17th December, 2013
Elder statesman, Alhaji Tanko Yakassai, in this interview with OLUOKUN AYORINDE, speaks on many key issues in the Goodluck Jonathan government, the 2015 elections, problems confronting the country and the President’s approach to them
In the run-up to the 2011 general elections, you are one of the strong advocates of return of the presidency to the North. But it seems you are no longer keen about the idea, even as some other leaders from the region are clamouring that the presidency must return to the North in 2015. Why?
When I was talking about a northern presidency, many people do not understand what I was talking about. But you have to view the issue against what happened at that time. Obasanjo won the presidential election in 1999, then in 2003 there was a debate on whether he should terminate his presidency when he completed the first term or if he was entitled to second term. The matter was debated at the national caucus meeting of the Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, and it was decided that Obasanjo should be allowed to go for second term as part of the zoning arrangement of the party.
Now, the Board of Trustees decided that Obasanjo should be allowed to go for his second term after which the presidency would, according to PDP Constitution, move to the North. I don’t know what is the truth about it, but it is believed that Obasanjo, in trying to protect that arrangement played a role in bringing Yar’Adua to be the presidential candidate of PDP.
You should remember that before that time, Yar’Adua never expressed interest in the presidency. And virtually everybody also believed that it was Obasanjo that made it possible for Yar’Adua to emerge as the presidential candidate in 2007 on the basis of the continuation of rotational and zoning arrangement of PDP. Now, Yar’Adua won the election with Goodluck Jonathan as his running mate. In the course of his first term, Yar’Adua became sick, he went abroad for treatment and there was a campaign that he left without writing to inform the National Assembly that he was going abroad. And there was a debate on whether he should give notice to the National Assembly or not. The matter went to the High Court in Abuja and the court ruled that writing that letter was discretionary; it was not mandatory.
Then Obasanjo came up with a new campaign that Yar’Adua must write that letter. He (Obasanjo) said it sarcastically that if somebody is given an assignment, if he cannot do it, it is better he should come out to say so and then should allow another person to do it. That was the beginning of the campaign to force Yar’Adua to resign. I and a few others thought that it was not proper for Obasanjo or any other person to force Yar’Adua to resign or even to write a letter to the National Assembly. If you remember, there was a meeting of former heads of state, former retired Chief Justices and other prominent Nigerians, particularly northerners, convened by General Gowon where a decision was taken to ask Yar’Adua to write formally to the National Assembly to convey that he was abroad for treatment. But I argued that writing that letter was not mandatory and because that decision was taken by a number of influential northerners, I considered it a betrayal of Yar’Adua. I also felt unhappy that Alhaji Shehu Shagari, my president – I served him as special assistant and he has been my personal friend for over 40 years – with younger people like Danjuma, Jerry Gana and Jonathan Zwingina at the meeting, would take the trouble of taking the resolutions of the meeting to Jonathan and David Mark. I felt it was belittling of Shagari, in view of his age – he is older than Gowon, Obasanjo and the rest of them – and in view of the fact that he was a president. So, because of that, I reacted and it was widely reported in the media. But my main argument was that since PDP Board of Trustees, BOT, had decided that the rotation would be on two-tenure, Yar’Adua should be allowed, if he was alive, to complete the two tenures and if he died, the Vice-President, as stipulated in our constitution, should complete the rest of his tenure. Thereafter, a northerner should be allowed to be the presidential candidate of the party to complete the cycle which Yar’Adua had started. It was not a question of northern presidency, it was a question of getting PDP to honour its commitment to allow the rotation of two terms consecutively.
Given what happened then, do you still believe in the idea of zoning or rotational presidency?
I honestly believe this was in the best interest of the country. I happened to be a member of National Party of Nigeria, NPN, which initiated zoning and rotation policy during the second republic. I religiously believe in it, not because it is the best for this country, but given the nature of this country it would enable people that would not otherwise have the opportunity to produce the president. By and large, those of us that supported it were having the ethnic minority groups in mind, because without that kind of arrangement it would not be possible for them to produce the president.
So I am an ardent supporter of zoning and rotation, not because of northern presidency, but it is an instrument of stability in Nigeria. I took part in the 1994/95 Constitutional Conference and it was part of the resolution we presented to the Head of State, General Sani Abacha, who also accepted it and incorporated it into the 1995 Constitution. And it was because of that that we suggested that the country should be divided into six zones and we limited the tenure of the president to five years, so that it will rotate from the North to South. The North will have three slots; the South will have three slots.
