Category Archives: Federalism

Against this backdrop, Jonathan who chaired the event called on the National Assembly to factor into the amendment process the yearnings and aspirations of the people. He pointed out some of the pathologies of the Nigerian crisis, namely, nepotism, ethnic and religious differences and lack of patriotism as some of the teething challenges plaguing the country.

He stressed the point that in addressing the contradictions besetting the country the expectations of the people must never be undermined. Beyond redrawing the state architecture to meet the quest for federalism, the former president said that restructuring was two-fold and the second aspect is the restructuring of the mind. According to him, if there is no attitudinal change, whatever the shape and content of the state, the many problems confronting the country would still rear their ugly heads. On this, the former president waxed poetic by a quote of the famous lines of William Shakespeare in his Julius Caesar. In his words,As a country, we have our peculiar challenges and we should devise means of solving them, but we should not continue to vent our spleen on the amalgamationAs Shakespeare in Julius Caesar said, the fault is not in our stars, but in ourselves My conviction is that discussion on restructuring will not help except we restructure our minds because some of the challenging issues at the national level still exist at the state and local levels. He likened leadership and nation building as multilayered process but the goal is to builda nation that is conducive for all. He sounded off on the establishment trope of the unity and indivisibility of the country.

The former president was not alone on the restructuring question. The immediate past President General ofOhanaezeNdigbo, John Nnia Nwodo argued that the 1999 constitution upended the foundational structure of the country laid by the founding fathers, namely, Nnamdi Azikiwe, Ahmadu Bello and Obafemi Awolowo. The blame was placed on the door step of the military, which atomised the federal essentiality of the Nigerian state through constitutionality, i. e. arbitrary rule-making process of the military. While underlining the objective manifestation of the contradictions of the polity, namely, the truncation of the sovereignty of the regions over their resources and domestic security with a consequent decay in all facets of the society, he urged that restructuring should hold before 2023 general elections.Chief Ayo Adebanjo, theAfenifere chieftain and elder statesman followed the same path with Nwodo by a call to return to the 1963 Constitution, which to a great deal was federal and preserved the autonomous spheres of the federating region.

On his part, former Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Prof. Attahiru Jega held the view that the call for restructuring was being driven by incompetent and self-serving leadership, at all tiers of government. Also, the professor of political science noted that the failure of governance to satisfy the needs and aspirations of citizens and the corresponding poverty have been drivers of the clamour for restructuring. He went further to suggest incremental amendment of the constitution rather than going through the process in one fell swoop.

The interlocutors at the Daily Trust Dialogue have spoken well. There are, however, matters arising. Mr. Jonathans take on the unity and indivisibility of the country is a play to the gallery, in both theory and practice. Nations are not permanent entities, and they undergo changes in their dialectical entanglement. But certain variables can make nations to endure, such as its ability to ensure justice for all, a platonic requirement for the polis. To blame Nigerias problems on the mind of its people may be partly right but its smacks of idealism as objective realities influence the minds. The devastating impact of nepotism today and the inability of the government to secure lives and property cannot engender a congenial attitude to the presently constituted Nigerian state.

Also we do not agree with Prof. Jegas position that it is mere inept leadership that is driving the call for restructuring, nor do we agree with his call for piecemeal amendment. The policy output of the dominant ruling elite in Nigerian is hegemonic by design, if not, commonsense would have prevailed to note that a multiethnic entity like Nigeria cannot be dominated by what experts on the state have called state-nation mainstreaming its preferences over the rest nationality. This today is the primary contradiction and cannot be resolved by sheer incremental amendment of the constitution that cannot alter the rotten integument of the present Nigerian state. In the main, this newspaper believes that the most viable alternative to the disintegration of the country is total overhaul of the current state structure to meet the governability attractions of federalism for multi-ethnic nations.

On the whole, the Daily Trust Dialogue on clamour for federalism in the nations capital was indeed a veritable colloquium on the inevitability of restoration of organic federalism we lost to the soldiers of fortune in 1966. There should be more of such significant, civic engagements on what has become an idea whose time has indeed come.

See original here:

Federalism is the answer, after all - Part 15 | The Guardian Nigeria News - Nigeria and World NewsOpinion The Guardian Nigeria News Nigeria and...

NewsOpinionColumnistsLess than a week from Boris Johnsons first visit to Scotland of the year, the Union of which he has appointed himself minister has rarely looked in such poor shape.

Tuesday, 2nd February 2021, 4:45 pm

If we are to believe SNP minister Mike Russell, there could be a second Scottish independence referendum legal or not before 2021 grinds to a close, while polling suggests that support for Irish unification has risen. Even in previously staunchly unionist Wales, flickers of separatist sentiment have emerged.

It will take more than a few flying visits from a divisive Prime Minister to restore harmony to our house of four nations. It is time to fix the foundations on which this house stands.

It is a conventional assumption that, in times of trouble, societies are motivated by cooperation and selflessness. But in the medical, social, and financial crisis which envelops Scotland it would seem otherwise.

