In a sign of maturity, the delegates to the National Conference have been trying to grapple successfully the logistical and procedural problems encountered in the first few days of sitting.

As expected it might not be that easy for different personalities from different places to be assembled for deliberation on various topics, not well demarcated.  It is a good start for the lucky representatives of the people, old and young, men and women.

At the time the delegates were happily settling down to solve the critical problems, came the sad comment by that respected and eminent Constitutional expert, Prof Ben Nwabueze that the National Conference as it is presently constituted is a “waste of time”.

To the learned Professor, the National Conference would not be able to produce a Constitution that would take into consideration the many and obvious problems of the country.
This looks like a sad development when viewed against the noble activities of Prof. Nwabueze in convincing President Jonathan on the desirability of a type of dialogue to tackle the ills of the country.

For many other reasons, others including the Opposition party, APC see the National Conference as a mere “talking shop” –  President Jonathan`s hidden Agenda set up under President’s inherent powers and not backed up by any law.

However, despite the apparently justified misgivings, that Conference has started with high hope and expectation which it is hoped, would be sustained till the end.  Many people believe that the National Conference represents a broad view of Nigerian nation and a mixture of liberal, conservative and radical idealists.  The Conference which consists of conservatives of the first Republic, Chief Richard Akinjide and Chief E. K. Clark also has Mr. Femi Falana, Mike Ozekome and others of like minds.  Undoubtedly, the product of their deliberations could be nothing but sound.

One of the major problems of political instability is the functions exercised by the Federal Government under a supposedly Federal Constitution.  This is little difference between the 1979 Constitution and the 1999 which is now being applied.  It is a known fact that Professor Ben Nwabueze and others in the “Patriots” contributed to the framework – of the 1979 Constitution which made the Center to be strong, and had become stronger under the 1999 Constitution.

The expectation of the people is that a way would be found within the present dispensation at the Conference to forge or suggest a new federal Constitution that would satisfy the ingredients of a truly federal document.  This idea, unfortunately, is what Prof. Nwabueze thought might not be possible to achieve by the present National Conference.

In a situation when the brilliant brain behind the idea of a National Conference is looking the other way, it is appropriate for the delegates in a ‘Committee on Constitution‘ to find a convenient way of examining the ‘ideal Constitution‘ prepared by the Patriots with others, and then come out with a ‘perfect‘ one (if there is a perfect constitution).  The suggestion is that the ‘Patriots‘ should mount pressure and lobby so that their ideas could be seriously considered.  Nigeria needs their valuable contributions.

Some analysts believe that the powers being exercised by the Federal Government has to do with the application of the 1999 Constitution which gives much to the Federal Government in a federal structure.  The Federal Government takes 52 per cent of all the federally collected revenue for the country to perform its responsibilities which are many and heavy.

However, the real problem of the Federal Government lies in its structure and application of its power.  As expected in an ideal federation, the federal government should be the ‘government‘ of its entire constituent States based on ‘representatives‘ of each State.  The present practice is for the President to choose his party members from all the 36 States to satisfy the Constitution.

The policy of ‘winner-takes-all‘ and political exclusion has been the major problem of President Jonathan who perhaps, does not believe in the idea of a national government.

SWISS DEMOCRACY REVISITED
Some friends phoned me over some conclusions on my article last week on “Swiss Democracy”.  Some faulted my conclusion on the basis of my equating sophisticated Swiss people with corrupt Nigerians.  It is a question of attitude of mind on pursuit of democracy, true federalism and fight against corruption.

For example, in 2012 Switzerland confederation of 8 million people had a growth rate of 1 per cent; unemployment rate of 2 per cent; Inflation rate of 0.1 per cent, Foreign Exchange reserves of $531.1 billion and had only 7 per cent of the population living below poverty line.

Nigeria, a federation of about 160 million had as at 2012 a growth rate of 6.8 per cent; unemployment rate of about 30 per cent with 70 per cent of people living below poverty line, Nigeria‘s foreign exchange reserves amounted to about $44 billion. Which do you prefer?  Swiss Democracy with a federal government or Nigeria autocracy.

According to Dr. Carl Doka in his article, Swiss Democracy, he notes “And what of parliament?  Are not its hands tied by referendum and initiative?  To this there is only one answer:  The Swiss does not want parliamentary democracy, so he does not regard parliament as the summit of wisdom.  His member of parliament is not a deputy who makes decision on his behalf, but more of a servant whom the Swiss expects to remain in constant touch with him.

The members of the Federal Assembly and the canton and commune councilors should not only be conspicuous at election time.  They have constantly to come to grips, in full view of the people, with parliament`s bills and policies.  At meetings they are frequently called upon to give an account of themselves in what virtually amount to hearings.

Membership of a parliamentary body is therefore no sinecure; it demands a passionate concern for the entire community, even though the citizen can at times be a hard taskmaster”.