VANGUARD: Headlines

WEDNESDAY, 30TH MAY, 2001

Leaders of Thought meet in Abuja.

By Bolade Omonijo, Sam Ogbeifun & Chioma Ugwunebo

ABUJA — FOUR of the nation’s six geo-political zones — South-East, South-South, South-West and North-Central agreed yesterday that only a national conference with sovereign power could resolve the country’s intractable problems, as a meeting of leaders of thoughts got underway in Abuja.

The remaining two zones — North-East and North-West were undecided yesterday as their representatives said they needed more consultation.

Immediate past Secretary-General of the Commonwealth, Chief Emeka Anyaoku in a special democracy lecture in Abuja also yesterday called for a national conference as a against a sovereign one, to resolve all the contentious issues threatening to tear the nation apart.

At the leaders of thought meeting convened by the Ooni of Ife, Oba Okunade Sijuwade and the Sultan of Sokoto, Alhaji Muhammadu Maccido on behalf of Concerned Traditional Rulers, Prof. Ben Nwabueze speaking for the South-East said: "Our delegation is attending this meeting in the hope and belief that it is meant to prepare the ground for a national conference. We consider a conference of the ethnic nationalities in the country to be an absolute necessity as a forum for tackling the problems that prompted the Committee of Traditional Rulers to convene this meeting."

Prof. Nwabueze, Secretary-General of Ohaneze Ndigbo, and constitutional lawyer dismissed as a misconception argument that powers for constitution making and amendment rested in the government of the day.

Prof. Nwabueze who spoke for about one hour articulating the position of the South-East delegation, presented the lead position which was adopted by other delegations.

He described government’s mandate as limited in nature, lacking the power to make fundamental and radical nature.

Demands by the delegation included resources control, religious neutrality of the state, rotation of the presidential office, restructuring of the federal system and confederal arrangement as an option of last report.

Associating the South-West delegation which he led with Prof. Nwabueze’s contributions, Senator Abraham Adesanya said he would have "wished to adopt the Supreme Court procedure where the lead judgement is delivered and others merely say I concur. I would have said I concur to the address of Prof. Ben Nwabueze."

The leader of the Yoruba who said he was speaking the mind of the 21-member South-West delegation called for a return to the 1960 constitution as "a working document before a properly constituted sovereign conference of all Nigerian ethnic nationalities."

Senator Adesanya dismissed fears that a national conference could lead to the break up of Nigeria. He described such fears as misplaced "because Nigerians do not want heir country to break up."

He explained that Nigerians "are only concerned that things should be properly arranged to ensure unity, fairness, equity and justice to all."

The delegations from the South-South led by Senator David Dafinone and North-Central led by Chief Solomon Lar (represented by Commodore Dan Suleiman) adopted the Nwabueze and Adesanya addresses.

Senator Dafinone described various provisions of the 1999 constitution as inconsistent with the practice of federalism, insisting that only a national conference could resolve thorny issues.

Chief Lar, former Chairman of the ruling Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), said "there is no alternative to true federalism."

He sought to correct the view that the Middle Belt constitutes the North-Central.

Rather, he said, "the Middle Belt is South of the North and North of the South."

He declared that "we hope that respectable leaders of other zones will today join us in the demand for a restructured Nigeria. Regions should have no less power than agreed at independence so that each region will develop at its own pace."

Chief Lar said "a national conference is inescapable. He also called for the establishment of a Solid Minerals Development Commission.

Alhaji Maitama Sule from the North-West and Senator Ibrahim Tugga from the North-East, however, complained that they were not given adequate notice for consultation.

Alhaji Maitama Sule said "nobody is afraid of a conference. We cannot run away from discussing the problems of this country."

Describing himself "as an individual, an old coaster somebody who has been in it since independence," the former minister appealed to the traditional rulers "to allow the various zones to discuss in detail before next meeting."