Referendum fever

Day-after-day the First Minister uses the podium the virus has given her to take pot shots at the Prime Minister. The divisive political issue which continues to rival coronavirus is that of independence.

This is most readily evidenced by the clamour for a referendum by leaders of the SNP, including the logic-defying notion that one is needed soon whatever the state of the health of the nation or the stage of the recovery.

The idea of a referendum while the scars of the virus remain raw finds little support outside the most fevered of nationalists but so long as that fever infects many of the present SNP leadership, it remains a threat.

If the current First Minister and the Prime Minister will not handle the Union with care, others must rise to the challenge.

The Liberal Democrats argue that, for Scotland and the United Kingdom alike, a partnership with proper separation of powers among the four nations is the most fruitful and stabilising of constitutional settlements. That partnership is best served by federalism.

Post-Cold War settlement is over

Never has there been globally such a period of uncertainty both domestically and abroad.

The United States is seeking to recover from the nationalist excesses of the Trump presidency. China, buoyed up by its continuing economic success and the political and military assertiveness which that allows, pursues worldwide influence like a colonial power. Russia, under the seemingly perpetual reign of Mr Putin, tries to assuage unrest at home with meddling abroad.

Make no mistake, the informal post-Cold War settlement is over. The apparent stability which it brought is fractured and nationalism is on the rise. But in these four nations of ours we have more in common with each other than with any other four nations in the world.

This is a strength to be built upon in an increasingly uncertain environment and neither to be undermined nor squandered.

But Liberal Democrat conviction that the four nations of the United Kingdom are best served by partnership needs constitutional reform to match. The structure of the United Kingdom must reflect the aspirations of all of its people and support the demands of a modern democracy, with particular emphasis on fairness and better internal systems to ensure that government at all levels is transparent and responsive.

UKs broad shoulders

Through the pandemic we have seen what federalism could look like and also why it is essential.

With health protection measures devolved, but with the virus a threat to us all, it has been necessary to cooperate across the four nations with practical measures like protective equipment and vaccination, while allowing variation in the restrictions on our freedoms reflecting the state of the virus in each part of the country.

Meanwhile on the economic front, Scotland has benefited from the broad shoulders of the United Kingdom economy, while still having the ability to design business-support packages tailored to Scottish needs.

Yet there have been unnecessary disagreements which could have been resolved by a formal partnership structure. That is the opportunity that reform presents.

I relish the opportunity to refresh the work I led for the Scottish Liberal Democrats a decade ago. That work shaped the successful reforms that were ultimately delivered through the Smith Commission. Now the task is to reform the United Kingdoms governing architecture to make our country more suited to the modern need.

Our objective is a system of government which allows for the expression of different identities and builds additional influence and strength with co-operation and common purpose; which embraces joint action when necessary and enhances effectiveness; decentralisation of power where practicable and desirable; and which is based on proportionality and subsidiarity.

Only a settlement based on these principles will strengthen our ties with the other nations of the United Kingdom and maintain a Union at peace with itself.

A mood for change

While the Prime Minister seems either content or oblivious to the risk of separatism, we see indications that other parties are sympathetic to our approach and that there is momentum building to reform the United Kingdom.

Under the influence of former Prime Minister Gordon Brown, Labour are exploring reform once more, which presents an opportunity for our two parties to work together and with others of like mind.

In English cities, regional mayors have fought hard for their communities and held the feet of national politicians to the fire. There is a mood for change consistent with our proposals throughout the United Kingdom.

With Liberal Democrat knowledge and expertise in constitutional reform, we are able to join that effort. We reject the idea that the only choice is between independence and the status quo and will be setting out a coherent and modern alternative for the United Kingdom.

Menzies Campbell is former leader of the Liberal Democrats and former MP for North-East Fife

A message from the Editor:

Thank you for reading this article. We're more reliant on your support than ever as the shift in consumer habits brought about by coronavirus impacts our advertisers.

Read the rest here:

With Boris Johnson and Nicola Sturgeon both posing threats to the Union, federalism is now essential to save the UK Menzies Campbell - The Scotsman

Events unfolding in the twilight of Donald J. Trumps presidency, especially the triumph of strong institutions against the Capitol Hill insurrection, have again reinforced our position on true federalism. Whereas politics and shenanigans are global, in federalism abounds the steering wheel-power for democrats to explore institutions to whip an intransigent personality into general-will and create a system that works for all. Clearly, the American democratic bragging right has been demystified, but their faith and commitment to organic federating units, attendant independent judiciary, credible legislature and press freedom have not been misplaced for Nigeria to learn from.

Nigeria borrowed quite a lot from the U.S. when it switched from the parliamentary to presidential system of government. At becoming a Republic in 1963, Nigeria technically switched from unitary to federalism. But it was a symbolic federalism that was not meant to be in substance. Nigeria has indeed practised quasi-federalism, which has concentrated all the powers at the centre and bred strong personalities over governing institutions. So, when the U.S. Congress erupted in Trump-instigated violence the other day, Nigerians back home could readily relate with the event that was all-too-familiar with the Nigerian political experience. What Nigerians hardly see in their own clime was how the American institutions rose to the occasion to salvage their democracy.

