Dr. Joe Nwaorgu, a delegate at the national conference and Secretary General of the apex pan-Igbo socio-cultural organisation, Ohanaeze Ndigbo, tells Assistant Editor (North), CHUKS EHIRIM, that the South East Governors’ Forum has no common agenda on the main Igbo cause to present at the confab
When you were nominated as a delegate to the national conference, were there meetings held to articulate the cause of Ndigbo?
Dr. Joe Nwaorgu
Definitely, from October 1, after Mr. President flew the kite that a national conference would hold, Ohanaeze started the mobilisation drive. Meetings were held; Igbo organisations were brought together, and based on what has formed part of previous conferences touching national life, subheads were given and Igbo organisations sent in their positions on those subheads. Particularly, Igbo organisations were referred to Igbo positions in the 1994/1995 national conference, in the 2005 national (political reforms) conference and in the position paper of Ohanaeze when the National Assembly (Senate and House of Representatives) called for amendment to the constitution led by Deputy Senator President, Ike Ekweremadu, and Deputy Speaker of House of Representatives, Emeka Ihedioha. Ohanaeze presented a paper, Igbo position, in the 2012 amendment call.
What were the frontline demands?
First and foremost was the restructuring of this country. Ndigbo stood and still stand for six zone structure. Next is devolution of powers; that power should devolve from the federal to the zones. Those were the critical issues and therefrom any other thing flows – power should devolve from the centre to the zones.
To what extent, individually and collectively, have you pushed those demands in this national conference?
The structure of this conference is different. The conference started off with the president’s inauguration speech. All members of the conference spoke individually on the president’s excellent speech. I saw it as a masterpiece; it covered all, though it fell short of allowing us the whole hog to discuss issues that would make for a break-up if any section doesn’t like what is occurring. Otherwise everything else is on the table and we are taking the liberty to discuss everything. After the discussion on the president’s speech, 20 committees were formed and we were divided into committees, each of which had its own subject area.
I was in the Land Tenure and National Boundary Committee. It was committee number 15. The committees have now submitted their reports and it is these reports that are being taken one by one.
You said Ohanaeze Ndigbo had a position before coming to this conference. But during the debate at the Restructuring Committee, Ebonyi and Enugu states went against regionalism. Could this imply there was a crack in the ranks of Ohanaeze?
There is no crack in the ranks of Ohanaeze; rather there is a crack in the South East Governors’ Forum. The governors do not have a single position for the South East. One would have challenged the governors to tell us what their position on these issues is. Delegates appointed by governors came here with different portfolio stance. Ebonyi State government has always maintained that states should be the federating units and it is not just for this conference. They had the same view in the 2005 conference; they have not changed. So, we all know the position of Ebonyi.
What is surprising everybody is the stance of Enugu because that state has never said it is against zoning, and most of the meetings we held, top Enugu people – former Senate President, Ken Nnamani; former Governor Okwesilieze Nwodo; Prof. Onyema Ochioha and many other people – had taken part in the formulation of Ohanaeze position, and this Ohanaeze position is not just Igbo position. After the Ohanaeze position under the auspices of His Excellency, Dr. Alex Ekwueme, Igbo organisations – the South East Peoples Assembly (SEPA), South East Peoples Development Assembly (SEPDA), Aka-Ikenga, Izu Umunna, Igbo Delegate Assembly (IDA) which links all Igbo associations in Northern Nigeria and Ohanaeze as the apex Igbo organisation – met in Awka to streamline all their positions.
All of us met and streamlined our position as Ndigbo. It is this position that we streamlined in Awka that we took to Asaba for a discussion with South West and South South. It was a two-day meeting at which committees were formed and discussion held therefrom, we arrived at the synthesis and a sync of what is a Southern position. It is that Southern position that each group was asked to defend and bring to the conference. That is the position Ohanaeze is carrying.
Here, one is tempted to ask, given that you were not in the committee for power devolution or restructuring and therefore could not project that common cause of Ohanaeze. Did you make any attempt to submit those positions to the committee involved for consideration?
Good! By the time we arrived here, the South East governors put us together under Gen. Ike Nwachukwu (rtd.) and that is South East Delegates Group. Ohanaeze cooperated under his leadership. We met and we have a South East peoples’ position, which is not at variance with the Ohanaeze position of six zone structure. That was what Ike Nwachukwu and Gary Enwo-Igariwey, and those Igbo who were in that committee came to their committees with these objectives.