When the North produced the president this time, the next time it will be South. When it comes back to the North, the zone that produced the last time will not be the one to produce again. In fact, it was decided by Sani Abacha and his colleagues that that experiment would run for 30 years, so that every zone in this country will produce the president. I happened to be very active in the politics that led to the independence of this country.
I was at one time General Secretary of Northern Elements Progressive Union, NEPU, and I was active in all the constitutional conferences during the colonial era. I observed that the first time that we had very serious crisis in Nigeria, apart from the 1953 crisis which emanated from the motion moved by Anthony Enahoro for independence, was after the 1959 election. Since then, I have observed that the polity is always overheated around the times we are approaching federal elections. So the question is the power at the centre; it is usually a live or death affair. Nigerians are bent at getting it at all cost, even if it is at the cost of their country.
So our stand at that time was on insisting that PDP should continue its zoning policy, so that it would become the practice in Nigeria, and which will also bring stability in the future. It was not that I insisted that there should be a northern president.
Are you still keen in seeing that zoning or rotation policy adhered to by PDP?
I am still keen. There are two ways to do it: either you do it by rotation or you do it by reducing the attraction of the centre. And you can make the centre less attractive either by reducing the powers of the centre or by creating a French system that will provide for a prime minister and the president. I think I prefer doing it through the French system. In a committee of about 20 experienced and learned people set up by Governor Kwankwaso, of which I was a member, we tried to do that, and there were members who thought we should transfer power from the centre to the regions. When we took the constitution and began to look at the items one after the other, we, including those advocating for the transfer of power from the centre to the states, concluded that only two items should be put on the concurrent, not exclusive, list for the states. So, because of that, I think that the French system will be a better way out.
If you get a northerner as the president, a southerner as the prime minister, you will reduce the tension. The northerner can come from Zone A, the southerner can come from Zone B, and when there is a change, the zones that will produce them in North and South will change again. I believe it should continue and even in the coming constitutional dialogue, if I have the opportunity, I will argue along this line. I am a committed Nigerian; I went to prison in 1963 on account of national unity of Nigeria and I believe very strongly that the Nigerian nation should remain a single political entity in the best interest of the people.
I observe that Nigerians love this union. I go to Lagos – Balogun market – and I see the Igbo, Yoruba and the Hausa in the market interacting. The first time I went to Lagos was in 1962 and till today, I have been going to Lagos. I have never had an occasion in which the Igbo and the Hausa or the Hausa and the Yoruba fought one another in the market, either in Balogun, Tejuoso or Alaba market; or in Onitsha, Aba, Port Harcourt, Kano.
As individuals, Nigerians live with one another in peace. If you hear any trouble, it is the politicians that are bringing it because of their selfish interest.
With this argument, where do you stand on the clamour by some Nigerians, especially northerners, that President Jonathan should not contest the 2015 elections…
I am glad that you ask this question. I am 87 years old, I was born in 1926, I have 21 children, 50 grandchildren, so Nigeria is my country.
I would think you are younger, just a bit over 70
No, I am 87. Even doctors said I should be 65 or something like that. But my first son was born in 1951. I got married in 1946 and I was married at the age of 20. If I was married at the age of 16, 17, as it was custom in those days, my son would have been 70 by now. I am a realistic Nigerian. President Jonathan never dreamt of becoming the President of Nigeria, but by special divine intervention he became the President. Before him, the Ijaw people never thought that they could produce the President of Nigeria. Jonathan, by the special intervention of God, became the president of this country and he is now half-way through his first term. Even if Jonathan volunteers that he will not go for a second term, the Ijaw people will either kill him or send him into exile. Go and ask any Ijaw man what his reaction will be if Jonathan says he is not going to contest. A total of 16 heads of state, whether colonial, military or civilian, have come and gone in Nigeria and I believe that by the grace of God, Jonathan will not be the last President of Nigeria. Nigeria will remain after him. And like I told you, I have 21 children; my last daughter has also had her own child. So I will not like anything that will bring trouble to Nigeria.
So I would rather allow Jonathan to continue. If the majority of Nigerians agree, let them vote for him to complete his second term. By the provision of our constitution, if they don’t vote for him, then he cannot continue. So, I will not be unrealistic by insisting that Jonathan cannot contest when the court has said that it is his party that should decide who should contest or not. I will leave it to Nigerians to decide.