Indeed, Trump is not any different from average Nigerian politicians that would arm-twist the entire system for personal gains. Since the November presidential election ended, Trump has been sulking over unsubstantiated stolen elections to mask his defeat at the polls. He had made frantic efforts to cancel the result like few power brokers did with the June 12, 1993 Presidential Election that Moshood Kashimawo Olawale (MKO) Abiola won in Nigeria. Trump has been up to all sorts of peccadilloes that are not presidential and un-American at the same time. Having failed in court, he incited American mob to stampede the Capitol the meeting place of the United States Congress and the home of the legislative branch of the American government to forcefully ditch the confirmation of Joe Biden as the 46th American president ahead of the January 20 inauguration. The TV footage showing a Trump supporter lounging in the Speakers chair at the Capitol made American democracy a laughing stock of the world.

But the stronger institution, however imperfect, rallied back remarkably to save American blushes and her place as the bastion of democracy in the world. Despite Trumps ugly legacies, unquestionable is the importance of strong democratic institutions, federal constitution and conscious citizenry and Nigeria should learn critical lessons here. Within hours of the Capitol Hill invasion, the police were deployed to restore order in line with the constitution. Unlike the scenes in this clime, police are not a weapon and law unto themselves. We did not see the deployment of maximum force by the police, nor did we see opposition figures being arrested over trumped-up charges. The security agencies have clear roles in the constitution and within their jurisdictions. They are also defenders of democratic rights but do not have to rely on Washington D.C, irrespective of who the occupant is, to take orders like Nigerian Police depends on Aso Villa and ultimately the sitting president. The Nigerian system has consistently made mockery of federalism without regional and state police. Meanwhile, it is the same system that would order with impunity maximum force against unarmed #EndSARS protesters. It is one of such abuses that have described Nigeria as having one of the most powerful presidents in the world in a democracy where power should reside with the people, not strong men and opportunists in democratic garb.

In the American experience, we also saw that the vice president is not a yes-man even over what constitutes a major personal loss. Trump had surprisingly urged the Vice President, Mike Pence, to block electoral votes. Mike Pence, I hope youre going to stand up for the good of our constitution, and the good of our country. And if youre not, Im going to be very disappointed in you, I will tell you right now. Pence still presided over the ceremony in which his electoral loss was certified, according to normal constitutional guidelines. He did so despite immense pressure from the president, misinformed citizens, and conspiracy theorists to deny the truth. Such are the gains of a true federalism that clearly states the functions of officeholders and not leave them at the whims of the Commander-in-Chief.

Similarly, the legislative arm of government, where lawmakers are not rubber stamps, has again shown that it can and should save the day from tyranny and clueless leadership running the country to the brink. In this case of reference, the legislators, independent judiciary and media stood up to be counted. Most U.S. legislators accepted the result of the Electoral College vote, and most Republican members of Congress also admitted that Americans made their decision, and accepted it. All through this phase, the courts remained independent. Leading up to the election, the state of Texas and the Trump legal team had attempted to invalidate the votes of tens of millions of Americans in four states where Trump lost Michigan, Pennsylvania, Georgia, and Wisconsin by suing the states at the Supreme Court, but the court struck the case down citing a lack of legal standing for Texas to sue other states over their local election laws. Indeed, the judgment reiterated the importance of American federalism, and the independence of states. This is remarkable, especially given that three of the nine judges on the nations highest court were appointed by Trump. Unlike in our case where the presidency had in 2019 curiously removed Honourable Justice Walter Onnoghen, then Chief Justice of Nigeria from office through an Administrative Tribunal headed by a non-judicial officer, the U.S. system constitutionally authorised justices to retain Supreme Court positions for life, to deepen their independence and uphold democratic ideals. That was federalism and constitutionalism in action.

What is more remarkable, the media in the U.S. system is constitutionally allowed to do its job as the Fourth Estate of the Realm. Unlike in Nigeria, where the Federal Government could impose fines on media houses for reporting the states violent crackdown on #EndSARS protesters in October 2020, the U.S. government generally respected journalists right to cover the riots objectively. More so, at no time did the U.S. disrupt the Internet connectivity. Instead, citizens access to social media was preserved as some legislators even leveraged platforms to confirm their safety on that dark Wednesday at the Capitol Hill.

In contrast to the norm around here, social media high-tech companies have been exercising their duty to the state by blocking their sitting president from further inciting followers via caustic messages. That is what makes democracy the best system of government despite its flaws. It is also what makes true federalism and constitutionalism the best bet in a diverse democracy aiming at truth, justice, fairness, peace and progress. Nigeria cannot afford to be an exception.

