Ego Kristi Youth Movement in an interactive section with hon Anthonia Tabansi Okoye to ascertain the true nature of politics in Anambra State since her creation. Hon Anthonia lamented on the attitude of most Christians(Christ-like) towards politics in Anambra State and in Nigeria, which she referred to as-'Politics of Lies and deceit'; hon Anthonia calls for a positive change in what we currently witness in our political system, which contradicts an example of a true Christian life.

The members of Ego Kristi Youth Movement on Thursday 29/10/16, in her Courtesy visit tours to ascertain the condition of politics in Anambra State, had an interactive section with hon Anthonia Tabansi Okoye.
On our arrival to hon Anthonia Okoye residence in Housing Estate Fegge Onitsha, we were given a warm welcome with some cola by hon Anthonia.
On her speech hon Anthonia Tabansi in her welcome address thank the members of Ego Kristi Youth Movement and appreciated their strong commitment to effect some reformative changes in our political system.
In the interactive section, hon Anthonia Tabansi made it clear that lies has been the order of the day in our National and State politics with some stated evidences, which made the whole of our political system corrupt.
  Hon Anthonia was part of the five regimes of the governors that Led Anambra State government from the first democratically elected government of His Excellency Chukwuemeka Ezeife, to Chijioke Mbadinuju, Sen Chris Ngige, Peter Obi and finally Chief Willie Obiano.
Hon Anthonia Tabansi gave us the true analysis on the state of affairs in Anambra State government under these five regime and the various performance by these five governors within their four years different regimes.
Hon Anthonia Tabansi on her speech told us that Anambra State have within these five different regimes witnessed only few true Christians, why others are only camouflage or fake Christians.
  In our interactive section, Hon Anthonia as devoted Christian  said that although she have not benefited much from the current Anambra State government; he still see Willie Obiano as the best Christian Governor with the fear of God Anambra State government have ever had.
Hon Anthonia Tabansi said that our governor Chief Willie Obiano, is a governor that she have ever seen that have the real interest of Anambra State at heart and not merely for the business of politics.
The founder of Ego Kristi Youth Movement Comrade Ositadimma Luke Iloghalu commended hon Anthonia Tabansi for his service to Anambra State government as a member of Anambra State House of Assembly and as an aide to Anambra State government severally. Comrade Ositadimma urge hon Anthonia to always continue in her good service as a devoted Christian and never relent in doing good.
Other members of member of Ego Kristi Youth Movement present Comrade Igwe Nzeka and Nonso Okafor also commended the positive contributions by hon Anthonia Tabansi Okoye to Anambra State government and also urge her to do more.
  Hon Anthonia finally commended the effort of the EXCOS of Ego Kristi Youth Movement by organising such a mega Leadership Orientation Seminar for our Youths and promised to give them the necessary support towards the success of their event.
     Ego Kristi Media Team Reporting from Fegge Onitsha, Anambra State.

Switzerland Legislative Structure that gave people in the grassroot chances to contribute through Referendum in the making or amending of their National Law or Constitution Still remains the best system of government for a true democracy