I was thinking you are no longer keen about the idea of northern presidency?
Not that I am not, but I am a realistic person. Any realistic person will know that it will not be an easy thing to tell Jonathan not to contest. Even if you can tell Jonathan not to contest, what about his people, the Ijaw? Nobody can tell the Ijaw when the opportunity will come their way again. So, the only way out is that Jonathan should be allowed to exercise his constitutional right; if he doesn’t want it, then he should go away. But I know the Ijaw people will not forgive him if he does so.
Many will think that in making this argument, you are succumbing to individuals like Asari Dokubo and others who have vowed to make Nigeria ungovernable if Jonathan was not allowed to run for a second term?
No, no, you are making a mistake. Nigerians need to be reminded that Jonathan contested the election with Atiku (Abubakar) and Sarah Jibril, the lady from Kwara. Now, Jonathan emerged the presidential candidate of PDP at that time; our chairman of G15 was General Babangida (retd). He congratulated Jonathan after he won the primary. Later on, Atiku also congratulated Jonathan for winning the primary at the Convention. I am not a member of PDP; I am not a member of any political party. So, to me, that’s the end of the matter. I am just an ordinary voter. The man who contested against him congratulated him. So what is my business in quarrelling with Jonathan after he had won his party’s nomination? They went into an election, he contested against Buhari; he defeated Buhari. INEC declared him winner. Buhari went to court. The Court of Appeal, which is the court of first instance, decided in favour of Jonathan. He went to the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court also decided in favour of Jonathan. So, to me, the matter has been laid to rest.
There was a presidential aspirant that went to court and I was always with him in the court and I was there when the court said it is not a justisciable matter. And the court quoted the decision of the Supreme Court that it is the prerogative of the PDP to decide where its presidential candidate would come from. The strength of my argument that time was the decision of the Board of Trustees of the party, but the judge said he had gone through the PDP [constitution] and that the power vested in the BOT of the party is only to reconcile the executive and the legislature. The judge said the BOT has no power to interfere whatsoever in the decision of the party on who should be the presidential candidate.
So what do you now make of the activities of some northern leaders who are saying President Jonathan should not contest in 2015?
This is a democracy
What’s your reaction to the argument by some northern governors that the President should not contest in 2015? That is one of the conditions they gave to the President for peace to return to PDP.
No, I didn’t hear them say that. It is the media that are ascribing it to them. I never heard them say Jonathan should not contest. I have never heard them say that; if you see any copy of the statement they issued in which they say so, bring it to me.
There is also the argument that the President should respect the one-term agreement he signed before the 2011 elections as being championed by Governor Aliyu of Niger State.
Till today he has not produced that agreement. I am waiting for that agreement to come out. But this is democracy. I fought for entrenchment of human rights in our constitution because I suffered denial of human rights. And with fundamental human rights entrenched in our constitution, every Nigerian’s right to expression, to hold opinion, is guaranteed. So if some northerners say Jonathan should not contest, they are just exercising their fundamental human rights, I have no problem with them. If anybody says Jonathan should contest, I have no problem with them, except those who are using threats. Election is a matter of persuasion. A good politician is one who turns his enemy into his friend; it is a bad politician who turns his friend into an enemy. So anybody who wants to make a good case for Jonathan should try to persuade people, not threaten them, because if they say they will not vote him in, what can they do? They cannot do anything to them.
What is your assessment of President Jonathan’s administration?
There are positive and negative angles to it. What I have been yearning for is the day I will see the programme of development for this country, because why we are in trouble is that we don’t have development programmes. And that is why I supported General Sani Abacha when he conceived the Vision 2010; that is, bringing back the culture of development plans as initiated by our past leaders. But it was abandoned because of the civil war.
Going back to development plans is in the best interest of this nation because going about nation building without a target, without a goal, is sheer madness. The development of a nation is so enormous that no individual leader can complete it. You can only do your best and leave the rest to others. But like Jonathan is trying to do now, trying to fix the power sector. And if he can do that alone, he would have done a great job for this country because the cause of most of our troubles is the dilapidation in power infrastructure. So he is trying to address the problems of power – from the generation, transmission and distribution angles.
