El-Rufai And Politics of Zoning, By Emmanuel Oladesu
POLITICS DIGEST – It is good that a politician should have courage and capacity for self-correction.
This may become necessary, especially when a seemingly inflammatory statement capable of sowing seeds of discord and deepening the suspicion and division among the component units of the fragile heterogeneous ‘federal’ country had been previously made by him.
Nevertheles, that sheer relunctant political repentance, which was preceded by half-hearted open confession and unavoidable admission of error, may still shape public perception about the pompous political actor.
The eminent politician is not infallible, like all mortals. But, he has also demonstrated that he is capable of retracing his steps from the path of ego, insensitivity and danger.
Had Nasir el-Rufai, brilliant surveyor, accidental administrator, former Abuja minister and governor of Kaduna State not reframed or reviewed his thoughts on presidential zoning, the brewing tension and confusion about a “regional sit tight agenda” would have continued to heat up the polity and threaten the existing artificial national unity.
Before the recapitulation, his previous statement, which generated nasty thoughts, had inadvertently set the tone for 2023 presidential election when the president was just settling down for a second term.
The diminutive, fork-tongued and ebullient Northern star spoke in his personal capacity when he insinuated that 2023 presidential nomination in the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) would not be premised on zoning, but merit.
He called for the abolition of zoning, describing it as “opaque” and a barrier to quality. Many Southern APC gladiators were livid because the South is anticipating zoning to the region in 2023 by the ruling party.
Many interpretations were given to the personal remarks in the highly complex and divided nation-state where the doctrines of catchment area, federal character, quota system, zoning, power shift and rotational presidency fill the public consciousness.
The first was that the North had decided to test the waters through its emergency mouthpiece, Governor el-Rufai.
The second was that APC was sending a signal that the interest of the South would be jeopardised due to the inordinate power retention in the North in post- Buhari era.
The third was that the governor was fighting a personal battle; inspite of predictable obstacles, he is interested in the presidency and he is peddling regional influence by trying to delicately flaunt the acclaimed intimidating numerical strength and fabled superiority of his zone.
The fourth is that, influential Northerners, knowing that power retention would be a hard option to sell, may strategically divide the South to pave the way for the emergence of a pliable president, who will operate from the armpit of desperate power barons.
The fifth is that, having realised the futility of a presidential ambition, which, constitutionally speaking, is his fundamental right, Rufai may now be disposed to mobilising the support of the North for his preffered or anointed presidential aspirant from the South, who may in turn reward him with the slot of running mate.
Unknown to many, Rufai may have been on a lonely journey before reason prevailed. The so-called intellectual may have, momentarily, acted before thinking, unmindful of the dark side of his previous remark and the prolonged controversy and crisis it may unleash.
Although merit was projected as a superior criterion, it was countered by the plausible explanation by commentators that the six geo-political zones parade men of honour, integrity and capability who can succeed Predident Muhammadu Buhari in three years time.
Read Also:
The Kaduna governor has not refuted the two statements credited to him. But, the second remark, which was an affirmation of zoning, showed that he had embraced reality. Many agreed that it would be politically offensive to the South to keep the presidency in the North after eight years of the Buhari administration.
Noting that there is no justification for a Northerner to take over from President Buhari, the governor said:”The general political consensus in Nigeria is that the Presidency should rotate between the North and the South. It is not written, but everyone understands it.
“I think that every politician of honour should understand and abide by that consensus, except there is an extenuating circumstance compelling it to be set aside.”
El-Rufai maintained that “APC has no rotational presidency.” It is debatable. At least, their is a pointer to a power distribution arrangement in the party. The ruling party has in its constitution a clause or provision that is “nearest in meaning” to zoning or rotational principle.
In the APC Constitution, Article 20(iv)(d) stipulates the criteria for nomination. It states:”The National Working Committee shall, subject to approval of the National Executive Committee, make rules and regulations for the nomination of candidates through primary elections. All such rules, regulations and guidelines shall take into consideration and uphold the principle of federal character, gender balance, geo-political spread and rotation of offices, to as much as possible, ensure balance within the constituency covered.” It is incontestable that the entire country is the presidential constituency.
The agitation for zoning cannot be silenced. It reflects the level of political culture and the circumstances in which Nigeria has found itself. The scramble for presidential power is latent and conflict-ladden that only rotation can somehow stem the potential rift.
The conventional power distribution formula is even being internalised by major politial parties. In the 36 states, every position is zoned. The governor and House of Assembly Speaker are zoned. In the National Assembly, the principal offices are zoned. Also, party offices are zoned.
If zoning is abolished, as initially proposed by el-Rufai, then, the principle of inclusion may be annulled and the minority ethnic groups are edged out.
Presidential zoning or rotation is not new. It was catapulted to the front burner in the Second Republic when the mood of the ruling National Party of Nigeria (NPN) suggested that its 1987 presidential would come from Yoruba-West.
The long years of military rule were remarkable for the domination of a particular zone, which resulted into a feeling of marginalisation and loss of a sense of belonging by other zones.
The clamour for zoning intensified, culminating in the subtle power shift to the West, although the mandate of the late Chief Moshood Abiola in 1993 presidential election was criminally annulled.
The injustice reinforced the legitimate demand for zoning in favour of the Southwest. Instructively, after President Olusegun Obasanjo’s two tems of eight years, the slot was zoned to the North and Alhaji Umaru Yar’Adua became president.
The deceased president was succeeded by his deputy, Dr. Goodluck Jonathan, who also won an election in 2011. So strong was the zoning argument that the controversy drew the curtains on the Jonathan administration. Majority of leaders in the PDP felt that the ticket should have been zoned to the North.
Related to zoning is micro-zoning. Whenever the presidential ticket is zoned to the North by the PDP or APC, there may be no major controversy over its micro-zoning to any of the three zones in the North.
But, the situation in the South is more challenging. At issue is micro-zoning. If the APC presidential slot is zone to the South as a matter of political convention, will the slot go to the Southsouth, which recently produced Dr. Jonathan, but whose people are agitating for the benefit of second term for the region, or the Southeast, which had a poor numerical strength in the ruling party or the Southwest?
Ahead of next elections, Nigerian political principals and principalities will be locked in more permutations and scheming over core issues that will shape the exercise.