  THE POLITICS AND LEGISLATIVE STRUCTURE OF SWITZERLAND;-

There is a framework of a multi-party federal directorial democratic republic, whereby the Federal
Council of Switzerland is the collective head of government and head of state . Executivepower is exercised by the government and thefederal administration and is not concentrated in any one person. Federal legislative power is vested in both the government and the two
chambers of the Federal Assembly of Switzerland. The judiciary is independent of the executive and the legislature .
Switzerland is the closest state in the world to
a direct democracy . For any change in the
constitution, a referendum is mandatory
( mandatory referendum); for any change in a
law , a referendum can be requested ( optional
referendum ). Through referenda , citizens may
challenge any law voted by federal parliament
and through federal popular initiative introduce
amendments to the federal constitution .
The same system is used for the three
administrative levels of municipality, canton
and country. If the community is small enough
like in small villages, the parliament
representing the people does not exist. Also
the ordinary law does then not exist, only the
constitution of the village. The term "council"
is used ambiguously, sometimes it refers to
legislation, i.e. parliament, sometimes to the
execution, i.e. government.
Direct representation
See also: Voting in Switzerland
Switzerland features a system of government
not seen in any other nation[citation needed ]
direct representation, sometimes called half-
direct democracy (this may be arguable,
because theoretically, the Sovereign of
Switzerland is actually its entire electorate).
Referenda on the most important laws have
been used since the 1848 constitution .
Amendments to the Federal Constitution of
Switzerland, the joining of international
organizations, or changes to federal laws that
have no foundation in the constitution but will
remain in force for more than one year must
be approved by the majority of both the people
and the cantons , a double majority.
Any citizen may challenge a law that has been
passed by parliament. If that person is able to
gather 50,000 signatures against the law
within 100 days, a national vote has to be
scheduled where voters decide by a simple
majority of the voters whether to accept or
reject the law. [1]
Also, any citizen may seek a decision on an
amendment they want to make to the
constitution. For such a federal popular
initiative to be organised, the signatures of
100,000 voters must be collected within 18
months. [2] Such a federal popular initiative is
formulated as a precise new text (general
proposal initiatives have been canceled in
2009 [3] ) whose wording can no longer be
changed by parliament and the government.
After a successful signature gathering, the
federal council may create a counterproposal
to the proposed amendment and put it to vote
on the same day as the original proposal.
Such counter-proposals are usually a
compromise between the status quo and the
wording of the initiative. Voters will decide in a
national vote whether to accept the initiative
amendment, the counter proposal put forward
by the government if any, or both. If both are
accepted, one has to additionally signal a
preference. Initiatives (that are of
constitutional level) have to be accepted by a
double majority of both the popular votes and
a majority of the cantons, while counter-
proposals may be of legislative level and hence
require only simple majority .
Executive branch
Main articles: Swiss Federal Council and
Federal administration of Switzerland
See also: List of members of the Swiss Federal
Council and List of Presidents of the Swiss
Confederation
The Swiss Federal Council is a seven-member
executive council that heads the federal
administration , operating as a combination
cabinet and collective presidency . Any Swiss
citizen eligible to be a member of the National
Council can be elected; [4] candidates do not
have to register for the election, or to actually
be members of the National Council. The
Federal Council is elected by the Federal
Assembly for a four-year term. Present
members are: Doris Leuthard (CVP/PDC), Guy
Parmelin (SVP/UDC), Ueli Maurer (SVP/UDC),
Didier Burkhalter (FDP/PRD), Simonetta
Sommaruga (SP/PS), Johann Schneider-
Ammann (FDP/PRD) and Alain Berset (SP/PS).
The largely ceremonial President and Vice
President of the Confederation are elected by
the Federal Assembly from among the
members of the Federal Council for one-year
terms that run concurrently. The President has
almost no powers over and above his or her
six colleagues, but undertakes representative
functions normally performed by a president or
prime minister in single-executive systems.
The current (As of 2016) President and Vice
President are Johann Schneider-Ammann and
Doris Leuthard , respectively.
The Swiss executive is one of the most stable
governments worldwide. Since 1848, it has
never been renewed entirely at the same time,
providing a long-term continuity. From 1959 to
2003 the Federal Council was composed of a
coalition of all major parties in the same ratio:
2 each from the Free Democratic Party , Social
Democratic Party and Christian Democratic
People's Party and 1 from the Swiss People's
Party . Changes in the council occur typically
only if one of the members resigns (merely four
incumbent members were voted out of the
office in over 150 years); [5] this member is
almost always replaced by someone from the
same party (and often also from the same
linguistic group).
The Swiss government has been a coalition of
the four major political parties since 1959,
each party having a number of seats that
roughly reflects its share of electorate and
representation in the federal parliament. The
classic distribution of 2 CVP/PDC, 2 SPS/PSS,
2 FDP/PRD and 1 SVP/UDC as it stood from
1959 to 2003 was known as the " magic
formula ". [5]
This "magic formula" has been repeatedly
criticised: in the 1960s, for excluding leftist
opposition parties; in the 1980s, for excluding
the emerging Green party; and particularly
after the 1999 election, by the People's Party,
which had by then grown from being the fourth
largest party on the National Council to being
the largest. In the elections of 2003 , the
People's Party received (effective January 1,
2004) a second seat in the Federal Council,
reducing the share of the Christian Democratic
Party to one seat.
Legislative branch
The Federal Palace, in Bern, hosts the
Federal Assembly and the Federal
Council .
Switzerland has a bicameral parliament called
the Federal Assembly , made up of:
the Council of States (46 seats - members
serve four-year terms) and
the National Council (200 seats - members
serve four-year terms and are elected by
popular vote on a basis of proportional
representation)
The previous elections (before those held in
2011, below) to the National Council were held
in 2007, see 2007 elections for more details.
The five parties that hold seats in the Federal
Council dominate both chambers of the
Assembly; they currently hold a supermajority
of 167 seats in the National Council, and 41 in
the Council of States.
Most hearings in the parliament are open to
everyone, including foreigners.
Political parties and
elections
For other political parties, see List of political
parties in Switzerland. An overview on
elections and election results is included in
Elections in Switzerland.
Switzerland has a rich party landscape. The
five parties represented in the Federal Council
are generally called the government parties:
Free Democratic Party , Social Democratic
Party , Christian Democratic Party , Swiss
People's Party , and Conservative Democratic
Party of Switzerland.
As of 2011 only the five government parties
were represented in the Council of States. In
the National Council the party landscape is
more diverse with six non-government parties
having at least one seat.
Main article: Swiss federal election, 2011
Summary of the 23 October 2011
National Council of Switzerland election
results
Parties Abbr. Alignment Ideology
Swiss
People's
Party
SVP/
UDC
Right
wing
National
conservatis
Social
Democratic
Party SPS/
PSS Centre-
left Social
democracy
FDP.The
Liberals
FDP/
PLR
Centre-
right
Classical
liberalism
Christian
Democratic
People's
Party
CVP/
PDC
Centre/
Centre-
right
Christian
democracy
Green Party GPS/
PES Left wing Green politic
Green
Liberal Party
GLP/
PVL Centre Green
liberalism
Conservative
Democratic
Party
BDP/
PBD
Centre-
right Conservatis
Economic
liberalism
Evangelical
People's
Party EVP/
PEV Centre Christian
democracy
Party of
Labour PdA Left wing Socialism
Ticino
League LdT Right
wing Regionalism
Right-wing
populism
Christian
Social Party
CSP/
PCS
Centre-
left Christian left
Geneva
Citizens'
Movement
MCG Right
wing
Regionalism
Right-wing
populism
Federal
Democratic
Union
EDU/
UDF
Right
wing Christian rig
Other
Total (turnout 48.5%)
Source: Swiss Federal Statistical Office
(French)
Summary of the 23 October, 13
November, 20 November, 27 November and 4
December 2011 Council of States of
Switzerland election results
Parties Ideology 2007 Seats
Christian
Democratic
People's
Party (CVP/
PDC)
Christian
democracy 15 13 -
FDP.The
Liberals
(FDP/PRD) Classical
liberalism 12 11 -
Social
Democratic
Party (SPS/
PSS)
Social
democracy 9 11 +
Swiss
People's
Party (SVP/
UDC)
National
conservatism 7 5 -
Green Party
(GPS/PES) Green politics 2 2 ±
Green
Liberal Party
(GLP/VL)
Green
liberalism 1 2 +
Conservative
Democratic
Party (BDP/
PBD)
Conservatism /
Economic
liberalism
New 1 +
Independent Independent 0 1 +
Total 46 46
Source: http://www.politik-stat.ch/
srw2011CH_de.html
Judicial branch
Switzerland has a Federal Supreme Court , with
judges elected for six-year terms by the
Federal Assembly. The function of the Federal
Supreme Court is to hear appeals of cantonal
courts or the administrative rulings of the
federal administration.
Political conditions
Political positions of the Swiss political parties
based on their referendum voting
recommendations, 1985-90 and 2010-14
Switzerland has a stable government. Most
voters support the government in its
philosophy of armed neutrality underlying its
foreign and defense policies. Domestic policy
poses some major problems, to the point that
many observers deem that the system is in
crisis [7] but the changing international
environment has generated a significant
reexamination of Swiss policy in key areas
such as defense, neutrality, and immigration.
Quadrennial national elections typically
produce only marginal changes in party
representation.
In recent years, Switzerland has seen a gradual
shift in the party landscape. The right-wing
Swiss People's Party (SVP), traditionally the
junior partner in the four-party coalition
government , more than doubled its voting
share from 11.0% in 1987 to 22.5% in 1999,
rising to 28.9% in 2007, thus overtaking its
three coalition partners. This shift in voting
shares put a strain on the " magic formula", the
power-broking agreement of the four coalition
parties. From 1959 until 2004, the seven-seat
cabinet had comprised 2 Free Democrats, 2
Christian Democrats, 2 Social Democrats, and
1 Swiss People's Party, but in 2004, the Swiss
People's Party took one seat from the
Christian Democrats. In 2008 the Conservative
Democratic Party split from the SVP, taking
both of their Federal Council seats with them.
However, the SVP eventually retook both seats,
in 2009 and 2015 respectively. [8]
The Swiss Federal Constitution limits federal
influence in the formulation of domestic policy
and emphasizes the roles of private enterprise
and cantonal government . However, in more
recent times the powers of the Confederation
have increased with regard to education ,
agriculture , health , energy, the environment ,
organized crime, and
narcotics . [citation needed ]
The Index of perception of corruption puts
Switzerland among the least corrupt nations.
In the 2005 survey, Switzerland ranks 7th (out
of 158 surveyed), with 9.1 out of 10 possible
points, representing an improvement of 0.4
points over the past four years.
Together with seven other European nations,
Switzerland leads the 2005 index on Freedom
of the Press published by Reporters Without
Borders (with a score 0.5 points, zero being
the perfect score).
Foreign relations
Main article: Foreign relations of Switzerland
Switzerland has avoided alliances that might
entail military, political, or direct economic
action. In June 2001, Swiss voters approved
new legislation providing for the deployment of
armed Swiss troops for international
peacekeeping missions under United Nations
or Organization for Security and Co-operation
in Europe auspices as well as international
cooperation in military training. The Swiss
have broadened the scope of activities in
which they feel able to participate without
compromising their neutrality.
Switzerland maintains diplomatic relations with
almost all countries and historically has served
as a neutral intermediary and host to major
international treaty conferences. The country
has no major disputes in its bilateral relations.
Energy politics
The emergency switch-off button of
the Beznau Nuclear Power Plant. In
2011, the federal authorities decided to
gradually phase out nuclear power in
Switzerland.
See also: Energy in Switzerland and Nuclear
power in Switzerland
The energy generated in Switzerland comprises
55.2% hydroelectricity, 39.9% from nuclear
power , about 4% from conventional sources
and about 1% other.
On May 18, 2003, two referenda regarding the
future of nuclear power in Switzerland were
held. The referendum Electricity Without
Nuclear asked for a decision on a nuclear
power phase-out and Moratorium Plus asked
about an extension of an existing law
forbidding the building of new nuclear power
plants . Both were turned down: Moratorium
Plus by a margin of 41.6% for and 58.4%
opposed, and Electricity Without Nuclear by a
margin of 33.7% for and 66.3% opposed. The
former ten-year moratorium on the
construction of new nuclear power plants was
the result of a federal popular initiative voted
on in 1990 which had passed with 54.5% Yes
vs. 45.5% No votes (see Nuclear power in
Switzerland for details).
In May 2011, due to the Fukushima accident in
Japan, the Swiss government decided to
abandon plans to build new nuclear reactors.
The country’s five existing reactors will be
allowed to continue operating, but will not be
replaced at the end of their life span. The last
will go offline in 2034. [9]
See also
International relations of Switzerland
Modern history of Switzerland
Demographics of Switzerland
Direct democracy
Federal popular initiative
Referendum , List of Swiss federal
referendums
Concordance system
Constitutional conventions of Switzerland
Notes and references
1. ^ Pierre Cormon, Swiss Politics for
Complete Beginners], Editions Slatkine, 2014,
ISBN 978-2-8321-0607-5
2. ^ Cormon 2014 , p. 23.
3. ^ http://www.admin.ch/ch/f/pore/
va/20090927/det544.html
4. ^ Swiss Federal Constitution , art. 175 al. 3
5. ^ a b Cormon 2014 , p. 32.
6. ^ These numbers represent fictional voters .
See National Council for more details.
7. ^ Cormon 2014 , p. 55-61.
8. ^ Mombelli, Armando (December 10, 2015).
"People's Party Gains Second Seat in
Cabinet" . Swissinfo . Retrieved April 5, 2016.
9. ^ Kanter, James (2011-05-25).
"Switzerland Decides on Nuclear Phase-
Out" . The New York Times.
Bibliography
Pierre Cormon, Swiss Politics for Complete
Beginners , Editions Slatkine, 2014, ISBN
978-2-8321-0607-5
Hirschbühl, Tina (2011a), The Swiss
Government Report 1 , Federal Department of
Foreign Affairs FDFA, Presence Switzerland –
via YouTube
Hirschbühl, Tina (2011b), The Swiss
Government Report 2 , Federal Department of
Foreign Affairs FDFA, Presence Switzerland –
via YouTube
Hirschbühl, Tina (2011c), How Direct
Democracy Works In Switzerland - Report 3 ,
Federal Department of Foreign Affairs FDFA,
Presence Switzerland – via YouTube
Hirschbühl, Tina (2011d), How People in
Switzerland Vote - Report 4 , Federal
Department of Foreign Affairs FDFA, Presence
Switzerland – via YouTube
Hirschbühl, Tina (2011e), Switzerland & the
EU: The Bilateral Agreements - Report 5 ,
Federal Department of Foreign Affairs FDFA,
Presence Switzerland – via YouTube
Wolf Linder, Yannis Papadopoulos,
Hanspeter Kriesi, Peter Knoepfel, Ulrich Klöti,
Pascal Sciarini:
Handbook of Swiss Politics , Neue
Zürcher Zeitung Publishing, 2007, ISBN
978-3-03823-136-3 .
Handbuch der Schweizer Politik / Manuel
de la politique suisse , Verlag Neue
Zürcher Zeitung, 2007, ISBN
978-3-03823-136-3 .
Vincent Golay and Mix et Remix, Swiss
political institutions , Éditions loisirs et
pédagogie, 2008. ISBN 978-2-606-01295-3 .
External links
Wikimedia Commons has media related
to Politics of Switzerland.
Swiss government site ( in English )
Swiss parliament site ( in English )
Chief of State and Cabinet Members
Political rights at the federal level
The political landscape of the present
parliament depicted in a graph
Swiss political system
®
Content is available under CC BY-SA 3.0
unless otherwise noted.
Terms of Use • Privacy • Desktop
Politics of Switzerland

