2011: President Jonathan And The Anti-Zoning Apostates

In a contemporary Nigeria plagued by anomie, it is hardly surprising to witness the kind of brazen political opportunism and dishonesty that have been on display amongst key elements of the PDP and the civil society in general regarding the zoning arrangement of the ruling party at the centre.

Those who only yesterday were ardent defenders of a more equitable formula for political representation that takes into account the ethno-religious diversity of the country are today singing a completely different tune, thanks in part, to the palpable political ambition of Goodluck Jonathan and the determination of his army of carpetbaggers, spin doctors, sycophants, religious bigots and tribal jingoists to play cheerleader to the man’s desire to be president beyond May 29, 2011.

As a politically engineered recipe for national integration, the PDP’ s brand of zoning can be said to be a child of necessity, although not in the manner the latter expression has recently been bastardized by undemocratic types. The zoning or power rotation stance of the ruling party in Abuja is a logical product of Nigeria’s peculiar socio-economic configuration. Now, contrary to the rhetoric currently favoured by mainly ethnocentric revanchists and sectarian demagogues alike, the PDP`s power-sharing plan did not come about solely as a reaction to the June 12 debacle. Like the NPN before it, the PDP did opt for a political solution that canvassed accommodation for the disparate social groups that make up the nation’s mosaic. It is bad enough that the beneficiaries of the PDP’s zoning culture are today trampling on it. It becomes all the more disheartening when those individuals seek to toy with Nigeria’s stability, if not with our nerves, by resorting to bigotry and other forms of intolerance in the bid to maintain political supremacy of a rather tenuous kind.

The ploy consisting in the devious attempt to play the North’s ethnic and religious minorities against the majority Hausa and Fulani as a way to justify the ditching of the zoning policy must be denounced as potentially divisive. It is also patently dangerous. The unwholesome strategy of tribal cum sectarian warfare by proxy is a demonic piece of skulduggery that was employed by the former dictator called Obasanjo in a divide-and-conquer enterprise that pandered to base and primordial instincts. It is revealing that besides embracing the anti-zoning apostasy, President Jonathan is today resorting to the same desperate and despicable antics. A case in point is the on-going mushrooming of pro-regime outfits that almost always pledge support for his presidential ambition. That is when they are not crudely denouncing a mythical “Hausa-Fulani hegemony” or its “Northern agenda”. Such conduct should be dismissed in the strongest of terms. And more significantly, the anti-zoning gimmickry deserves to be challenged by way of enlightened engagement. 

As recently articulated through a communiqué dated July 12, 2010, the position of elder statesmen from Benue on the PDP’s zoning agreement should be deemed as approximating the thinking of the majority within that political formation. Led by Dr. Iorchia Ayu and Prof. Ignatius Ayua, these eminent Benue indigenes have offered what is tantamount to a pondered rejection of the hasty and, one might add, panicky and self-serving stand of the Benue state governor, Mr. Suswam, supporting the repudiation of zoning by the pro-Jonathan band of acknowledged turncoats comprising the likes of Anenih, Barnabas Gemade, Solomon Lar , Jerry Gana, Edwin Clark and the ex-tyrant called Obasanjo. The Ayu group argued that zoning has served both the PDP and the country well through its insistence on the kind of inclusiveness that speaks to our nation’s pluralistic character. “Zoning …has assured political stability, justice and allayed the fears of minority groups at all levels in the country; it has also created a voice for minority groups and empowered them…To rescind the principle now will upset the polity; cause instability, insecurity and promote fears among minorities in Benue and the country in general. It will also undermine trust and honour which are cardinal to credible politics and good governance…In as much as we recognise the constitutional right of every Nigerian to seek…any elective office, we must be seen as respecters of the principle of zoning and rotation and not to personalise the issue for immediate personal gain”. This Benue position has been vindicated by the reported decision of the PDP’s National Caucus of August 10, 2011 re-affirming the party’s zoning and rotation of political offices. As for the reassertion by the same caucus of President Jonathan’s right to stand for election, it does not have to be held as inherently contradictory. Irrespective of their constitutional rights, Jonathan and other PDP members are being reminded of the obligation to uphold the party doctrine as it pertains to zoning. And the point needs reiterating that there is nothing fundamentally unconstitutional or undemocratic with zoning as formulated by the PDP. Also, to whimsically and expediently do away with zoning would be a suicidal venture for the country’s minorities in particular. It is good that national leaders of thought from Benue are showing the light in the debate around the zoning issue.