Alhaji Maitama Sule traced Nigeria’s problem to a penchant to ape other countries. He called for a closer attention to the African culture in the process of fashioning a constitution. In China, there are 1.4 billion people and they have no problem feeding themselves. The West castigates them for human rights abuses but the system is working. The country is stable because they have retained their culture. Malaysia has also made progress because they have retained their culture.

"Perhaps why we have problems with amending the constitution is because we have been trying to ape others. If we had retained African democracy while learning from others there would have been progress."

Speaking further on the demand for national conference, Alhaji Maitama Sule said: "We must be ourselves to solve our problems. Whether it is a national conference or not, the issues must be discussed for us to move forward."

Senator Tugga on his part frowned at the calls for the abolition of the Sharia, and described as contradictory the demand for true federalism and denunciation of the Sharia.

The senator said Northerners had the right to decide how to be governed, and asked Southerners to stop attempting to make Northern Muslims second class citizens in their own country.

"When they are in Calabar, Ibadan or Enugu, they cannot enjoy their rights to be full Muslims and Northerners in Lagos are not demanding Sharia. But they (Southern Christians) should not also decide for Zamfara where there is a majority 85 per cent Muslims how they should be ruled," he said.

The senator defined federation as a collection of compromising people.

Earlier in his address of welcome, the Ooni of Ife, co-convener of the meeting made a plea for mutual respect, tolerance, political stability and permanent peaceful co-existence.

The Ooni described the gathering as important because "our leaders gathered here today are those whose views have always been taken seriously, but we must build a bridge of understanding among ourselves."

Present at the meeting were the Ooni of Ife, Oba Okunade Sijuwade, the Emir of Gwandu, Alhaji Mustapha Jokolo, the Tor Tiv, Dr. Alfred Torkula, the Ochidoma, Chief Elias Ikoyi Obekpa, the Asagba of Asaba, Prof. Edozien, the Shehu of Borno, Alhaji Mustapha El-Kanemi, Emir of Kano, Alhaji Ado Bayero, and Gom Gbom, Jos.

The South-West delegation led by Senator Abraham Adesanya comprised Prof. Bolaji Akinyemi, Lt.-Gen. Alani Akinrinade, Mr. Ayo Opadokum, Chief Richard Akinjide, Prince Dayo Adeyeye, Chief Olu Falae, Justice Adewale Thompson (rtd.), Gen. Adeyinka Adebayo, Vice-Admiral Akin Aduwo, Alhaji Ganiyu Dawodu, Dr. Frederick Fasehun, Chief Ayo Adebanjo, Dr. Omololu Olunloyo, Prince Oluwole Awolowo, the Rt. Rev. Bolanle Gbonigi, among others.

From the East came former Vice-President, Dr. Alex Ekwueme, Commodore Ebitu Ukiwe (rtd.), Ikemba Nnewi, Chief Emeka Odumegwu-Ojukwu, Dr. Chukwuemeka Ezeife, Chief Emmanuel Iwuanyanwu, Chief Bob Ogbuagu, Dr. Okwesilieze Nwodo, Chief Sonny Odogwu, and Chief M.C.K. Ajuluchukwu.

The North-Central delegation comprised Commodore Dan Suleiman (rtd.), Chief Paul Unongo and Chief Cornelius Adebayo. The South-South was represented by Senator David Dafinone, Chief Albert Horsfall, Chief Felix Ibru, Chief Solomon Asemota and Chief M.T. Mbu.

From North-West were Alhaji Maitama Sule, Alhaji Umaru Shinkafi, while Alhaji Tugga led the North-East delegates.

lAnyaoku wants national conference

And in his democracy day lecture entitled: "Democracy, good governance and development in Nigeria," Chief Anyaoku warned that to continue to ignore the call for national conference could spell doom for the progress and unity of Nigeria.