Ego Kristi Courtesy to Ebere Ejiofor

The Ego Kristi Youth Movement in her courtesy visit today met with hon Ebere Ejiofor(Immediate past Member representing Anaocha 1 in Anambra State house of Assembly), he is also a friend, lover and adviser of the youths.
Hon Ebere Ejiofor in his welcome speech gave words of encouragement to the active members of Ego Kristi Youth Movement, for coming together so as to work the collective interest of every youth. In his speech hon Ebere commended and advise the youths to always be industrious and creative, so as to always be independent in any area of life the find themselves.
Hon Ebere used his own past situation as an example; hon narrated how he was through the help of God got to the position of Anambra State house assembly member, despite the fact he is not from a wealthy background and was also still trying then to finish his second degree in the University.
  Hon Ebere urge the youth to be hardworking, determined and be focused in their life ambition/vision; not minding t background. Instead the person should be consistence in his participation/involvement in our State governance, with prayers he will surely get to that position.
The Founder and Gen Coordinator  Ego Youth Movement(Ositadimma Luke Iloghalu) thank Ebere Ejiofor for the cola he presented us. Comrade Ositadimma also appreciated hon Ebere for his continual concern and advise to the youth.
As it pertains to our -"2nd  Youth Leadership Orientation Seminar" holding on 26th November, hon Ebere Ejiofor promised to give us full support as the event draws nearer.

Ego Kristi Media Reporting from Awka, Anambra State.

IDEAL FEDERALISM

NIGERIA: Political Issues & Solutions -

   Concept of Federalism;--
STATE SOVEREIGNTY AN INIMITABLE QUALITY
OF FEDERALISM:
A critical analysis of Nigerian
approach to the concept of state sovereignty
INTRODUCTION
One thing is clear in a federal system of government, the tiers of government ought to share political power as expressly spelt out in
the constitution.
Unfortunately, the current
foundation and principles on which Nigerian constitution is operated over the years particularly since the advent of democracy has not in any way reflected a true federalism in its
practical sense.
. Presently, Nigeria has a strong center and weak states. The states have become administrative
units of the federal government. The relationship between the centre and the states still reflects the military command structure, an unwelcome legacy of the military administration.
The states are so weak that none of them enjoys fiscal independence from the centre. The federal government pays the piper and is happily dictating the tune to the states.
The states are so weak and so generally impoverished that they
have no capacity even to negotiate meaningfully with the centre. None of the states as it is now can generate enough internal revenue to
prosecute any appreciable social and economic development.
Instead of pillars, the states have
become a burden on the federation.
It is a fundamental reality that, Nigeria cannot have a strong and united federation unless and
until the constituent parts are sufficiently empowered by enabling practices that conform to the principles of federalism Thus, this paper aims at discussing the issue of distribution of powers between the Nigerian federal government
and its constituent units, and making pragmatic solutions for its sustenance.