Some critics have expressed the view that the debate on zoning is unnecessary; that it is distractive at best. They say that what is required of those seeking elective office, including the presidency, should be the nature of their track record or competence and not necessarily the matter of their social or geographical origins. They go on to affirm that by unnecessarily insisting on the latter, one risks ignoring the need to confront both the ruling party and its incumbents with their performance history.  A sober reaction to these arguments is that clamouring for the upholding of the zoning formula doesn’t have to nullify the imperative of public scrutiny that office seekers ought to be subjected to. In other words, zoning and competence in government don’t have to be mutually exclusive concepts. It is ideologically and politically suspect on the part of those who are now obsessed with the competence or track record value when only yesterday, they saw nothing wrong with zoning per se. As a matter of fact, a great number of them were its principal advocates.

What one is ultimately confronted with in the debate regarding the PDP’s zoning mantra is the latter’s raison d’être, that is to say its political as well as philosophical essence. Yet, establishing the rational basis of the pro-zoning advocacy may not be enough to procure universal acceptance or respect amongst contending solitudes within the ruling party. The increasing irascibility and bad faith of the anti-zoning proponents that are allied to the incumbent president, the worrisome lack of democratic credentials on the part of key elements like Obasanjo and Anenih who, for a host of reasons, are desperate to see Jonathan remain in power after the next presidential election, the president’s half-hearted  gestures concerning the call for genuine electoral reforms that should help create a conducive environment for the holding of free and fair polls, these are some of the critical factors that are contributing to the hardening of attitudes, from essentially sectarian quarters, to be sure, toward the PDP’s zoning arrangement. Tellingly and ironically today, Mr. Nwodo, a South-East Igbo representative in the PDP hierarchy, has become a potent symbol of parochial politics in the service of vested interests. He has been drafted by Jonathan and his camp to replace another South-East Igbo, Chief Ogbulafor, as PDP chairman. It is apparent that what led to the coup against Ogbulafor was his insistence that the party’s zoning arrangement be respected. The political lynching of Mr. Ogbulafor should be seen as a clear indication of the anti-democratic reflexes of Jonathan and his allies.

In the light of the above, it smacks of unbridled optimism on the part of those who are hoping that President Jonathan would muster the courage, if not the sense of mission or purpose, to rise above the political fray by concentrating on two main areas, namely, the organization of credible elections in 2011 and the provision of stable electricity. It is expected in this regard that the man would shelve his ambition to stand for election next year. It needs stating here that it is naïve and dangerous to hinge our collective yearnings for transparent polls on an assumption of political will or even good faith on the part of Jonathan. As a party man, the president has consistently shown that his primary allegiance is to the PDP, or more appropriately, to his political godfathers or kith and kin within the party and what they have come to represent in the present scheme of things. Recent developments do point to the fact that Goodluck Jonathan and his associates are more determined than ever before to maintain their hold on the polity beyond the next elections.

It is in the interest of pro-zoning adherents and the nation in general to insist on a democratic solution to what has become a brutal and mean-spirited onslaught on the very basis of our shared history and citizenship. Crucially, beyond the circumscribed prism of the PDP’s byzantine quarrels, Nigerians ought to put special emphasis on the provision of a level playing field that anticipates credible electoral alternatives. The hype around the appointment of Professor Jega as the new chairman of the INEC notwithstanding, one must remain vigilant and insist on equitable and transparent processes at all levels in the run-up to the 2011 elections. The Nigerian people should make it known that they will not put up with the kind of rigging that attended the 2003 and 2007 polls. Above all, they must be prepared to defend their votes this time around.

By Aonduna Tondu.