But he said a sovereign national conference was not desirable in a country with legitimate government. Said he: "I believe that the best way of settling these debates and controversies is through a national dialogue, that is a national conference at which the representatives chosen by the main ethnic and creditable groups can discuss and arrive at a consensual positions on this fundamental issues of our constitution.

"Both the executive and the National Assembly will thereafter see to it that the 1999 constitution is revised on the basis of the consensus reached at the national conference.

"It is only where there is no legitimate government that we can talk about sovereign national conference, happily this is not the case in Nigeria.

"Those who use the word sovereign because they are concerned not to have a repetition of our past experience when the outcomes of constitutional review conferences were arbitrarily revised and imposed on the nation by the then military regimes, I would say that we now have an elected government whose arms, especially the executive and the legislative, will be expected to recognise the danger for the country and for themselves of tempering with the consensus position that emerge from a national conference of the principal representatives of their electorate."

In his remarks, National Chairman of All Peoples Party (APP), Alhaji Yusuf Ali disagreed with Chief Anyaoku, saying it was only the National Assembly that could discuss and provide solutions to issues threatening the fundamental existence of the country.

The APP chairman who said the National Assembly should be left alone to continue their job asked the modalities to be adopted in selecting those to represent the ethnic groups at the national conference.

But the National Chairman of the Alliance for Democracy (AD), Alhaji Ahmed Abdulkadir in his remark tongue-lashed the President Olusegun Obasanjo-led government for failing to deliver the promised democracy dividends after two years in office. According to him, "any realistic Nigerian will confess that the prevailing economic, social and political situation is not what we wished for them on May 29, 1999 the present administration took over power from the military."

Awolowo and Gowon's gang of advisers including the British scutlled the Aburi Accord. Unopposed by other political Heavy weights such as Zik or the Sarduana, Awo had a field day with the diffident Gowon.

He was behind the huried first 12 state creation to pre-empt Biafrans, because he could'nt see how the Yorubas would be left alone to deal with the Hausa/Fulani.

The Hausa/Fulani tolorated him as long as the issue of Biafra's secession was taken care of. As soon as they smelled victory, the uneasy alliance ended.

The anger and Bitterness of the Yoruba today, is that they were outfoxed by the Hausa/Fulani, who used them to prosecute the war, then came after the war and dominated the Nigerian affair.

The Hausa/Fulani Maffia has also made it clear condecendinly so that, they are the ones to decide which Yoruba gets to the helm.

If that is not political castration, I dont know what else to call it. Inspite of the Yoruba nation's repertoir of capable leaders, the maffia has always brought back the same failed man.

Unfortunately, the Yorubas are today's Nigeria problem, and the Hausa-Fulanis knowing the vulnereable and not trust worthy nature of the Yorubas, knew Yorubas were the machinery to be used in placing the country to its present state of confusion--using their own man to determine how weak they have been.

Whoever that would have imagined that, Obasanjo, after spending time in prison, would emerge as prescribed by the Hausa-Fulani ruling elites to head Nigeria again on the scorecard of the Hausas, after the Yorubas in all of their brouhaha regarding NADECO, AD and Afenifere, still do not see it clearly that a Yoruba would never rule Nigeria on the platform of "Egbe Omo Oduduwa."

But ironically, they are still the same sycophants and traitors one cannot trust. When Obasanjo was elected, what happened to the principles of Egbe Omo Oduduwa? The same people as slippery and dangerous like a snake found solace in joining the PDP government, just like most did during the Abacha years.

Now, let's talk about Sovereign National conference and the big deal that comes along with it. The problem is, most Igbo intellectual elites and leaders are in denial, too. When they support and back the so-called national conference, don't they remember a similar conference had been held in the past only to be foiled by Igbo-haters, Obafemi Awolowo, in particular?
What guarantees that the same callers of this conference will not renege? It happened before, remember?

If you noticed the number of people in their entourage, you can begin to see that for the chameleons this is a prelude to depart from Nigeria unscathed.