Lest we forget, what would have happened to the Georgia electoral votes if the Secretary of State, Brad Raffensperger,who the president had reportedly called to find 11,000 votes at all cost, was answerable to even an appointee of the President of the United States? There was no connection between the Secretary of State and the U.S. Election Commission, a central body. The power of the Georgias Secretary of State over even a presidential election outcome is as given only by the constitution of the state as a federating unit. And the powerful president of the United States cannot arbitrarily do anything to alter the sanctity of that provision to remain in office. In Nigeria, even a Federal High Court in any jurisdiction in the country could have given a ruling to annul a free and fair election to favour a high-profile office holder. This is part of the travesty and travail of federalism in Africas most populous nation.

Read the original:

Federalism is the answer, after all - Part 12 - Guardian

Recent weeks have provided a crash course on the advantages and disadvantages of federalism. In U.S. politics, the powers of local governments are delegations from the states, but the powers from the state arent delegated from the national government. Rather, they exist independently, as secured by the Constitution. The line between federal and state powers is sometimes contested, but in many matters its clear.

For example, the 15th Amendment gives the federal government the right to enforce the equal right of every citizen to vote, regardless of race or color. But other parts of the ConstitutionArticle I, Sec. 4 and Article II, Sec. 1assign states the principal role in determining the rules for electing the president as well as members of the House and Senate.

These constitutional realities were the crux of Sen. Tom Cottons refusal to join a dozen other Republican senators in challenging the results of the 2020 presidential election. The Founders entrusted our elections chiefly to the statesnot Congress, Mr. Cotton said. They entrusted the election of our president to the people, acting through the Electoral Collegenot Congress. And they entrusted the adjudication of election disputes to the courtsnot Congress.

To be sure, the Electoral Count Act of 1877 provides Congress a mechanism for challenging slates of electors under certain conditions, but these conditions have not been met this year. No state has sent dueling slates of electors to Congress, and every state met the legal deadline for certifying its results.

If the Constitution had established a unitary system for administering presidential elections, the two months since this years election could have played out very differently. Rather than pressing governors, legislators, secretaries of state and state electoral commissions to alter their results, President Trump could have tried to suborn a single national institution, with better prospects for success.

Read the original here:

The Blessings (and Curses) of Federalism - The Wall Street Journal

The country is sharply divided on the presidential election and the certification of electors, so is Congress. Many in Congress (North Dakotas delegation included) said they could not protest the certification of presidential electors, that doing so would be unconstitutional. At least someone read the Constitution, we should be happy with that. But who knew we had so many strict constructionists in Congress?

RELATED

Members of Congress were inundated with letters and messages against this position. You cannot blame the voters confusion. Standing on the Constitution may have been better received if it wasnt so, so unusual in our capitol.

For years our representatives sat on their hands (and on their constitutional authority) allowing government agencies to interpret laws and make rules far beyond the intended scope of the statutes they passed. Federal agencies have exercised more and more power over our lives ignoring the authority of each state. We witnessed, time after time, a single federal judge make law for the entire country. EPA ruled that each time you and I exhale we are poisoning the environment. I could go on. Yet in each instance our strict constructionists said and did nothing.

Yes, Article XII is clear. Congress does not have the authority to override state certified electors. It is also true that the actions of one or more states can harm the citizens of other states. This was the point of the Texas lawsuit joined by North Dakota that was rejected by the U.S. Supreme Court. The case was not rejected on the merits, it was rejected because the Court said Texas lacked standing. Question, if the Constitution limits the authority of Congress over the electoral process and the court does not allow a dispute among the states to be heard, where do we go from there? This question will need to be answered for the sake of the republic.

Beyond that, the people of North Dakota should closely follow the constitutionalists in Washington. What will Congress do if (when) the Waters of the United States (WOTUS) rule comes back? How about when the Obama era methane rule is resurrected, and fracking is banned on federal land? Will the strict constructionists in Congress object when an agency asserts any amount of federal land in a spacing unit means that federal policies apply to the entire spacing unit? Not far-fetched, this was the position of the prior administration.

But, environmentalists argue, you cannot leave issues like fracking or methane regulation to each state because those issues affect people in other states. Interesting, that is exactly the issue Texas raised, that the election process in six other states impacted the people of Texas.

Federalism, recognizing the authority and autonomy of each state, is the only answer for our divided republic. And, the Constitution is not a convenience to be pulled out only when it suits.

Grande represented the 41st District in the N.D. Legislature from 1996 to 2014. She is CEO of the Roughrider Policy Center, an "innovation over regulation" think tank. She is a wife, mom, grandma, lover of life and Jesus. Opinions are solely her own.

This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of The Forum's editorial board nor Forum ownership.

Excerpt from:

Grande: Federalism is the only answer - INFORUM

The BJP has conducted 25 webinars in the last week of December 2020 to propagate the idea of one nation, one election. This came in the background of Prime Minister Narendra Modi making one of his periodic pronouncements about the need for one nation, one election. The latest was at the 80th Presiding Officers Conference on November 26, which happened to be the Constitution Day.

The BJP webinars trotted out the now well-known arguments for the need for simultaneous elections of the Lok Sabha and state Assembly elections: that it will save a lot of expenditure; repeated elections bring the Model Code of Conduct into play which hampers development work and divert officials attention and so on.

