For instance; The security architecture of the country is majorly controlled by northers yet, north bears the heaviest brunt of the security challenges. Also, the government reacted swiftly to the killing of 23 travelers in Jos. The Inspector General of Police sent special unit and helicopters to track down the perpetrators and arrests were made. A week later 38 people were killed in Yelwan Zagam, the same commitment was not replicated to track down the killers and no arrest was made.
These are perceptions that catalyse the separatists’ agitations and revolts we see today, because certain groups no longer feel a sense of belonging in the country, as such the idea of national loyalty is insignificant to them. In essence, mismanagement of our diversity is the reason why this country is sinking deep. Peace, security and development can only be attained if those at the helm of affairs approach governance with the principle of Fairness and Equity which is the trademark of good governance.
Kefas Bangripga 