NIGERIAN FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
ENCROACHMENTS ON THE STATES
Nigeria returned to democratic rule in 1999, after about three decades of military rule. The state of the federation, in the new democratic rule since 1999, showed severe signs of stresses and strains. As the states try to express their newly acquired autonomy in a democratic context, the federal government tries to re-enact the old military scenario of the states as an administrative organs of the federal government.
This leads to a number of severe strains in the relations between the federal and States governments.
The Federal government does not maintain its boundaries of authority. It encroaches upon the jurisdictions and sovereignty of the states.
This has brought about severe resentments and conflicts between the states and the federal governments. It is therefore the mechanisms to resolving these encroachments that I now turn to
discuss.

1.1 SOLUTIONS TO FEDERAL ENCROACHMENTS
STRUCTURAL SAFEGUARDS
The structural safeguards of federalism restrain the national government to prevent encroachment.
Solution to Nigerian federal government encroachments on the sovereignty of the states could best be prevented by implementing some structural safeguards such as enumerated powers, fragmentation, and state incorporation.
The Founders of American constitution recognized that federalism presupposes limits to
the federal government’s power and authority …
Without constitutional boundaries, the national government would readily give in to demands to
wipe out state competition. In that event, the states would become mere instruments or administrative subunits of a central, unitary
government. The constitutional reflection of this recognition is the doctrine of enumerated powers.
In Nigeria, except for the rather vague statement in Section 2 of the 1999 Constitution, there are
no definite enumerated powers of the federal government the Nigerian Constitution. In the United States, the powers of the federal government are enumerated and limited.
Such enumerated and limited powers allows for checks and judiciary review of both the state and federal encroachments. It is important to note that when each state agreed to become part of the
federal republic of Nigeria, they did with the intention to surrender some of its powers without any recourse to their sovereign identity and
direct governance of its citizens. The major cause of ethnic crisis in Nigeria is mostly because the sovereignty of these states has been
trampled upon by the central government.

One of the challenging failures of Nigerian federalism is lack of inter-institutional oversight.
In Nigerian federal structure, vertical separation of powers is necessary for preservation of liberty and the prevention of tyranny. Hence, both the federal and states governments should possess the means of preventing or correcting unconstitutional encroachments of the other.
As it stands, the Nigerian federal government is self-regulating without institutional support. A
true federalism will be attained if the two levels of governments are partially dependent on one another through checks and balances. When this balance is achieved, the national government is less likely to behave opportunically, whether by
encroaching on the state governments or by tyrannizing its citizens.

POPULAR SAFEGUARDS
According to James Madison, the primary control of the government is its dependence on the people The declaration of American Independence contain the facts,
“… That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and
to institute new Government, having its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness
…”
Popular safeguard is effective in a democratic society where there is respect for electoral principles. Joseph Schumpeter famously argued that democracy was best understood not as a practice of collective self-government by the
“people”, but rather, the selection by the people of representatives to govern on their behalf.

Elections, on this account, are a process whereby “individuals acquire the power to decide by
means of a competitive struggle for the people’s vote … To be democratic, the elections must
consist of “free competition for a free vote” among parties. But the corollary of electoral competition is not just the right “to produce a
government” but “also the function of evicting it” through the electoral process (272). Thus, competition between political parties entails the
possibility of alternation through regular, free and fair elections. A hallmark of democracy, in Theodore Pempel’s memorable turn of phrase, is the ability to “throw the rascals out.”
In the light of the above democratic principles, popular safeguards would be unthinkable mechanism in the present Nigerian federal setting of militant democracy. It is very difficult for the people to exercise their fair judgments on the choice of government or candidates. The
European Union Election Observer Mission was not constrained by diplomatic niceties in condemning the 2007 elections in Nigeria. The
caption of the EU preliminary report was, "Elections Fail to Meet the Hopes and Expectations of the Nigerian People and Fall Far
Short of Basic International Standards". The nature of electoral system causes most Nigerians
to lose faith and confidence in the country’s democratic process.

JUDICIAL SAFEGUARD
Since independence from Britain in 1960, Nigeria has adopted five Constitutions. The present
Constitution which borrowed most of its contents from the United States Constitution is a product of a military led initiative. Unfortunately,
Nigerians fail to understand that it is not what is copied on paper that produces federalistic character; rather, it is the means or mechanism
to enforce the contents of such instrument that matters. Laws are a dead letter without courts to expound and define their true meaning and operation. Constitutionalism is meaningless
without resources of power, in some form, both to achieve and sustain it. For example, in the United States, the constitution imposes limits on
government powers and these limits are meaningless unless subject to judicial enforcement. When trying to ascertain the limits of legislative power, courts … examines and
defines the nature of a federal power itself to see if it contains within it some inherent limitations.

Thus, in a true federal system, it is not out of place for the judiciary, to decide cases of constitutional controversies between the federal,
states and the citizens. It must be poised to intervene in cases where there exist such problems between the central and its federating
units. Unfortunately, Nigerian courts still perceive issues between Federal and States as having political undertones whereas the true test in a federal system is continuously defined and strengthened when the judiciary espouses and decides on issues bordering on the terms and
conditions.
The role of judiciary as a safeguard against federal encroachments is best achieved under an independent judiciary. In Nigeria, there is a
compulsory retirement age for justices of the supreme court at 70 years. A Supreme Court with compulsory retirement age of 70 is breeding ground for insecurity and judicial incapacity. A judge who is burdened with financial considerations of retirement years is not an independent judge. A judge who is burdened with the politics of advancement or succession is not
a free judge. A recent petition against the Chief Justice of Nigeria Supreme Court alleged that the
he had been honest before now, but due to his impending retirement, he has started amassing wealth through the abuse of his office.

In order for the Judiciary to act as a safeguard against any form of government encroachment,
Nigerian Supreme Court Justices should be appointed for life subject to impeachment and removal for physical or mental impairment.
Justices should serve an independent role free from political pressure. A judge who has run his
course and is divested of all ambitions, financial and professional insecurity is the judge, who will
give a bold and honest decision any day.

DISTRIBUTION OF AUTHORITIES AND BOUNDARIES DRAWING
At the center of every true federal structure lies a common feature: the sharing of sovereignty between national and state governments.

These boundaries between national and state governmental authority must be maintained. The problem with Nigerian federalism is the failure or incapability of the federal government to maintain its boundaries and curb the temptation
of states’ sovereignty exploitation. Sometimes it is confusing to distinguish what power belongs
to which level of government. This paper will now turn to examine how the spheres of power sharing could be allocated to each level of government - federal and state. Those within the federal power are earmarked as “centralization”
while those responsibilities within the state jurisdiction are labeled as “decentralization.”

MILITARY SECURITY
(Centralized responsibility of the central government).
It is the responsibility of the central government to provide security and protection for the rest of the units and the citizenry. In Nigeria, it is a
common practice for the President to use his emergency powers to deploy the military at his
whims. Military deployment could only be applicable in times of war or appropriate state of emergency with the approval of the House.