In one of the webinars, Bhupendra Yadav, a general secretary of BJP, stated, Election is just a means in democracy, but repeated elections show that it has become the only objective of a democracy. Governance lags behind.

The underlining message is that too many elections are not good for democracy; more important is governance. This is in line with what the CEO of Niti Aayog, Amitabh Kant, said that there is too much democracy in India with regard to the farmers struggle. The message is as clear as daylight the call for one nation, one election is a logical extension of one nation, one leader and the leader has declared that this is not a matter of debate but a necessity for India.

The holding of elections at all levels together (some BJP leaders want the local body elections to be held also along with state and national elections) and the constitutional changes that will be required to bring it about will fundamentally change the character of parliamentary democracy and destroy federalism in the country. To hold the Lok Sabha and state Assembly elections together would require tampering with the constitutional scheme of accountability of the government to the legislature.

Under the Constitution, if a government is voted out on a no-confidence motion, or loses a vote on a Money Bill, it is bound to resign and if no alternative government can be formed, the House is dissolved and a mid-term election is held. There is no fixity of tenure enshrined in the Constitution either for the Lok Sabha, or, for the state Assemblies.

A set of proposals have been made by the Niti Aayog in its discussion paper in 2017 and the draft report of the Law Commission in 2018. They all amount to shortening of the tenure of some of the existing state Assemblies, or, extending the life of some, so that they can be synchronised with Lok Sabha elections, or, at least to hold only two sets of elections in a five-year period. Both, the reduction of the term of an Assembly, or, its extension are profoundly anti-democratic and violate the basic rights of citizens to elect their legislators.

To avoid mid-term dissolution of the House and consequent elections, fixity of tenure is prescribed. The implications of this are dangerous. In one of the proposals in the Niti Aayog paper, it is stated that if the dissolution of the Lok Sabha cannot be avoided and the remainder of the term of the Lok Sabha is not long, then a provision can be made for the President to carry out the administration of the country on the aid and advise of a Council of Ministers to be appointed by him/her till the next House is constituted.

This outrageous proposal would make the President head of the executive. This is bringing in an Executive President through the backdoor. The same approach is suggested for state Assemblies, where the governor can take over the administration for a short period.

Fixity of tenure would mean that a ruling party which has a stable majority in the House cannot recommend for dissolution of the House and hold early elections. It is also proposed by the Law Commission Report that if a no-confidence motion is moved in the Lok Sabha, it must be accompanied by a resolution naming the new leader to run the alternative government. This is termed as constructive vote of no confidence.

What this means is that even if a government is voted out by the members of the House, there has to be some alternative government, or, even a coalition government which is unrepresentative of the peoples choice. Primacy is given to stability through fixity of tenure and the electoral choice becomes irrelevant.

Centralised control of state legislatures and state governments will be established in such a system. After truncating the powers of dissolution in the event of a government losing its majority, the fixed time of five years would require the formation of an alternative government. Such a government would be dependent on the sole whim of the governor who can decide which leader to call upon to form a government. The fixed term will also be a license for legislators to switch sides wholesale without the fear of facing an election.

With governors like Jagdeep Dhankar, Bhagat Singh Koshyari and Arif Mohammad Khan, one can only imagine the havoc that would be created when they act as partisan instruments of the centre.

To bring about simultaneous elections to Parliament and state assemblies, there will have to be a major constitutional overhaul. There will have to be amendments to the Constitution in Article 83 (duration of House), Article 85 (dissolution of the Lok Sabha), Article 172 (duration of state legislatures), Article 174 (dissolution of state legislatures), Article 356 (failure of constitutional machinery) apart from amendments to the Representation of the People Act and other Rules.

The BJP has been consistently putting out the idea of one nation, one election since it appeared in its election manifesto in 2014. Both the President and Vice President of India have endorsed this concept in their official capacities. The current thrust and campaign of the BJP presages a serious effort in this direction. It will be a mistake to think that the constitutional amendments and changes to enable this would pose major obstacles to the ruling partys authoritarian drive. We have witnessed the constitutional chicanery which was indulged in to dismantle the state of Jammu & Kashmir.

Prakash Karat is Member, Polit Bureau of CPI (M).

Here is the original post:

Threat to democracy and federalism - Greater Kashmir

The nation woke up yesterday to reports and photographs of a cross-section of police and special constabulary officers and their passing-out parade at the Police College in Lagos.

The authorities in Nigeria would like the people of Nigeria to accept their fact that the present administration has launched community policing in the country. This newspaper would like to reiterate its long-held view that what was launched on Tuesday is not what we have consistently advocated.

The governing party in their manifesto we have consistently quoted here promised restructuring and their document generated in fulfillment of this includes the state police, not community policing faade the federal police seems to be foisting on a docile federation without federalism.As we have repeatedly noted, the recurrent issue of federalism within the contextual discussion of restructuring has become a metaphor for the curious failure of state actors to do the right thing about nation-building at the right time.The issues that have been shaping and even triggering discussions on the much-needed federalism have been dominating political debates across the country.In fact, it is fast becoming a Frankensteins monster a thing that becomes terrifying or destructive to its maker.The governing party promised a qualified one they even called true federalism.They prepared the blueprint in January 2018 and told the nation publicly.

