The conference report should not end in the shelf like previous ones

The National Conference was recently concluded with the report submitted to President Goodluck Jonathan. Chaired by retired Chief Justice of Nigeria, Idris Lagbo Kutigi, it was attended by 492 delegates selected from different fields of human endeavour and from the 36 states of the federation.

While receiving the 22-volume reports with annexure totalling about 10,335 pages, the president said the quality of debate and the depth of interventions contributed to the ability of the delegates to resolve every argument without “burying or suspending them”. He added that such was indicative of the fact that “it is a new dawn in Nigeria and a new nation is at the door.” He concluded that the relevant aspects of the reports and recommendations would be sent to both the Council of States and the National Assembly for necessary action.

Despite our position from the outset that the conference was a needless jamboree we nonetheless commend the eminent personalities who attended for their patriotism. We particularly note the maturity with which the final sessions were conducted with participants demonstrating a good sense of history.

While there were cleavages that reflected the nation’s delicate fault-lines in the course of the conference, it was heartwarming that a sort of national consensus was achieved at the end.

According to Justice Kutigi, more than 600 resolutions dealing with issues of law, issues of policy and issues of constitutional amendments were approved by the delegates. He added that the purpose of the conference included addressing the fears, disappointments, aspirations and hopes, which have accumulated over 100 years. “We did not try to ignore or bury our differences. We addressed these differences while respecting the dignity of those holding these differences and sought to construct solutions which would become building blocks for a just and stable nation,” he said.

As stated earlier, our position on the conference is already well-documented. Yet, even while we questioned its relevance and timing, we were also of the view that to the extent that there are those who believed it would help address sensitive issues which are unnecessarily raising the nation’s socio-political temperature, it was not a bad idea. But we hasten to say that we would not be too disappointed if nothing concrete comes out of the efforts. Our position is simple: since any modification to the existing structure would necessitate constitutional amendment and such cannot be done through a conference brought about by administrative fiat, we could not understand what such gathering would achieve under the current dispensation.

However, now that the reports are with the president, it would be sad if the recommendations end up in some lockers like all previous reports inaugurated by this administration. We say so because a whopping N7 billion was invested in the assignment and such amount of money should not be allowed to just go to waste. Yet it is evident that the questions we raised at the beginning are still begging for answers: if participants are merely to collate views that would form the basis of discussion by the National Assembly and Council of States, did we need an expensive conference to do that? Again, since the 1999 Constitution, like any other constitution, already prescribes how it could be amended, what “legal framework and procedures” could the conference participants possibly have recommended outside the ground norm?

That explains why we fail to understand all the chest-beating after the conference. At a time the main preoccupations are with the 2015 general elections and the party conventions and primaries that will precede the exercise, it is not likely that the conference report will generate any attention from the critical stakeholders in the coming weeks. Will the end justify the means on this conference