During the 1994/95 Conference, a senior staff of NEPA sought audience with few of us and at that time, there was serious fuel scarcity. But he said what was happening in NEPA was more serious than fuel scarcity because, with fuel scarcity you can import oil, but you cannot import power. He said we should tell government to ensure more investments in the sector, because there was stagnation in the sector. I come from Kano, which was the second most industrialised state (when there was sufficient power in those days), next to Lagos. At the time there was sufficient electricity supply in Nigeria, Kano had about 600 companies. Today, I don’t know if it has up to 100.
The next thing Jonathan is addressing which I like is the issue of transportation. Obasanjo started the issue of the dredging of the River Niger, but he couldn’t go far enough. When Yar’Adua came, he reversed it. So Jonathan is dredging the River Niger. I heard the Vice-President recently saying the actual dredging is almost complete and what is remaining now is to provide infrastructure and communications. And they are now thinking of re-activating the railway transportation. If all these came to fruition, the problem we are having of our Trunk A roads not lasting would disappear. To that extent, I appreciate his programmes.
There is an angle which, in my opinion, he is trying to do his best – that is fighting corruption. And corruption is what is taking away most of our funds. The problem is however more with the judiciary than with government. I listened to Ibrahim Lamorde, [Chairman of the] Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, very recently on Hausa Service of the Voice of America. He was talking of cases they took to court seven years ago and today, they have not been finalised. Unless the courts are prepared to handle corruption cases with dispatch, the fight against corruption will not go anywhere. It is only when people are convicted that others will be afraid of committing the same crime. But somebody will steal N30 billion and you leave him to go free. He will use that money to hire 10 Senior Advocates of Nigeria to raise this objection; that objection, the judges will rule against and they will appeal. The appeal will take one, two years at the Court of Appeal. Then it will take another five years to go to Supreme Court. You can’t fight corruption that way.
So, while I think Jonathan is not performing in the fight against corruption, it is largely not the fault of his government but the lukewarm attitude of the judiciary. I am glad that the current Chief Justice is trying to tackle the issue. She has a directive that when you start a case, it must continue because SANs are taking advantage of adjournments and appeals to frustrate trial of corruption cases. There is corruption all over the world. The only thing is that they bring it under control. See the case of a leading member of the Communist Party of China; the corruption case against him and his wife were quickly disposed of and decided and it is now history. It didn’t take six months.
The argument of some Nigerians is that the President is not showing convincing examples that he is ready to fight corruption. Take the case of the cars scandal involving the Minister of Aviation; they feel there are sufficient facts in the public domain about the issue on which the President could have acted, but he chose instead to set up a committee…
That is military mentality. In a democracy, a person accused of any crime is presumed innocent until proven guilty. If the President sacked the minister on the basis of the allegations only to find out later that the woman has no hand in the matter, he has already penalised her. So, let him take his time. He appointed a committee to look into the matter and the people appointed are respectable people, so I have confidence that they will do justice to the matter. This military mentality of sacking people with impunity is not good for democracy; let us not encourage it.
Do you think the President has also done well in the fight against insecurity, especially that posed by the Boko Haram elements?
Well, he declared a state of emergency, he deployed troops and they are fighting the insurgents. We’ve had a problem of kidnapping in this country, which at one time was very rampant. We also had the problem of youth restiveness which was killing our economy. The oil we were producing before the problem was over two million barrels per day, but the restiveness brought it to under 800,000 barrels per day. After the late Yar’Adua introduced the amnesty programme, production even went up and now we are producing 2.6 million barrels per day. Now, the Boko Haram situation is a new phenomenon, not only in Nigeria but in the whole of Africa. Nobody knew how to handle it before now. Now they are gaining experience of how to handle it. Undoubtedly, the frequency of the activities of the Boko Haram people now is much less than what it was a year ago. So, at the rate we are going I believe that we will soon begin to see the end of Boko Haram.
Do you support the idea of national conference?
When people were asking for national conference, you, the media, reported it. Why did Jonathan appoint a committee to probe Oduah? It is because people are talking. In a democracy, when people tal, the government has to act. If Nigerians say there must be conference and government say there will be no conference, you don’t know what will happen. It may drive people to desperation. Let’s have the conference.
During the Sani Abacha regime, before he summoned the constitutional conference he appointed a constitutional conference commission headed by Justice Saidu Kawu and Babangida Aliyu, the present governor of Niger State, as the secretary to the commission. They went round the country, over 3,000 memoranda were submitted to that committee and not a single one advocated for the disintegration of Nigeria. You find people fighting one another over whether Nigeria should continue or not. So, give them chance, this is democracy, let them talk, superior arguments will overcome inferior arguments, then there will be peace in the country. But if you say you will not listen to the yearnings of the people, there will be trouble for you and your country.