But at the committee levels, it is not only the Igbo that were there, other interest groups were also there. So if the overwhelming majority at that level goes against the Igbo position, you will not blame the Igbo who were in that committee. However, the committee report will be presented at the plenary. It is at the plenary level that we get final decision, and it is at that level that everybody should work for achieving the objectives. So it is not concluded that we have lost out.
I want all Igbo, the South West and the South South to try to convince their colleagues from other areas on the necessity of the zonal structure for the development of Nigeria. It is only the zones that are large enough to receive devolved functions from the federal level. The states are too small; in fact, most of the states are not viable.
So the federal level cannot devolve very many things to state level. It is only the zonal structure that can absorb things we want to take away from the over-centralised activities of the federal government that seems to still be a military government because it is too unitary and power is too concentrated at the centre that we want these powers to be dispersed, but not to disperse to states which I think are very weak to receive these functions.
But if you have the zones as federating units, you have economies of scale; so a group of states can now put their resources together to execute large-scale projects. Let us take coal from Igbo land, for example. Enugu State alone cannot provide the funds to revamp the coal industry; but as a combined force, the South East working in tandem, we can revamp the coal industry. That is the kind of thing I am talking about.
You talked about the South East governors’ agenda being at variance with that of Ohanaeze.
I didn’t say their agenda is at variance. I said the South East governors do not have a joint agenda. They did not give us an Igbo agenda with which we came here.
To the best of your knowledge, what agenda are they pursuing?
I don’t know what they are pursuing; I know that they are all Igbo people. But it would have been good if the governors have met and said “this is what we want you people to do”. It has not been done until now. I have not seen what puts the South East governors together as regards Igbo core interest like the zonal structure issue.
During the election of Ohanaeze Ndigbo, it was alleged that the governors were not carried along; for instance, in your state, Imo, it was believed that Governor Rochas Okorocha never supported your candidature and so does Martin Elechi for Igariwey?
Governors were not carried along, how? If they are not carried along and he never supported my election, how come he had a candidate?
Do you mean Peter Oji?
Then what do you mean by he was not carried along?
They alleged the election was manipulated against the governors.
That is a different thing. You were not carried along in an election and you had your candidate. If your candidate was defeated, it does not mean anything. Election is over and the governor is my friend. He needed not support my election because he had his own ideas. But after the election, he saw that I got 2,011 votes and whoever they supported got 43. The others got two, one. It was clear that Ndigbo said Joe Nwaorgu is their secretary general, and being a magnanimous person, his Special Adviser on Igbo Affairs congratulated me and we are working in harmony. He is an Igbo man; I am an Igbo man. He is from Imo and I am from Imo too.
So you are saying that your relationship with Okorocha is cordial.
We don’t have any quarrel. We have never had any quarrel. Whether he supported my candidature or not doesn’t matter. I am secretary general of Ndigbo and he is the governor of Imo. I hail from Imo, so he is my governor.
Other delegates here, we learnt, are being overwhelmingly supported by their governors. Does this extend to you?
Our governors are giving us support through the South East secretariat.
To what extent have they done that?
All the governors, all of them, are giving us support through the secretariat. But I will not speak for the secretariat. There is a secretariat. Whether they have sufficient money, I don’t know; but the governors are giving us support.
Have they subsidised your stay here as others are doing to their own delegates?
I said they are supporting the secretariat.
The committee on restructuring went ahead and recommended an additional state for the South East and now many other regions are canvassing for additional states in their zones. Don’t you think that it is an attempt to scuttle the recommendation of an additional state for the South East?
The concept of states creation has two components. First, Igbo people of the South East want parity. That is the first line. Thereafter, you can discuss the creation of other states. At the moment, one state for Igbo land is not state creation. We are looking for equalisation or looking for parity and equity, first and foremost. When that has gone, we shall discuss the concept of new states. That is how I see it.
Do you think the outcome of this conference should be subjected to referendum or National Assembly?
I have said that before the conference, and I will say it again, that it should be subjected to referendum because the National Assembly, in my view, is not equitably constituted and the structure is a bone of contention, both the Senate and House of Representatives. In terms of constituency distribution, both of them are contentious. Therefore, we cannot subject our decisions to the National Assembly.
Do you subscribe to the concept of zoning in Imo?
I am from Owerri zone and power should not have gone to Orlu in the first instance, in the last election. Okigwe zone should have been allowed to complete its two terms (of eight years). That was my position; that rotation should be the thing and that Okigwe should be allowed to complete its eight years since Orlu zone had held power for eight years under Achike Udenwa. Okigwe spent four years (under Ikedi Ohakim); so it is not fair for another Orlu man to become the governor of Imo. That is where I stand on this question of rotation. I support rotation but there must be equity in it.