But sadly, execution the discipline of getting things done has been curiously elusive as both the president and the vice president have been speaking in tongues about the same public-interest issue called federalism.They have been conceptually divided about the crossroads they both hit on the volatile issue they cant eventually escape as state policing is an idea whose time has indeed come.

The reasons are again not too fat to seek. The current level of violence and insecurity in the country, calls for new thinking about our security policy and architecture. But the clincher in all this begins with federalism, a restructuring genre that will allow different regions to tackle insecurity and other concomitant challenges with their local policing arrangement. Kidnapping, marauding killer-herders in the Middle Belt, and perennial acts of brigandage in other parts of the country have made it imperative for us to go back to the drawing board and do things in a different and better way.

This newspaper believes that as a federation, as proclaimed in the 1999 Constitution, we ought to begin the process of creating different levels of policing in the country in consonance with the spirit of federalism.

By definition, the police force is expected to perform investigations, detection of crimes, and protection of the citizenry as routine duties.This onerous assignment makes them first line in the security apparatus of the country.They are legally in charge of internal security. And so, they are usually expected to be close to the environment where they maintain law and order and protect lives and property.Besides, the police officers and operatives need credibility, respectability, and acceptability in the community or town where they serve.

Sadly, the Nigeria Police as currently constituted is not near any of these ideals. The average policeman in the country is poorly remunerated, despised by the people, seen as friends of criminals, poorly armed, and very corrupt.The nation is still smarting from a devastating protest (#EndSARS) mounted by young Nigerians who could no longer endure their brutality. The police force hasnt recovered from the opprobrium the remarkable protest triggered for their image. Even the Nigerian soldiers drafted to quell the revolt of the youth because the police could not cope, are still facing a presidential commission of inquiry on why they had to fire shots at young protesters at an open tollgate.

Often our policemen are seen as aliens or an occupation force because they receive instructions from commanders who are politically, geographically, and culturally distant from the people.

They are also seen as agents of a Federal Government that are virtually resented by the people in different states.As a result, the police-is-your-friend slogan of the Nigeria Police is treated with derision and received with disdain.As much as possible, whether citizens are right before the law or not, they simply avoid the police as much as possible.

We are deconstructing a countrys police setting whose men and officers collect gratification from both the complainant and the accused.The effect of these anomalies is that we have a very crude and inept police force in a flawed federation.

The Inspector-General takes instructions from the President of the country even if the orders are inimical to the overall interest of the nation. Indeed, he (IGP) is beholden to the President. For, as we know, our public officers would rather be loyal to the appointing body than the Constitution.

At the state level, although the elected governor is described as the chief security officer of the state, the police commissioner is not obliged to take orders from him. It has come to be that State Commissioners of Police are often at odds with State Governors on security matters. This inanity cannot and should not be allowed to continue.It is against this background that we once again reiterate our call on the Federal Government to tinker with the political structure of the country.And so Abuja can begin this with legal decentralisation of police operations as once suggested by the Vice President. The unitary system that gave birth to the unwieldy federal police has failed the nation. It is not sustainable anymore.

As this newspaper has often noted, the states, particularly the ones that can afford it, standing as constituent parts of the federation should be allowed by law to have their own police force.

The elected representatives in the National Assembly once saw the wisdom behind this advice and opted for the creation of State Police.This has not been a reality as the presidency has been unyielding to the political restructuring suggestion that can save the nation from the brink it is at the moment.

Some cynics have expressed fears that state governors would use the police under their control to threaten and intimidate opponents.This argument does not hold water. The rule of law and independence will be thus tested if there are abuses of power. Its introduction should be part of our political development. Until we give it a trial we cannot be so sure of its effectiveness or otherwise.

At the moment, the country is under policed. With a population of 180 million citizens, Nigeria has 350,572 men and women, at a ratio of 205 per 100,000.A significant percentage of these men are attached as guards to holders of public office and some wealthy private citizens.These officers are under the control of an IG that is located in Abuja, the nations capital.The result is that there is a palpable alienation. Policemen in the states do not see it as a constitutional duty to protect the citizenry.Elsewhere in the world, for example, in the United States or the United Kingdom, the police command is localised.The Sheriff is the local police chief whose tenure in office is dependent on a good performance.The U.S. has a total of 794, 300 policemen across the country at a ratio of 254 per 100,000. TheNew York City alone has the NYPD with a force strength of 40, 400 officers.These police officers are not under a general or federal command.Therefore, the duty bearers in the country should not get it twisted, the future of our nation depends on how its current managers handle the clamour for federalism. And so institutionalisation of state police in this context is critical to the survival of our convoluted federation whose leadership seems unconcerned about federalism, which is now a desideratum.

Read more here:

Federalism is the answer, after all - Part 11Opinion - Guardian

DHARAN, JANUARY 7

Province 1 Chief Minister Sherdhan Rai has described the provincial structure as the essence of federalism.

