JONATHAN AND STATE GOVERNORS Editorial Published on Thursday, 20 March 2014 (Daily Trust) President Goodluck Jonathan caused more than a few raised eyebrows recently when he appeared to suggest that he had a rulebook in which he scores state governors, not on their performance in office, but how close or distant they are to him in interpersonal relationship. Addressing a delegation from Anambra State who visited Aso Rock to mark the end of the tenure of former governor Mr Peter Obi, Jonathan made the astonishing, indeed exasperating disclosure, that not all the governors enjoyed ‘equal status’ in his relationship with each. Apparently measuring others in his book against what he listed as the Obi’s virtues, the president employed words such as ‘antagonists’ to describe them, noting that they were always ‘intent’ on verbal assaults and blackmail on his administration. He went on to say that while governors were elected to ‘develop’ their states, “the best thing is to have a good relationship with the centre” since wearing boxing gloves and jumping into the boxing ring to face Mr. President “does not help the development of any state”. Such thinly veiled threat should have no place in a democracy. It is not difficult pinpointing which governors that president had in mind; they are in the main those have have publicly disagreed with him in matters of policy. That was why one of them, Kano State’s Governor Rabi’u Musa Kwankwaso, reacting to the president, accused the Federal Government of putting the cat among the pigeons by a deliberate policy of divide-and-rule to make the governors disagree in their forum, which has now broken into two factions as a result. Kwankwaso observed that such action of the president’s was capable of jeopardizing the collective interest of Nigerians. The fact is that both sides have been indecorous in their public engagements regarding their mutual disagreements, falling far short of the expectation of the people they lead. For instance, the president’s comments carry an ominous tinge that suggests that for any state to enjoy benefits optimally from the federal government, the governor concerned must kowtow to him. Such expectation is strange, even offensive, to the Nigerian Constitution on the basis of which the Presidency’s powers and functions and those of each state governor, are defined. A good rapport is good, and should help smooth certain areas of such relationships, but it cannot be the basis for defining protocols for federal -state interface with respect to resource allocation as well as on matters of exclusive and concurrent jurisdictions. In a country with a celebrated diversity in political inclinations and polarities of its constituent groups, the least that can be expected of the president is to be disposed to accommodating all shades of opinion which any section of the nation may express. Hence the play-out of personal uneasiness of the president over views expressed by other political office holders is not helpful. Just as well, because the lesson in the president’s comments qualifies for attention by the state governors, some of whom by their conduct leave much to be desired. The NGF should not be a platform for executing unending battles with the Presidency; that should not be part of its mandate. It should instead be active in promoting meaningful development in the states and pursuing common interest in the members’ interaction with the president and his officials. Moving forward, there needs to be a new model for developing and managing intergovernmental synergy between the president and state governors, which should be guided by mutual respect for each other and based on legal principles as enshrined in the Constitution.
Posted on: Thu, 20 Mar 2014 07:39:52 +0000