The fear of revenge, that is the rest of what is left of Nigeria partucularly Ndiigbo forcing it into a war if it declears the republic of Oduduwa; compels it to make sure that we are singing the same song this time around.

I don't think that in 1967 prior to the Aburi accord that the East had any concreet understanding as to where the Yorubas stand.

This is why I still question the "tactical" move to liberate Midwest and consequently Lagos and the West spearheaded by Victor Banjo.

If they all agreed on Aburi at the time, it may be that the aggrement was just on face value, they knew going in that they were not going to honor it.

Their believe this time, with the North skeptical is that the document generated from the SNC will provide them with enough latitude to be able to negotiate their exit if and when it in their interest to do so. Without making the same mistake that Biafra made of a unilateral declearation.

Nevertheless, the so-called "Sovereign National Conference" is a good call, but the bone of contention still relies on trust since most of these "sovereign Nationalist" as one is weary of pointing out, are not seeing it from the other side of the coin.

First, what is it about this sovereign national conference that wasn't discussed or deliberated at Aburi? And why are the Ndigbos of the Anyaokus, Ukiwes, Ndubuisi Kalus, and lately the Ekwuemes and the rest jumbled Igbo intellectuals conceding to a conference tailored by NADECO/AD/Afenifere to preserve a nation that never was and never would be?

Secondly, the present undertakings by these bellicose Igbo elites who as perceived right now, know vividly well that they are not protecting Igbo interests; and quite well understand the contradictions of their positions to which in the past they held their tongues as we have seen recently in Uwazuruike's MASSOB; what are they doing about the scheme of things?

Finally, Uwazuruike is fighting for his life, and these Igbo intellectual elites, amazingly, are twisting the entire story, seeking compromise with the same people that destroyed them in the past.

It all means we haven't learned our lessons. I am already weary of pointing out that Anyaoku and his brigade of shenanigans are not the best for Ndigbo. Where was Anyaoku at the "Aburi Accord?"

We shouldn't let him have a place in Biafra or Igbo history because he was a traitor. And, besides, why should we be listening to him? What has he done?

[ May 31, 2001: Message edited by: Ambrose ]

I perfectly understand your position on this issue. Here's my take on it....There are at least today, two schools of Igbo nationalism.
Those who advocate it but within the confines of the Nigerian state. More than half of the elites you mentioned falls under this category. The other school of Igbo nationalism wants the Igbo nation out of the political confines of the Nigerian state.

The former group will be willing to accept complete exit from Nigeria only on the grounds of a major upheveal that grossly affects the Igbo i.e. another large scale ethnic cleansing of the magnitude equall or greater than the 1966-67 pogrom.

The later group of Igbo nationalism needs no further catastrophy, thinks that Ndiigbo has had enough. Most youths, and the diaspora Ndiigbo belongs to this group.

This is why you basically have two different organizations for these schools of thought. The Ohaneze for the elite group, and the Massob and BAF, and others for the grassroots and the intellectuals in diaspora.

The interests of the elite group and the grass roots will only merge when the Nigerian state's policies brings them together.

The Ohaneze therefore, see his interest being served by supporting the SNC. It believes that it will be the last chance to save the Nigerian state, and I believe broker a deal that will contain most of the elements of the Aburi Accord.

The grassroots on the other hand, thinks that it will be an excercize in futility; given Nigeria's checkered History, that group suspicion, skepticism and outright chicanry will not allow the outcome to be anything worth writing home about.

Where lies the answer? personally, the two shools of thought approach is an excellent strategy. A two pronged attack if you will. The dynamics of events will determine which tactic prevails.

You made a salient point with the two strategies--Ohaneze and MASSOB--for self-determination. But my own take, too, is, the elite group (Ohaneze and some jumbled Igbo intellectual elites) have not served or protected any Igbo interest since the persecution and annihilation of Ndigbo commenced anew, especially in the so-called "nascent union" of our neo-democracy in the Fourth Republic.