ECONOMIC BENEFITS & EFFICIENCY
(Cooperative function of the central and its
subunits)
In Nigeria, the central government believes and
operates on the basis that the federal
government owned the country, its resources and
all that dwell in the land. The central took the
fund that rightly belongs to the state and local
governments into the coffers of the Federal
Government. The subunits are thereby denied the
wherewithal to carry out their functions for the
progress and welfare of their citizens. Nigerian
states have almost completely lost their
autonomy. The centralization and concentration
of the country’s revenues in the hands of the
central government has resulted in the country’s
poor political, social and economic development.
Decentralization can take advantage of
informational asymmetries; that is, lower levels
of government may have local knowledge that
allows them to tax and spend most efficiently.
The classic example of this informational
asymmetry is the property tax, local
governments have a keener sense of market
value and can more appropriately devise a
formula to calculate tax rates than a central
government. Decentralization can also allow for
revenue specialization based on different
characteristics of the regions. A region especially
endowed in natural resources with extensive
mining operations might best rely on severance
taxes, while in another; tourism offers
opportunities for licenses and user fees.
Developmental projects are most efficiently
handled by the local governments who know
local needs and conditions, while higher levels of
government are necessary to coordinate
redistribution effectively
INNOVATION
(Decentralized sphere of the subunits)
Federalism enables a people to try experiments
which could not safely be tried in a large
centralized country. Justice Brandeis considered
it "one of the happy incidents of the federal
system that a single courageous State may, if its
citizens choose, serve as a laboratory; and try
novel social and economic experiments without
risk to the rest of the country. When states share
goals but try different policies, the potential for
policy decentralization to stimulate beneficial
innovation is maximized.
Under the current federal government in Nigeria,
all power is centralized, and the states do not
have any control over their resources, hence
there is no incentive for innovation and states
competition. Nigeria's economic development,
political stability, security and peace depend on
extending the freedom, benefits and choice of
autonomy to each ethnic nationality within the
country.
INTERGOVERNMENTAL COMPETITION
(Decentralized subunits authority)
Governments compete with one another to the
benefit of their citizens, eliminating waste and
encouraging growth. Intergovernmental
competition directly strengthens the allocative
functions of government. Decentralization
permits governments to match services with
variations in demand. Greater overall citizen
satisfaction can be achieved with multiple
governments offering different packages of public
services at different prices. Competition forces
governments to become more efficient in their
allocative activities, providing better services at
lower costs. Competition forces government to
be more responsive to citizens’ preferences than
monopoly government.
Allocation is the functional that local
governments can perform more effectively than
central governments, because decentralization
allows for a closer match between the supply of
public services and their variable demand.
Citizens migrate to those communities where the
allocation best matches their demand curve.
Intergovernmental competition inspires state and
local governments to be concerned with the
impact of their taxing and spending policies on
economic growth and to become directly
involved in economic development activities.
Competing governments are in a better position
to observe the economic consequences of their
policy decisions. Since state and local
governments are well equipped to pursue
developmental objectives, most public efforts of
this type should be left to them.
EXTERNALITIES MANAGEMENT
(Centralized federal government exclusivity)
The spillover effects of policies are known as
externalities because they are consequences of a
government’s policy that the government does
not consider. In Nigeria, each year, industrial
facilities discharge into the environment large
amounts of chemicals leading to respiratory,
neurological, developmental and reproductive
disorders, and cancers. The spillover effects of
these factories are without any form of
government management or control. The
distribution authority can be adjusted to manage
these externalities. The central government can
be given full control of a policy domain, it can
regulate it, or it can encourage beneficial
behavior. The central government can maintain a
common market between states by prohibiting
state-led industry protection that generates
negative externalities. In environmental policy,
the government can incentivize control; first,
through sanctions should the polluter fail to
reduce output, and the second, by pricing
pollution, to motivate polluters to reduce their
output without the threat of penalties.
MARKET PRESERVATION
(Cooperative sphere between the central
government and its subunits)
A market requires firmly established and credibly
defended property rights. Uniform governmental
regulation can establish rules governing property
ownership and transfer, as well as provide a
forum to adjudicate disputes. However, in order
to prevent government encroachments on
property rights, decentralization and fragmented
authority enable a state to credibly commit not
to expropriate all rents, when couple with other
conditions, such as a decentralization of fiscal
control and hard budget constraints.
In Nigeria the commitment to establishing
property rights and effective markets has not
been accompanied with significant devolution of
power to subnational governments. There is no
triumphal market economy due to lack of
freedom of local governments to set their
economic policies and induce competition among
jurisdictions. Market reforms have proceeded
alongside central resistance to subnational
claims for devolution of fiscal jurisdiction and
policing services. A commitment to market
reforms would require fiscal devolution that
eliminates financial dependence of the
subnational governments and induces horizontal
competition for efficient service delivery.
Thus, probable conditions for a sustainable
market preservation in Nigeria should be
structured to include:
a) A hard budget constraint on subnational
governments;
b) The authority of subnational governments to
regulate their domestic economies but without
the power to restrict the movement of goods and
services cross jurisdictions. And, the assignment
of monetary policy and common market
regulation to the central government; and
c) An explicit agreement on federal arrangement
to make for juridical federal restrictions and a
clean separation of national power including
independent courts.
POLITICAL PARTICIPATION
(Decentralized jurisdiction of the subunits)
Effective democracy depends on citizen
participation. As more people become
enfranchised or enter the political arena, a wider
variety of perspectives contribute to public
deliberation. As diversity increases, all else equal,
collective decision making improves.
The population of Nigeria is about 150 million,
out of which about 60 million people are
registered as eligible voters. The long history of
electoral rigging and fraud has challenged
possibilities for bringing citizens into the political
process. Pervasive electoral rigging and fraud
have increasingly become common practices in
Nigeria’s democratic process. This history has
produced conditions where political tensions
have mounted and violence has persisted. The
outcomes of many elections in Nigeria have been
so contested that the conditions for the survival
of the democratic order have been compromised.
The compromised system has permitted the
formation of political party politics that feed on
these lapses, rather than ethically engaging
citizens in ways that conforms to constitutional
provisions. The politicians employed anti-party
practices such as using money, thugs and
sometimes the police, to eliminate competition.
The general assumption that underpins the
democratic practices embraces the assertion that
power must only legitimately reside with the
people. In Nigeria, contrary to this idea, is the
notion of Godfatherism. While the concept of
Godfatherism remains fairly recent, the
phenomenon and its pervasiveness is as old as
electoral politics in the country. The development
of this phenomenon recognized that
Godfatherism thrives in any polity in which state
power is perceived as a commodity to be
possessed and used to acquire other
possessions Since these individuals in Nigeria
become too powerful to dictate for the rest, the
integrity of the process of choosing leaders is
compromised. Indeed, the idea of godfatherism is
an entrenched ideology that often accentuates
exclusionism and diminished entitlement to civic
and political rights of citizens.
The godfatherism phenomenon, emerges as an
illegal enterprise, but because this practice is
deeply rooted in the political process itself, it
possesses tremendous challenges to efforts at
reclaiming democracy for the people. State
power, here, is heavily commodified, and the
struggle for the exercise of this power restrict
access to power from the majority poor. The
highly privileged minority class constitutes the
dominant class in the Nigeria political setup, who
control the affairs of government.
Increasingly the dynamic relation between wealth
and power has definitely acquired new and
perverted meaning in the Nigeria political
process. The monetization and commodification
of the democratic process is endemic to the
character of, and popular response to, the
political process. The restriction of political and
civic rights from the citizen is now legitimately
justified through the heavily monetized electoral
practices. Increasingly, the amount required to
secure party nomination, in itself, poses a threat
to inclusion as majority of citizens are not able
to pay these amounts. What is troubling here is
that, because of these heavy monetary demands,
some competent aspirants, who have the
knowledge and leadership capability and are
entirely driven by democratic impulses, are
forced to withdraw their candidacy. In many
case aspirants for representative’s positions who
do not have the means to participate in the
processes opt for sponsorship from the wealthy
(Godfathers). This then becomes the ground for
neo-patrimonialism, as these indebted aspirants
are forced under obligations to serve the needs
and interests of their patrons. Thus, Godfathers
have in the most brazen manner hijacked the
political machinery at all levels. It means then
that what is called election in Nigeria is nothing
but the expression of the narrowly defined will of
a few dishonest individuals who feel that they
have the power to manipulate the entire electoral
process in favor of their anointed godsons
The aspirants because they are indebted to a
particular godfather, once in office serve the
interest of these godfathers rather than the
public who voted them in office. Democratic
efforts in this context, fractures the idea of
accountability, as normal political processes (in
terms of formal popular demands and civic
avenues of coercion of representative to do
public biddings) can no longer be recuperate
except through unorthodox means, which
sometimes result to violence.
The power of money has dwarfed the power of
choice… Men and women of ideas without access
to big money do not have a fair chance to run
and win. In fact, the godfather phenomenon is a
major threat to democratic consolidation in
Nigeria. The diminished public in politics asserts
a new path to defining citizenship away from
political rights. The Nigerian political system has
increasingly become a game in which godfathers
install their puppets in political office to do their
biddings.
It is an understatement to suggest, then, that
godfatherism clogs the system of political
representation. While the highjack of power in
Nigeria seems alarming, it is the sense of
diminished ownership of the political process
that threatens to negate commitment to
democratic values among citizens.
MANAGING AND SATISFYING DIVERSITY
(Decentralized sphere of the subunits)
Diverse opinions; they are inherent to humanity,
whether from the logical … or different histories,
or different ways of viewing the world. We
cannot eliminate diversity – whether born of
social differences or just different opinions ...
Diversity is beneficial when states serve as
policy laboratories. Diverse prospective and
desires may lead to new ideas, solutions that
can be transported to other domains and
territories. Federalism may help us to manage
diversity’s detrimental effects so we can harness
its benefits.
Nigeria is a country of extraordinary diversity.
Ethnicity is generally regarded as the most basic
and politically salient identity in Nigeria. Due to
marginalization of these diverse groups and their
non-inclusive in the affairs of the country has led
to Nigerians, more likely to define themselves in
terms of their ethnic affinities than national
identity. In other words, Nigerians tend to cluster
more readily around the cultural solidarities of
kin than the class solidarities of common
nationality. Thus ethno-religious tensions have
become common features in the Nigerian
federation and have constituted what is
commonly referred as the national question in
Nigeria. Nigeria is a mere geographical
expression’, bound together by nothing except
the coercive apparatus of the state. The major
challenge the nation faces is how to galvanize
the various ethno-religious groups into
nationhood with the instrumentalities of
federalism. This paper offers practical solutions
to this challenge (Infra).
ACCOUNTABILITY
(Decentralized subunits exclusivity)
Representation and accountability go hand-in-
hand: elected leaders are more likely to represent
their constituents faithfully when they know they
are held accountable for their actions.
Accountability is impossible without transparent
responsibility. Therefore, it is claimed that
authority decentralization improves
accountability because citizens are more likely to
see the effects of government action at the local
level and respond accordingly in the ballot box.
Nigerian citizens face a key challenge in holding
their political representatives accountable, since
decentralization reforms tend to be partial in
nature, leading to the involvement of multiple
tiers of government in the provision of public
goods. Under complete decentralization, voters
can limit governments rent seeking by setting
appropriate reelection incentives. The ability of
voters to hold politicians accountable is lower
under partial decentralization than under
complete decentralization.
Decentralization of expenditure responsibilities
from central to local levels of government is
generally thought to mitigate the problem by
bringing the policymaking process closer to
citizens and, hence, to increase overall
government accountability. The World Bank, for
example, has strongly advocated decentralization
on the basis that it will help to solve corruption
problems, especially in developing countries. The
standard intuition that decentralization should be
accountability-improving is consistent with
theoretical models considering complete
decentralization, i.e. the full transfer of a given
expenditure responsibility from a higher level of
government to a lower one.
ANTI-TYRANNY AND RIGHTS
(Cooperative between central government and its
subunits)
Federalism’s inherent fragmentation is well-
suited to block tyranny; when decision-making
power is subdivided, they tyrant cannot easily
gain full control. It is a common practice in
Nigeria that the ruling class could abuse its
powers to oppress the governed just as easily as
a king. The minority groups such as women,
children and the less privileged are faced with
the dangers of tyranny of their rulers.
Centralization of power and majority's tyranny
over political and social minorities is "a constant
threat" to Nigerian democracy.
HIGHER QUALITY REPRESENTATION
(Cooperative between central government and its
subunits)
Both centralization and decentralization are
important for federalism to improve the quality of
representatives. With two levels of government,
people can gain experience with their local
leaders. Accountability is easier at this level, so
voters are more likely to make the right
decisions about voting poorly performing
politicians out of office while retaining better
ones. In order to find this solution fruitful in
Nigeria, there must be restoration of confidence
in the country’s electoral system.
FORCED COMPLIANCE
Sometimes the federal government justifies its
encroachments on states non-compliance, even
when the subject of compliance is
unconstitutional or too expensive for the state to
implement. Very often, the federal government
uses intergovernmental retaliation to enforce
compliance. Intergovernmental Retaliation is a
severe type of safeguard. It is a safeguard with
potentially disastrous effects. It can lead to Civil
war. It is best not to involve intergovernmental
retaliation for the mundane matters of minor
transgressions, but preferably to reserve it for
significant transgressions. When
intergovernmental retaliation is the only
safeguard available, it is inevitably a severe
sanctioning mechanism. When it is reinforced by
other safeguards (structural, political, judiciary
and popular – supra) it may have potential to
span a wider range of punishment force. For
example, in the United States the federal
government withholds funds to induce state
compliance, for example, with highway funds,
education, and pollution control. This limited
intergovernmental retaliation is both tolerated
and kept in check by other safeguards,
particularly popular safeguard.
CONCLUSION
The success of Nigerian federation hinges on
widespread confidence in its safeguards. The
ability and commitment of the safeguards to
uphold the boundaries of authority must be
beyond question. No single force – whether
constitutionally derived or tyrannical – should be
able to dictate the boundaries of federal and
state authority or force other governments to
work for it. Each government should remain
relevant. With a well-functioning system, major
violations are punished, upholding compliance;
minor transgressions, when allowed promote
exploration of the policy space and adaptation of
the rules; and the multiple safeguards, each
judging governmental actions independently,
means that the system is not vulnerable to the
failings of one component.