We were familiar with the central and local levels, but the provincial structure is rather a new practice, said the chief minister.

He was speaking at the Ministry of Financial Affairs and Planning today.

Just as the provincial structure is the heart of federalism, MFAP is the heart of the provincial government. I have come to know that this heart of the provincial government is not doing well, he said, upon being briefed about the financial scenario of the province.

I have got to know how this heart that was performing well in the first year landed in this chronic condition in the second year; now that weve diagnosed the problem, the process of healing the ailing heart has started, he added.

During his presence at the ministry today, Rai instructed the staffers at the ministry to set right all the wrongs happening in the ministry.

The latest political development in the country might have brought some confusion, but I urge all of you to perform your duty with full sincerity, he said.

Follow The Himalayan Times onTwitterandFacebook

Originally posted here:

Provincial structure is heart of federalism, says CM Rai - The Himalayan Times

Members of OFC: From left Bekele Gerba, vice chairman, Merera Gudina, Chairman, Jawar Mohammed, member, Hamza Borana, member, and Dejene Tafa, 2nd vice chairman in charge of political affairs. All but Merera are currently facing both, terrorism and criminal charges . Picture: Bale Robe during campaign trip in 2019. Social media

By Medihane Ekubamichael@Medihane

Addis Abeba, January 09/2021 Opposition party Oromo Federalist Congress (OFC) has released yet another statement last night saying that the party will find it very difficult to participate in the coming general elections scheduled to take place on June 05/2021.

The statement, the second in as many weeks, said that repeated the calls that it will be very difficult for us to participate in the election, as our leaders, members and supporters, who would be participating, coordinating and observing, have been arrested and others have been displaced and our offices have been forcibly closed.

The party has made a similar call on December 09 last year in which it said it finds it extremely hard to take part in coming elections under the existing conditions in the country whereby many of its leadership as well as rank and file members remained jailed, most of its offices are closed by the government, and the free movements of its members are restricted.

As the OFC has repeatedly expressed in the past, it finds it extremely difficult to take part in the election when the majority of its members from federal to Kebelle (small districts) level who are competing, coordinating, and observing elections are imprisoned, and majority of its offices, except for its headquarters, are closed.

The OFC has requested an immediate effort to reach at a national consensus before holding the elections, a call it repeated in its latest release yesterday despite falling on deaf ears.

In addition to calls for national consensuses and the release of its members, OFCs latest statement also warned that the growing calls by right-wing forces that oppose the constitution and the multinational federalism [and] push forward with threat to it was reverberating among those in control of the scepter of power who are also seen working to reverse the federal structure. it said, and cautioned OFC understands that this is a dangerous move.

It is to be recalled that on September 30 last year OFC had called for genuine national dialogue and warned that Ethiopia has entered a new year with all its heavy political burdens with both hope and despair. And without a shadow of doubt, the hoped-for democratic transition is disturbingly failing.

The expansion of the political space is crucial for our political problems as well as for free, fair and democratic elections!

Statement from the Oromo Federalist Congress (OFC) on current affairs of our country

Since its inception, the Oromo Federal Congress has been anorganization that believes in peaceful dialogue and negotiation and hasstressed the need for dialogue, discussion and negotiation to solve ourcountrys political problems. It isknown that it has been working for free, fair and democratic elections with theaim of holding public office.Accordingly, many of our members have made great sacrifices in our yearsof bitter struggle against the EPRDF-led government for the democratization ofthe federal system, interference in the autonomy of the states and theabolition of the caretaker administration.

OFC leaders, members, and supporters from the center to thelower echelons were killed, arrested, tortured, deported, and persecuted. Still today, countless OFC members andsupporters, from the top to the bottom, are being tortured and imprisoned invarious concentration camps, including police stations, special forces camps,corporate offices, prisons, and classrooms, simply because they stand up for therights and freedoms of their people.

On the other hand, using the current Ethiopian crisis, right-wing forces have begun to push political parties established based on the constitution and identity out of the political space by claiming that the the multinational federalism we got in its shape is too much.There are more and more organizations working on condemning the question of nations together with the TPLF, forgetting that it was raised before the formation of the TPLF.We say that these right-wing forces should be warned on time.

The purpose of the Oromo Federalist Congress is to ensure that the people of the Oromia region are represented only in the federal system of the people and in democratic elections, and that their basic democratic right to self-determination, without being ashamed of their identity, neither being lesser nor greater than anyone, is respected in accordance with international principles. However, while the right-wing forces that oppose the constitution and the multinational federalism push forward with threat to it, those in control of the scepter of power are also seen working to reverse the federal structure. OFC understands that this is a dangerous move.

OFC has been urging to resolve political differences through national dialogue, fearing that a war alternative could harm our poor country and benefit of our people, and thereby hasten the downfall of our country. Neither the government nor the ruling party are listening to us.