That, of course, should be an indication they have no case to present on behalf of the Igbos but for their own interest.

On the other hand, Igbo factions obviously is of no help. If the elite group, privileged per se, refused to identify the causes and effects to their engagements of dabbling into political tactics dismissing the recognition of Igbo self-reliance, as in MASSOB, then history will be an indication a one Nigeria is patently deceptive and a lost cause.

Too, many factors can be attributed to this, and several key reasons explain why.

The first reason involved a lack of Igbo unity which took shape in the post-Civil War era. Ndigbo are not organized as a nation. We do not have a national party, as in the descendants of "Egbe Omo Oduduwa," and as a machinery to fight our causes collectively.

Secondly, we have no national identity. We are now largely an anonymous group, not differentiated from the rest of Nigeria; logically while our movements continue to falter.

Finally, Ohaneze must come to terms with reality using their influence to apply The Principles of Self-Determination in the event a sovereign national conference or whatever conference is in place. And if the approach by Ohaneze prevails, would that not be a one Nigeria?

The Guardian Online - http://ngrguardiannews.com
Sunday, June 3, 2001
Progressives To Hold National Conference

FROM SAXONE AKHAINE

KADUNA

THE Progressives, under the platform of National Progressive Forum (NPF), yesterday, agreed to conduct an independent National Conference which apparently may pre-empt the Federal Government, that was expected to set up a similar body to look into the various complaints of ethnic nationalities in the country.

Last Wednesday, traditional rulers, who met in Abuja, under the aegis of the Conference of Concerned Traditional Rulers and Leaders of Thought, also agreed that it was through the convening of a national conference that most problems bedevilling the country could be resolved.

But the NPF, which paraded many prominent politicians who met at the Arewa House, Kaduna, stated in a communiquŽ issued at the end of their meeting that the progressives would come out with the result of an authentic conference which would adequately address the socio-political and economic problems confronting the nation and all the ethnic nationalities.

The communiquŽ signed by the protem national chairman of NPF, Dr. Ezekiel Izuogu and protem national secretary, Alhaji Shittima Ibrahim, stated that the members agreed "that a platform conference to involve all Nigerians who believe that the nation needs a drastic change of direction be held within the next four weeks to work out positions on all the major issues presently confronting the nation".

Consequently, a national committee to organise the conference was set up., They include Chief Olu Falae, Professor Usman, Mrs. S. Brent, Chief John Oyegun, Alhaji Balarabe Musa, Chief S. Udunka, Mrs. Sarah Jibril, Alhaji Shettima Ibrahim, Alhaji Talba and Chief Frank Kokori.

The secretary, Alhaji Ibrahim, said that "the National Assembly should be strongly urged to act with courage and in tune with the existing constitutional provisions to ensure that there is unfettered freedom for Nigerians to form political parties, including provision for independent candidate.

VANGUARD: Headlines

WEDNESDAY, 6TH JUNE, 2001
Senate throws out Sovereign National confab debate.

By Sufuyan Ojeifo & Emmanuel Aziken

ABUJA— THE Senate voted yesterday against attempts by Senator Arthur Nzeribe to reopen debate on the propriety or otherwise of a Sovereign National Conference (SNC) or national conference outside of the National Assembly.

But many of the Alliance for Democracy (AD) senators wanted the senate to debate the Nzeribe motion.

The overwhelming "yes" votes that foreclosed the debate provided the basis for the ruling of the deputy senate president, Senator Ibrahim Mantu who presided at yesterday’s session in the absence of the senate president, Senator Anyim Pius Anyim.

However, Senator Tokunbo Afikuyomi, (AD) who had earlier called for a division to determine the exact number of Senators for and against the debate of the motion, raised a point of order, citing order 73 of the Senate standing rules which empowers a senator to challenge the opinion of the senate president through a call for division.

