THE reference by President Goodluck Jonathan to the imperative of dialogue as an option of resolving the country's numerous problems is heart-warming, against the hitherto seeming uncaring official attitude to the recurring issue. The president's observation is perhaps one of the most profound coming from him in recent times; and it provides some hope for Nigerians that government after all can still steer the country to stability. It is important for the president to go beyond his remark and sustain that hope.The commemoration of Dr. Tunji Braithwaite's 79th birthday anniversary and book presentation in Lagos provided President Jonathan with an opportunity to ponder on and bare his mind on the unceasing call for national dialogue to resolve, in some holistic manner, the nation's challenges. Indeed, the president acknowledged that, 'all our present circumstances and challenges are just portraying a disputed picture of our country,' despite the huge potentials of the country. He thereby assured Nigerians that the call for national dialogue would not be ignored because 'dialogue is the most potent weapon for greatness and unity of any nation.'The president's assurance is perhaps an endorsement of a popular call, widespread and seen by every well-meaning Nigerian as imperative but in which the state elites have been hesitant due to entrenched interest seeking to perpetuate a malfunctioning Nigeria. His new thinking appears to trim down the discordant notes from the incumbent executives. The president needs to drive the process further. His assurance on this subject of national dialogue is easily the most fundamental statement to come from him since his inauguration as the country's president.The occasion may have been ignored as not ex-cathedra, but with the calibre of personalities present, many of who had called for national dialogue and have continued to do so, it was the right place for the president to bare his mind on the national question, which the call for national dialogue is. It is apposite coming as it were at a time when the country is bedeviled by accentuated contradictions such as the Boko Haram insurgency, militant activities in the Niger-Delta, the resource control debate, kidnapping, massive unemployment and widespread corruption.The above contradictions need to be confronted in a statesmanlike mettle. If the president fails in his bid to provide infrastructures such as roads, electricity and water, he should not fail as a statesman. Rising to the responsibility of a national dialogue to build consensus around key elements of the national question is essential to the country's survival. Nigeria cannot continue to grope in the dark, as has been the trend.Currently, the National Assembly is trying to amend the constitution wholesale, a task appropriate for a constituent assembly. A national dialogue, much earlier, could have spared them of the current burden, which itself amounts to putting the cart before the horse. A national dialogue should provide a consensus upon which constitutional provisions are to be engrossed. Restructuring of the country is crucial; and the outcome of a national dialogue should be further subjected to a national referendum for the people's sovereign seal.Each time the idea of a national dialogue is broached, it is often asked; who convenes it and how will it be convened' The country's history is replete with accounts of national dialogue. During the colonial era, the Ibadan Constitution Review Conference of 1950, which sired the Macpherson Constitution held with representations from the dominant political forces in the country.The September 1966 Benin conference, a last dint effort to avert the civil war, was composed of leaders from the four regions of the country at the time. The Constituent Assembly of 1977 put in place by the Obasanjo administration was made up of eminent Nigerians drawn from the major geo-political zones as well as interest groups in the country. The Abacha regime constitutional conference adopted an electoral-cum-selective procedure of representation and the last constitutional conference in 2005 again organised by the civilian administration of Obasanjo drew its members from states of the federation, including nominees of the Presidency. The point here is that there is a beaten track on how to organise a national dialogue.It is not rocket science; government does not need to re-invent the wheel; rather, it should draw lessons from past efforts. Why did many of the conferences fail to achieve their objectives' Past records show that diversionary agenda was largely responsible as incumbent leaders try to pursue personal instead of national goals. For example, Abacha's constitutional conference failed due to his self-transmutation motive and Obasanjo's National Political Conference failed because of his apparent third term agenda.The idea of a national dialogue cannot be foreclosed; not with the plethora of problems besetting the country today. The president's own statement, if nothing, helps to underline this necessity.
Click here to read full news..