What is more surprising is that the government, the ruling party, and the National Electoral Board of Ethiopia (NEBE) have set a timeline for the sixth general election, leaving aside efforts to bring about national consensus that has been ongoing for three years from Addis Abeba to Arba Minch and Bishoftu. It is known that competing parties, the Ethiopian people, and international observers have denied that all five previous elections were free, fair, credible, and did not meet international standards.In the current situation, with the treatment of the government and its allies, it seems naive to expect the next election to be free, fair and credible.

Therefore: The Oromo Federalist Congress (OFC) has called for participatory negotiations and discussions on the complex problems of our country and the transition to democracy despite falling on deaf ears, the part will still present the following questions and suggestions.

1. The FDRE government, in accordance with the human and democratic rights enshrined in the Constitution and the international law adopted by our country, should immediately release our party leaders, members, supporters and other sections of the society who have been imprisoned for their political positions and ensure that political parties operate freely. We also strongly urge that our offices, which have been closed by government forces, be reopened. We would like to inform the people of Ethiopia and all concerned bodied that it will be very difficult for us to participate in the election, as our leaders, members and supporters, who would be participating, coordinating and observing, have been arrested and others have been displaced and our offices have been forcibly closed.

2. We urge the government and the ruling party to urgentlyfacilitate the situation so that the leaders and members of the police, specialforces and militias engaged in different parts of the country workindependently of party politics and respect the democratic and human rights ofcitizens.

3. The state-run media is only reflecting the interests ofthe ruling party. Some so-called privatemedia outlets that have close ties to the government sing a single melodycalling for the government to use force to destroy ethnic and nationalistparties. Such an approach will not benefit our country. Therefore, we respectfully request all mediaoutlets to work diligently to provide information to Ethiopians so that thepublic can understand the general situation of our country and fulfill theirprofessional duties.

4. Law is enacted to protect and guarantee the security of citizens, whereas development and prosperity are unthinkable by just only saying them repeatedly in a country where law and order are not respected. Extrajudicial killings, arbitrary arrests, displacements, and intimidation are taking place in various areas outside of the provisions of the Constitution. The police rearrests a citizen whose release of had been ordered by the courts under unidentified authorization. Government officials who commit crimes under the guise of government shall not be prosecuted. There are very few, though. We therefore call on the courts, the criminal investigation department and the police to be independent of any party or group and to support the efforts to build good governance and democracy.

5. We entrust the Ethiopian Human Rights Commission (EHRC)to monitor the inhumane and undemocratic activities in various parts of thecountry and fulfill its legal obligations and play its role in saving ourpeople from massacre.

6. We are at a critical juncture in which our countryspolitical forces can narrow our differences and create a national consensus andachieve a successful democratic transition.We urge the government, the ruling party and the National ElectoralBoard of Ethiopia to put an end to their policy of holding free, fair and acceptableelections and to create a conducive political environment.

In conclusion: What we want to leave to the people of Ethiopia and history is that we have failed to develop and modernize our politics for the past fifty years and we have been struggling from one crisis to another, from one transition to another. The result is being seen. Unfortunately because we have not learned from our recent history, we are in a situation where our priests, sheikhs, Aba Gedas, and elders find it difficult to bring about national consensus for the past three years. We are seeing the pros and cons with the Ethiopian people.

For the past three years, we are struggling with a dream of bringing about a peaceful, free and fair election without a national consensus and agreement on a common roadmap for a successful democratic transition. Therefore, to avoid that this is not becoming a fools marathon,our organization respectfully calls on all Ethiopian political forces and the Ethiopian people, who are truly organized for the rights and freedoms of your people, to work together to save our country from this difficult time.

There is no alternative than a national consensus to bring a successful democratic transition!

Oromo Federalist Congress (OFC)

Finfinne: January 8, 2021

Read the original here:

News: OFC says, again,very difficult to participate in election under current conditions; cautions threat to multinational federalism dangerous move -...

The Modi government and the BJP are planning another serious assault on the Constitution and the very basis of parliamentary democracy in India. The BJP has conducted 25 webinars in the last week of December 2020 to propagate the idea of one nation, one election. This came in the background of Prime Minister Narendra Modi making one of his periodic pronouncements about the need for one nation, one election. The latest was at the 80th Presiding Officers Conference on November 26, which happened to be the Constitution Day.

The BJP webinars trotted out the now well-known arguments for the need for simultaneous elections of the Lok Sabha and state Assembly elections: that it will save a lot of expenditure; repeated elections bring the Model Code of Conduct into play which hampers development work and divert officials attention and so on.

In one of the webinars, Bhupendra Yadav, a general secretary of BJP, stated, Election is just a means in democracy, but repeated elections show that it has become the only objective of a democracy. Governance lags behind.

The underlining message is that too many elections are not good for democracy; more important is governance. This is in line with what the CEO of Niti Aayog, Amitabh Kant, said that there is too much democracy in India with regard to the farmers struggle. The message is as clear as daylight the call for one nation, one election is a logical extension of one nation, one leader and the leader has declared that this is not a matter of debate but a necessity for India.

Read more:

BJPs agenda of one nation, one election is a threat to democracy and federalism - National Herald