His position and clamour for attention were drowned by the uproar by his numerous colleagues who were opposed to the reopening of debate on the issue of SNC via the motion by Senator Nzeribe.

Senator Nzeribe, relying on order 14 (under privileges) had drawn the attention of the Senate to newspaper reports on the resolution of a group styled "Leaders of Thought" representing the six geo-political zones at their Abuja meeting where they agreed to fashion the modality to change the 1999 constitution.

The text of Nzeribe’s motion, seconded by Senator Dalhatu Tafida reads:

"I wish I could arrogate to myself the right to claim that I speak for the other 107 colleagues. The matter of which I speak ,by which my privileges have been offended affects every other senator. It boarders on the provisions of the 1999 Nigerian constitution which is in force. The issue that offends my privileges boarders on direct infringement of sections 1,4 and 9 of the constitution of Nigeria. By section 4 of Nigerian constitution we of the national assembly, of which I am one, are privileged to make laws for the good governance of Nigeria. By section 10, only us can amend the constitution of Nigeria.

"Mr. Senate President, newspaper reports have it on Friday June 1st 2001 that a body, a group styled as "leaders of thought representing the six geopolitical zones of Nigeria, "met in Abuja on May 29-30, 2001 under the auspices of the "committee of concerned traditional rulers to discuss national affairs. One of the key points reached in the communique was that they would fashion the modality to change the 1999 constitution. This is not acceptable. It is a direct challenge to my electoral mandate and my senatorial privilege. Section one of the 1999 Nigerian constitution clearly states that the constitution is superior to any other legal document with regards to laws of the land.

"I do not quarrel with the said body or with other aspects of their meetings. That which I complain of is that by which they arrogate to themselves the right to amend the constitution. That is job responsibility and privilege under the supreme document - I mean the 1999 Nigerian constitution. I intend to protect that which the constitution bestowed on me. Only the national assembly can perform that function. The communique in part reads - "that in view of the observed inconsistencies of the 1999 constitution, there is now a need for the people of Nigeria to exercise their democratic right to amend or review it." It further goes on and I quote. "The meeting agreed to set up a steering committee consisting of three members from each zone to draw up the modalities for the follow-up action."

Mr. Senate President, you will recall that this Senate had an occasion to register a vote in a resolution that we are opposed to a SNC of any sort. We maintained that our position as the true elected democratic representatives of the people with a mandate is enough as a national platform for dialogue.

"My prayer, Mr. Senate President, and distinguished senators, is that this Senate resolves that we are opposed to a national conference of any sort. A national conference at this time is not in the national interest and should not be entertained. I insist that all that is needed for re-adjusting or restructuring the polity is constitutional amendment which can be adequately handled by the national assembly and the state house of assembly. A process which is already on the ground.

"I therefore urge you to support this motion. Grant my prayers that we do not need a SNC or NC outside of the national assembly.

"I so move."

In seconding the motion, Senator Tafida said what the committee of concerned traditional rulers and leaders of thought did could undermine the democratic process, said "for some people who are election failures to come through the back door to take the responsibility of the national assembly, is condemnable".

He requested to know the conveners of the meeting and urged the Senate to summon them to the floor of the house to explain if they do not recognise the function of the national assembly in the circumstance.

The motion, duly seconded, however, was not allowed to be debated consequent upon the constitutional order raised by Senator Jonathan Zwingina.

Citing section 141 (a) and (b), Zwingina said that by the provision of the section; it is out of order for anybody to engage in any form of amendment of the constitution, except through the constitutional provisions."

He argued that it was not even necessary to debate the Nzeribe motion as the constitution is so clear on who can effect amendments to the constitution, a fact which was already stated in the motion.

Senator Idris Abubakar agreed with Senator Zwingina that the issue of SNC offends the spirit of section 14 of the constitution and the earlier position of the Senate on the issue under Senator Okadigbo’s leadership.