Ego Kristi Youth Movement meets with Chief Chukwueneka Ezeife, Okwadike

The EXCOS of Ego Kristi Youth Movement International today 14/10/16 paid Courtesy visit to His Excellency Chief Chukwuemeka Ezeife CON, Okwadike, the first elected governor of Anambra State. Chief Chukwuemeka Ezeife gave us a cheerful welcome with some edible gifts.  In his speech His Excellency commended us for coming up together as a youth group for our National interest. Chief Chukwuemeka Ezeife also ask us this question-"Is there any avenue/way by which the West(Yorubas) could collaborate/work together with the other parts of the South(South-East and South-South) as it pertains to our national Politics? We attended to this his question, but he took us back to history; that the answers to this question have not be clearly made, starting from the era of Nnamdi Azikiwe(Zik of Africa) and his colleague Obafemi Awolowo. His Excellency then gave us an assignment to inquire from our colleagues from the western part of the Country what might be the hidden problem; because this issue have been the lingering problem that has not being attended to, for a long time by the Southern part of Nigeria.
In response, the founder of Ego Kristi Youth Movement Comrade Ositadimma Luke Iloghalu thank His Excellency Chukwuemeka Ezeife for making out time, for us to share from his wealth of knowledge, and also commended him for his positive contributions towards a better political system in our State Anambra State and in Country Nigeria at large.
Comrade Samuel Onuzuluike in support also commended His Excellency for his positive Leadership styles during and after the third republic.
His Excellency Chukwuemeka promised to be part of our 2ND YOUTH LEADERSHIP ORIENTATION SEMINAR" scheduled to hold on 26th of November 2016.

