Re: In support of rotational presidency July 30, 2013 by John Uwaya I’ve read Simon Abah’s write-up in The PUNCH, Monday, July 29 but wonder if the writer read mine entitled, “Distorted Federalism and Pervasive Insecurity”, serialised by The Guardian on March 17 and 18. In any case, below is a short extract: “…Also, the same allure and ease of corrupt enrichment through public office is reason why the matter of who occupies any political office is a do-or-die affair to the extent that political gladiators with so much ill-gotten wealth at their disposal are now arming thugs and religious fanatics to threaten both individual and national security. “The same disdain for merit and absence of national agenda is reason why there is so much acrimony as to which section of the country should produce the president at any given time. And with talk of rotating or zoning the presidency, no one should expect good governance and hence, national security. In itself, the very idea of rotation or zoning conjures intents other than service as the real motive for desiring power. “Also, as it is now obvious, presidents from undemocratic arrangements like zoning or rotation naturally pander to the whims and caprices of the geopolitical zones that threw them up to the detriment of national integration and pursuit of national agenda. It gives no room for constructive criticisms as well as attempts at checks and balances, which are wrongly construed as impatience by one geopolitical zone to wait for its turn to govern. Instead, every geopolitical zone comes and does its own thing with no continuity or building upon the good programmes of even an immediate past government of the same political party. Imagine the speed of policy somersaults and thrusts immediately President Olusegun Obasanjo handed over power to another geopolitical zone. How can we integrate and grow together as a nation without a national focus or agenda. “So, one can safely conclude that the ease of corrupt enrichment and not service is reason why deciding on which geopolitical zone occupies the presidency, is such a contentious issue…” Ever since the failed country of Yugoslavia that disintegrated via a sectarian war or ethnic cleansing, I do not know any country that is presently practising rotational presidency. However, rotational presidency rightly belongs in a confederation where the federating states or units are stronger than the central government — a largely weak centre or a ceremonial president. So, our problem stems from wanting to have our cake and still eat it, i.e. practising a rotational presidency with a strong centre. The earlier we called a spade a spade and went for either true federalism or confederacy, the better for all of us. Otherwise, we are merely postponing the evil day or riding on a tiger. John Uwaya
Posted on: Thu, 22 Jan 2015 05:18:04 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015