The people loudest about SNC are mostly cowards who run out of the country at the first sign of danger. Chief Enahoro is the leader of the cowardly pac that is calling for SNC. You know that these SNC troublemakers are not serious because they are begging Obasanjo to approve their SNC. When you find yourself begging to be allowed to exercise your right, you have tacitly conceded your own hopelessness, and the potential that your ownership of that right is negotiable. First, if Obasanjo’s approval is made necessary to the convening of an SNC, then there will be nothing sovereign about the conference because Obasanjo has already erroneously claimed that he is a sovereign and that the people’s sovereignty resides with him. Obtaining Obasanjo's approval would be tantamount to ratifying his ill-informed claims of sovereignty.

Second, if Obasanjo is involved in planning and executing the (S)NC, then the conference will carry the marks of failure, incoherence, illogicality, and disgust that have come to typify Obasanjo’s involvement in governance. This must be avoided in any conference that is to be a basis for a worthwhile union.

Thus, if the people calling for SNC really mean business, they should demonstrate that they have their people’s mandate by convening the conference over Obasanjo’s objection and contrary to the rules that Obasanjo would wish to impose. Let Enahoro, Ekwueme, and Adesanya show that they are truly the leaders of their respective peoples. This is the only way that we could even come close to having a conference that could be considered sovereign. Otherwise, Enahoro and his fellow travelers should be told to pass on quietly into the great beyond. They should do so without spilling innocent blood as they escape to the safety of Europe and America to spend the last days of their failed leadership. The SNC clarion call has turned into the last hurrah of a failed and aged political class.

____________
Seun

The Aburi Agenda:

1) To resolve the question of leadership within the army, restore the chain of command which had become badly disrupted, and examine the crisis of confidence amongst the officers and soldiers which had rendered it impossible for them to intermingle.

2) To evolve ways and means of carrying on the responsibility of administrating the country until a new constitution had been determined; and

3) To tackle realistically the problems of displaced persons.

THE DECISIONS UNANIMOUSLY REACHED

(i) A military committee comprising representatives of the regions should meet to take statistics of arms and ammunition in the country. Unallocated stores of arms and ammunition held in the country should be shared equitably between the various commands in the federation.

(ii) The army should be reorganized in order to restore discipline and confidence specifiacally,

a) The army should be governed by the Supreme Military Council which would be chaired by a Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces and Head of the Federal Military Government;

b) Area Commanders and corresponding to existing regions should be created;

c) During the period of the military government, military governors should have control over area commands, for internal security;

d) A military headquarters, comprising equal representation from the regions and headed by a chief of staff, should be established;

e) A Lagos garrison, including Ikeja Barracks, should be created.

(iii) In accordance with the decision of August 9, 1966, army personnel of Northern Nigeria origin should return to the North from the West. In order to meet the security needs of the West, a crash programme of recruitment and training was necessary but the details should be examined after the military committee had finished their work.

(iv) The Supreme Military Council should deal with all matters of policy including promotion to top executive posts in the Armed Forces and the Police.

(v) The legislative and executive authority of the Federal Military Government should be vested in the Supreme Military Council, to which any decision affecting the whole country should be referred for determination, provided that, where a meeting is not possible, such a matter must be referred to the military governors for their comments and concurrence.

(vi) Appointments of the diplomatic and consular posts as well as to superscale posts in the Federal Public Service and Equivalent posts in the Federal Corporations must be approved by the Supreme Military Council.

(vii) With a view to promoting mutual confidence, all decrees or provisions of decrees passed since January 15, 1966, which detracted from the previous powers and positions of the regional governments should be repealed. Law officers of the federation should meet in Benin on January 14, 1967, and list all the decrees or provisions of decrees concerned, so that they may be repealed not later than January 21, 1967, if possible.

(viii) A meeting of permanent secretaries of the Ministries of Finance of all the governments in the federation should be convened within two weeks to consider ways and means of resolving the serious problems posed by displaced persons all over the country.