Ego Kristi Media Reporting from Awka, Anambra State.

HIS EXCELLENCY CHUKWUEMEKA EZEIFE OKWADIKE SPEAKS ON NIGERIANS RECESSION, THAT BUHARI SHOULD BE HELD RESPONSIBLE

His Excellency Chief Chukwuemeka Ezeife CON, who holds a doctorate
degree in Economics and who has a Commander
of the Order of the Niger, CON, award and was
Third Republic Governor of Anambra State as well
as being a former Presidential Adviser on Political
Matters to ex-President Olusegun Obasanjo. He
was also a member of the 2014 National
Conference in this interview, the retired permanent
secretary who hails from Igboukwu, Aguata Local government, Anambra State, speaks on burning national issues including economic recession, the debate on sale
of national assets and the Biafran agitation,among others.
   The economic recession is real. How did we get
here?
THE Federal Government pushed the country into
recession. Some of the actions are inexcusable.
Some are very pitiable. What affects the confidence of economic agents is what they see,what they hear, what they feel. If the government of the country begins to say
the government is broke, they (investors) have
nothing to doubt. That accounts for so many
exits from Nigeria. There were all kinds of
normally unprintable things said by our
government: that we are bankrupt, we are broke,
we are this and that. They took over and within a
very short time they started making negative
statements about the economy. This is not a
matter of blaming anybody. You just look at how
many companies have quit Nigeria.
I know of a friend who brought in some
expatriates to co-invest with him here. They were
just about to get started when the first salvo from
government was fired that the country should not
be invested in, because that is what it means;
that the country is broke, that it is a poor
economic decision to come here. So, the
foreigners ran away and the man is still
struggling now to get new partners.
Check the number of companies that were here a
year-plus ago and how many are here today.
Even the airlines, at least the ones that spoke
out, said they had no confidence in Nigeria and
that was why they were leaving. I have told many
people that the blame-game must stop. Now,
that (blame-game) is the most stupid thing to
do. If it was the fault of the last administration,
let him take us to all the things as they were
during that administration. Let him take us to the
price of rice that was obtainable before he took
over; take us to that petrol price; take us to the
exchange rate; take us to the market as it
existed; take us back to what it was when you
took over. Any blame-game is a waste of time.
What is your view on the issue of restructuring?
The issue of restructuring should unite us. There
is no reason for disagreement; maybe we do not
even understand. I was recently misquoted
somewhere as saying that this issue of
restructuring is political. Indeed, it is more
economic than political. We are concerned about
improving the welfare of ordinary Nigerian people.
It is not a matter of the rich. Those who are
against it may be feudalists, who do not care
very much about the welfare of the ordinary
people. What am I talking about? The present
states, which are not feasible are spreading
hunger and suffering to ordinary Nigerians
because the states are too small to cater for the
economic interests of their people.
I was trying to explain what is called “Economies
of Scale”. You don’t have it in politics but in
economics. What does it say? When you have
large population or space, you can produce
anything at lower unit cost than when you have a
very small population.
Now, it is not just a matter of lower unit cost but
also the capability to establish something like
power in any state. For now, the capability is not
there because the states are too small to afford
what it takes to generate power easily. When you
are dealing with water supply, power,
transportation, environmental problems, it is
always cheaper if you have a larger space, so, the
issue is very economic and it is ordinary
economics, not high-level economics.
Political aspect
Now, the political aspect of it has to do with how
to begin to create more states. Ironsi recognized
26 provinces, not states and we said he was
going to make Nigeria a unitary system and killed
him. Now, after killing him, they wanted to defeat
Biafra in war, they started with 12 states and
eventually we got to 36 states plus Abuja; and
northern military men created the states to favour
the North. That is why you hear some people
from the North attacking restructuring.
Indeed, the political aspect of it has been taken
care of. We can negotiate. Instead of all of us
suffering lack of welfare, we can make some
concessions to the North so that they can agree
to restructuring properly. What is there?
Only about four states can support themselves;
every end of the month we rush to Abuja to go
and take oil money and we have learned not to
do anything any more except to share oil money.
I am told of some local governments where
people only go to the secretariat just once in a
month when they share resources at the federal
level and it gets to the local government, then the
chairman calls people and says, “okay o, e don
happen”, and they share the money and go away.
States were created to fight Nigeria-Biafra war.
After the war, subsequent military leaders from
the North created states to favour their areas.
That is why the North-West has seven states and
Kano has by far more local governments than
Lagos. Bayelsa produces oil but has only eight
local governments and we are sharing money
based on that.
Somebody opened his mouth, a big man from the
north, and said, Nigerian oil is northern oil. You
see what comes out of our mouth? The North
and the South were always treated equal, that
was why Ironsi recognized some provinces, equal
number in the North and South. The regions were
not the same. We had extra region, Mid-West.
Out of four regions, one was north, three were
south but we then developed a fair system of
having six geo-political zones; three in the North
and three in the South like it used to be, equality
of units. Now, let’s use the six geo-political zones
as federating units that enables each unit to be
big enough to take care of the needs of the
people and benefit from economies of scale.
Think about the past when we had the regions,
there was “ownership” of regions and therefore,
not too much corruption. If you squandered our
money, we could literally kill you but today,
“Nigerian money” is like nobody’s money and so
people steal anyhow.
There was also competition among the regions.
Eastern Nigeria was very developed.
Look at what Awolowo did in education in the
West and it lasted up till today. Educationally, the
West is still ahead, the foundation was laid by
Awolowo. So, the issue of restructuring should
not divide us.
Unfair number of states
If the North is so sad about losing some majority
institutions, the unfair number of states given to
them, we can make some political amends by way
of compensation, but they should not go about
telling outright lies that oil belongs to the North.
What about the Biafran agitation? What is your
take on that?
I can say it many times because it is the truth,
our people have some bottom lines, principles,
which guide their actions. One of them arises
from this statement: Life without honour is not
worth living. The second is: He that is rejected
does not reject himself. If you don’t feel accepted
by your neighbours, what do you do? So, Biafra
becomes inevitable when injustice is made
permanent.
People like me don’t even think of any division at
all because I believe that nobody in his right mind
would want Nigeria to break up and the people,
who seem to be pushing the break-up, the Fulani,
are the least well-placed, if we were to break up
because they would lose the most from a Nigeria
that breaks up. The Igbo, somehow would
manage to survive and thrive; the Yoruba are
already surviving; South-South, God blessed
them; Middle-Belt, well, they might have
problems, being the closest people to the Fulani
but the bottom line is that Nigeria is better off
with the same people it has now and that there
should be no break-up if we think about the long-
term interests of each group.
Let us look at the Igbo, they feel the most
rejected at this stage. What is the problem?
The Igbo come to a place empty-handed, he
might even carry faeces on his head to make
small money and gradually he gets a kiosk,
eventually, he builds a palace in the place.
Unfortunately, without knowing it, he would sit in
front of his mighty palace and appear to ooze
more confidence than the original owners of the
land.
And, if the Igbo is from Anambra, he may even
insult some people without knowing it when he is
boasting. Therefore, jealousy would set in and
from there to hatred, then the next thing is blood-
flow. This is the problem we have in the country.
But I am pleasantly surprised at Nigerians.
In spite of what I have just explained, you find
some people writing that Igbo are needed in
Nigeria. I mean, these are people who can see.
The truth is that Igbo are a gift God gave Nigeria.
Look at anywhere you are talking about. Ijebu-
Ode, go and count the houses.
Go to Lagos and even in Abuja here or Kaduna,
count the houses. Another Igbo principle is,
“where you live, you mend it”, that is, you develop
it. But we have over-done it and people are
jealous of them and those who are jealous of
them sometimes forget that they did not steal
money and those who are Igbo forget that they
can get a lot better by studying the people of the
immediate environment, giving help and making
friends with the local people.
The best thing is to restructure now; the earlier
we restructure, the tighter the federation. The
later we restructure, the more our federation
would be more like a confederation. Those who
are stealing money and dumping money in foreign
banks come back here and talk nonsense about
restructuring because they have so much money
and they do not want anything that would bring
money to other Nigerians.
What is your take on the debate on the sale of
national assets?
Who will buy them? National assets are very
heavy things. Only those who dumped our money
in foreign banks can bring tiny bits of what they
stole to buy our national assets. It is a matter of
thinking about fairness. When you call the people
who have stolen our money, who would compete
with them? Let them sell the assets and you
would find out who bought them and from where.
You would find that it is not a fairly-spread
participation. So, it is unjust to compound
injustice and to give advantage to the more
corrupt members of the society.
The House of Representatives has taken steps to
establish State Police. Do you see any merit or
demerit in this?
The 2014 National Conference of which I was a
member approved state police. Today, with the
marauding cattle-rearers, everybody would call
for state police instead of the one that is
controlled by the Federal Government and which
closes its eyes as people are being killed; seeing
somebody with AK-47 tending to their cattle and
they are not asking questions. So, I think this
time, we need it.
In the beginning I was opposed to it. Many years
ago when I was governor, I found that those who
use the powers of governors can abuse state
police. I said, for instance, a man is having dinner
with his wife and men of the state police storm
his house, abuse him and arrest him only on the
excuse that the man is also aspiring to be the
next governor. What that means is that if we
allow state police, when it comes to aspiring to
the office of the governor, the state police would
behave so callously like what happened in the Edo
election, like what INEC also did in that election.
America said ours is another brand of democracy.
The US Ambassador to Nigeria said what INEC
was announcing was different from what were in
the wards. The rigging was done at the Collation
Centre.
How about plans by the Federal Government to
establish grazing reserves and ranches for
herdsmen?
This brazen islamization cannot work. They even
said they would import grass and then, I don’t
know if they will take over the cattle to sell to us
or leave it to the individuals to sell to us.
It is based on ancient practice where people must
go about. There is a new technology for fodder
production and this technology recycles fodder in
just six days.
So, you don’t need to move around and even
when you want to move the cattle to the point of
sale, you truck it down. How callous can our
minds be?
Are we decaying in the mind? You plant
something, you come to look at your farm and
you find cattle eating what you planted. You talk,
they shoot you down. What kind of society are we
running?
Grazing reserves
So, the South as a whole declared against
grazing reserves; I know because I chaired the
meeting of the whole South (Southern Nigeria
Peoples Assembly) in Delta and it was a
unanimous decision among southern people. I
heard that the Federal Government proceeded to
give money to some people to twist them but
people have rejected grazing reserves. I don’t
even support it being done in the North.
Those people are also Nigerians and they have
right to cultivate. In fact, we are eating more
from the North than the North is eating from us.
So, we should not allow the cattle to go and eat
up the farm produce of the North. Government
should encourage cattle ranching not grazing
reserves.
The Buhari administration said it would not
implement the report of the 2014 national
conference, describing the exercise as essentially
a job for the boys. What is your view on this?
As a member, I know what transpired there.
Nigeria for once, working together made
decisions. Not all the decisions were palatable to
all sections of Nigeria but they were unanimous
because you may not agree, but we would
persuade you. For the first time, Nigerians met
and took decisions by consensus most of the
time because voting was scarce.
So, if people who should know, people
representing every group in Nigeria, that is the
greatest achievement of that period and anybody,
who says he does not want it is only trying to
play sectional game. If you are talking Nigeria,
that (confab report) is the answer but if your are
talking about sectionalism, well, you go ahead and
do your own because you are in power. Imagine
what happens when you are out of power. Or, are
you insisting on the country breaking up?
The president made three major promises, anti-
corruption fight, war against insurgency and job
creation. How would you rate the government
now?
No, that’s a lie. There were many things he said.
One, petrol price N45, one dollar to one naira and
such other things. Even the ones you mentioned,
Boko Haram is still there killing people. I said to
myself, at the beginning, when Buhari appointed
over 40 people and not one south-easterner was
appointed, I was talking, I was writing. But when
he appointed ministers and I saw the distribution
of portfolios, how it was, I gave up criticizing. For
example, even today, no Igbo man is in the
National Security Council and no group is more
populous than the Igbo, none. You see the
herdsmen, marauding and killing and government
is not concerned. You see in Nigeria of 2016, you
kill somebody and say the reason is blasphemy
and the government does nothing. I must doff my
heart for Ganduje, the Governor of Kano State,
who said the right thing.
Indeed, I am a Christian but what made me a
Christian is because I arrived as a Christian. I did
not choose to be. I was Christian on arrival
because my parents were Christians. If you are
from my village, town or local government, you
are a Christian and even largely 99 percent, if you
are from Anambra, you are a Christian. So, it is
not a matter of choice. Some of us were Muslims on arrival and some were pagans. We had no choice to make as per the circumstances of our birth. If there is a blame, you go to God but, on our part, we only know how to praise God. So, no need blaming Buhari. It is not a matter of choice for him but it may be a matter of how much he knew.