So, what are the issues that you think should be discussed, especially from the northern perspective?
You can’t take the Nigeria issue from any sectional perspective; it has to be from a national perspective. I want peace and stability because without it, we cannot develop. Nigerians should discuss extensively how this country should develop. And fortunately, I attended the 1994/95 Constitutional Conference and the best of arguments were adduced and very good decisions that can take this country to the path of progress and development were taken.
Fortunately, Gen. Abacha accepted the recommendation of that conference. The conference was attended by 400 eminent Nigerians; we produced a very good constitution. Unfortunately, when Abacha died, Abdusalami came and appointed a 17-member committee, he gave them limited time and they had no time even to read the recommendation given to Sani Abacha. For instance, on the issue of revenue allocation, the decision of the 1994/95 Constitutional Conference was that because of the degradation of the areas where oil is exploited, oil bearing states should be given 13 per cent and it was a unanimous decision by northerners and southerners. But when Abdusalami Abubakar came, he used his position, because the decision under Abacha was “not more than 13 per cent”, but the committee opened a Pandora’s box; they said “not less than” and this is the reason you now have Niger Delta people asking for 100 per cent or 50 per cent or this and that.
If that had been settled, we wouldn’t have the problem of nagging again. Also, the Obasanjo confab; all the delegates were of high calibre, they made beautiful presentations. But Obasanjo smuggled in the matter of tenure elongation and because of that, the whole report was rejected. So, my suggestion now is take all the previous recommendations, including that of Obasanjo confab, look at them one after the other and see which ones are good for the country, adopt them and throw away those considered not good for the country. I am sure that by the time that they finish, we will be left with only one or two items that have not been addressed before. And that you can do in no more than six months.
What do you make of the suggestion that if there is need to postpone the 2015 elections because of the conference, we should do so?
Many Nigerians don’t read our constitution. Under our constitution, the only time you can extend the tenure of the President is when this country is at war with a foreign country. Otherwise, the National Assembly has no power to extend the tenure of Jonathan by a second. The moment they do that, someone will go to court and the court will tell them it is illegal.
Do you share the excitement of some Nigerians about the new political alliance, the APC?
I think it is a good thing that it happened. But what was worrying this country before was fragmented opposition which areas of influence were limited in terms of ethnic or religious considerations. If you bring an opposition party that will challenge the PDP that has support all over the country, then it will be able to give PDP a good fight. Then, Nigerians like you and me will have a choice to make. So I welcome the amalgamation of the political parties and I hope personal ambition will not destroy that unity.
What do you think will be the implication of the recent defection of some PDP governors to APC for the next elections?
The implication is that the PDP is now down to 18, instead of 22; APC will now have 16 governors. One can project that the governorship election in 2015 will be altered as the PDP may lose four states – Sokoto, Kano, Rivers and Adamawa. If you look at the parties involved, you will see that they are limited in scope. The ACN is concentrated in the south-west; CPC in the Hausa/Fulani or the north-west; APGA in the south-east and ANPP in the North. Unlike the PDP that has structures in all the regions.
So it is good that the merger succeeds because it will re-enact the politics of the First Republic and even the Second Republic. Nigerians welcomed even the creation of two political parties by former military president, General Ibrahim Babangida; that was the Social Democratic Party and the National Republican Convention.
Talking about personal ambitions, some people are saying Buhari, Atiku and others should no longer contest for the presidency because they are too old, while some say age should not be a barrier. Where do you stand on this?
When you are contented, it does not mean you have a lot of money, but you are satisfied with the little God has given you. If President Jonathan were to call me today to take over government, wallahi, I will never take it. I would rather rest in my house, sleep at the time I want, wake up at the time I want, lock my house, allow onl a person I want to come in. But this is democracy, you cannot stop others from pursuing their ambitions, but it is time that will tell them. I know that today, in the whole of Nigeria, I have no age mate either in the executive, in the legislature, in the judiciary or even in business.
Anybody who is under 50 is my grandchild; anybody who is 70 is my child. So I know my limits. From 2002, I have said I will not play any partisan politics. Anybody who wants my advice I will give him regardless of the party. So, I think time will teach people when it is time to throw in the towel.