(ix) Displaced civil servants and corporation staff (including daily-paid employees) should continue to be paid their full salaries until March 31, 1967, provided they have not secured alternative employment. The military governors of the East, West and Mid-West should send representatives (Police Commissioners) to meet and discuss the problems of recovery of property left behind by displaced persons.

(x) The Ad Hoc Constitutional Committee should resume sitting as soon as practicable, and the question of accepting the unanimous recommendations of September 1966 should be considered at a later meeting of the Supreme Military Council.

(xi) For at least the next six months there should be purely a military government having nothing to do with politicians.

(xii) The deceased military leaders should be accorded full military honours due to them.

(xiii) All Government information media should be restrained from making inflammatory statements and causing enbarrassment to various governments in the federation.

(xiv) Lt.-Col. Chukwuemeka Odumegwu Ojukwu should keep his order, that non easterners should leave the Easter Region, under constant review with a view to its being lifted as soon as practicable.

(xv) The next meeting of the Supreme Military Council should be within Nigeria at a venue to be mutually agreed.

Thanks for posting the major elements of the Aburi Accord. Though at the time inclined to military government, a discerning mind could see that the elements of the accord was fair equitable and just.

Most of the Military imbalance still exist to a large extent to the detriment of the southern states of Nigeria. However, the fronteir has moved to resource control, secularity of the Nigerian state, Local policing...and greater autonomy in matters of economic well-being of the federating units.

The dossier submitted by Ben Nwabueze is far more reaching in autonomy and devolution of powers than the major elements of the Aburi Accord.

The ACF remains skeptical as in the days of the Aburi Accord. The differnce this time, is that the Middle-Belt which constitute the bulk of the enlisted soldiers in the "butchers army" no longer wants to be seen as part of a unitary North.

The oil-producing states wants autonomy, thus Ndiigbo cannot be isolated as was the case in 1966-67 and made the scape goat again. In essence, "what is good for the goose, is good for the gander"

Your response is off on a tangent from SNC.I am not sure that you do understand what SNC purports to accomplish. Mind you that the South-east is not the original and main proponent of SNC. the South-west and South-south have been shouting about SNC since 1997.

If your view of what I stated, represents the view of most Northern zones, then it clear that the North and some of the southern zones are suffering from an incurable strain of Igbo Phobia.

Bature, you stated I quote "if the South-east have an upper hand, and manipulate resource control...". assuming that your presumption were to happen, Why are the South-west, South-south, and the Northern zones afraid of a bare Knuckle, level playing field competition?. The south-east has been under the "second war" for over thirthy years, yet the rest of Nigeria remains scared and can'nt compete fairly.

If after sitting through another serious conference,to once and for all correct the deffects inherent in Nigeria's governing structure; and the signitaries to the final aggreement reneg on its implementation, then the United Nations must be brouhgt in to oversee the formal seperation of the Political union.

Bature, according to you, the south-east now controls the economy of Lagos. If that were true, it does say something about perseverance,hard work, and commitment to improving one's lot.

Bature, in the Igbo cosmogony, such qualities are worthy of emulation. If the Hausa/Fulani Hegemony with their allies spent just a quarter of the energy they spent trying to destroy Ndiigbo, to learning and emulating Ndiigbo's sense of industry; for the past thirty years, they would've made some progress.

This incessant suspicion and fear of Ndiigbo is bodering on a serious Psychiatric condition for which the rest of Nigeria should seek serious treatment.

Also, the Aburi agreement, as spectacular a document that it was with the then South-West in particular, since the now South-South was never in the picture; and now they (South-South) have been part of the earnest call for a sovereign national conference, to which of course was tabled at Aburi--what guarantees the same mistake would not be made again--renegade?

I do not think the idea of a conference based on the decisions at Aburi should be a platform getting along with the callers of this so-called "sovereign nationalist." The sovereignty in this respect is unconstitutional, one of the reasons it was thrown out by the senate.