Ego Kristi Media Reporting from Awka Anambra State.

EGO KRISTI YOUTH MOVEMENT PAYS COURTESY VISIT DPO FEGGE SP RABIU GARBA

The Ego Kristi Youth on thursday 13/10/16 pay Courtesy visit to the DPO Fegge Onitsha Police station SP Garba Rabiu.
Sp Rabiu welcomed the members of Ego Kristi Youth Movement gladly to his office. The DPO encourages the members of Ego Kristi Youth Movement on their effort in adding positive values to the society through their initiatives; DPO also advises every youth to always be law abiding and shun all criminal activities.
  In response, the Founder of Ego Kristi Youth Movement Comr Ositadimma Luke Iloghalu thank the DPO Fegge SP Rabiu for accepting their invitation to come and see him, despite his tight engagement. Comr Ositadimma also commended SP Rabiub Garba for the good work he is currently doing in Fegge and its environs, especially by restoring, security of life,  peace and tranquility through his security strategies. Comr. Chimezie Ebirim also thank SP Rabiu for his usual fast response to any security alert.
As pertaining to our "2nd Youth Leadership Orientation Seminar" scheduled to hold on 26th November, SP Rabiu gave us assurance that he will be present in our event. 

  Ego Kristi Media Reporting from Fegge Onitsha Anambra State.