George warns lack of zoning creates domination that arouses resentment
By Jeph Ajobaju, Chief Copy Editor
********************************
In the First Republic we had the majority of tribes that had their way, while the minority tribes were just onlookers. This scenario played out both in the North and in the South.
This created that friction that led us into all kinds of coups and counter-coups that culminated in the civil war – Bode George
********************************
Bode George, a retired Navy General who fought in the civil war, has taken his case to the road, warning the grabbing of key political positions by the North may breed the same resentment that led to the civil war – which should be avoided at all costs.
He cited the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), of which he was National Vice Chairman (South West) before he retired due to old age, saying the refusal of Iyorchia Ayu to resign for a Southerner to become the National Chairman, in line with the party’s constitution, smacks of Northern domination the South rejects.
Ayu (North Central) is supported by PDP presidential candidate Atiku Abubakar (North East).
George sounded the latest alarm again on Arise TV at the weekend, after he had earlier called a press conference on the same theme last Thursday.
At that press conference in his home in Lagos, he justified his stand by stressing that “aside from the fact that I retired as a Navy General with postings all over this country, I am nationalistic by blood, orientation and global view.”
George explained further in the Arise TV interview that the resolve to stop the cheating, unjust treatment, and domination of minorities by majorities led PDP founders to insert in the party’s constitution the principle of zoning and rotating top political positions among the six regions.
Zoning, he argued, has helped stabilise the political system since 1999 and must not be jettisoned by the PDP or any other political party, or by the government, if Nigeria is to remain united.
Per reporting by The Nation, the interview is reproduced below:
There seems to be a division among members of your party in the South on the call for the resignation of National Chairman, Iyorchia Ayu. How do you respond to this?
Of course, we will have one or two dissenting voices. But, facts are facts; and fiction remains fiction. I am looking at the thought processes of the founding fathers of our party.
They gathered together in 1998 and looked at the problem that had befallen this nation called Nigeria. They came out with a solution that Nigeria should be divided into six geopolitical zones.
This was because in the First Republic we had the majority of tribes that had their way, while the minority tribes were just onlookers. This scenario played out both in the North and in the South.
This created that friction that led us into all kinds of coups and counter-coups that culminated in the civil war. That problem led to the incursion of the military into government.
Having considered all of these, these leaders thought of resolving the conflict by dividing the country into six geopolitical zones.
Some have said every zone deserves to be at the top of the nation’s government. What do you have to say to that?
Besides these factors, there are six top positions in this country that include the presidency, the vice presidency, the Senate presidency, the speakership, the secretary to the government, and the national chairman of the party. So, we have six zones and six positions.
The idea is that every zone will go home with one of the top positions. This was done to remove the associated anger of side-lining the minority in the affairs of the country.
There was also a proviso that after eight years, the North and the South will swap positions, as all the positions occupied by the North will go to the South and vice-versa.
If you look at it, number one is the presidency and number six is the chairman of the party. So, number one and number six cannot be from the same zone for balancing.
From the party’s angle, we have the executive, the legislative arm, and the party. It was a brilliant concept. This allowed us to stabilize this country for almost 16 years. Now, where are we again?
Some people came up and said there was no need for zoning anymore, and that shocked me. The need to have zoning is more important now than in 1999. This may be because some of these people don’t understand the concept that led to the thought processes of our founding fathers. It is a norm but an unwritten law.
I hope we will have the opportunity to put it down in writing so that everybody will be able to read and understand it.
Unfortunately, some people are saying they don’t believe in zoning anymore. But I am talking because I have been part of this system from the very beginning.
We have a saying in my part of the world that when you have old people in any association, they always make sure that they correct the mistakes of the young ones.
I am trying to refer you back to that concept that was established, which brought about this sanity in this nation.
Is that why some are bent on removing Ayu as your National Chairman?
If you remember, the APC when they came into government told everybody that they don’t believe in zoning but what did they end up doing?
Now that this thing came from us, and we are trying to manoeuvre it to suit certain purposes, certain personal ambition is going to drive us aground. And that is what I’m saying.
We are not asking that Ayu should be thrown out or forced to resign. But in the sense of oneness, in the sense of inclusivity, let him throw in the towel and let us balance the top positions.
We are going to campaign in my zone and we want our party to win. If it’s not going to affect the party, I won’t bother. But how do I go on the rostrum in the Southwest and tell the people that we are ready and that they must vote for our candidate?
They must realise that the ruling party has its candidate from the Southwest. How do I face them? He, the candidate of the APC [Bola Tinubu], will tell them that he has the presidential ticket, and what has the PDP got to offer them?
Let’s reverse the role. Let’s say the presidential ticket and the chairmanship of the party are from the South. Will our brothers from the North take it? Will they be happy? What is good for the goose is good for the gander.
But, if they say they don’t want it, history will be on the side of the truth. What am I looking for? If at this age I cannot tell the truth, then, what am I doing in politics?
This is not a matter to say someone is forcing Ayu out. Remember that Ayu himself stated that if the presidential candidate emerged from the North, he would resign as the Chairman of the party to give room for balancing.
We are saying, let us be mindful. How do I convince my people that they should vote for us? What do I have on the ticket? What do I have on the plate?
And if we are still manipulating the mindset of Nigerians, it’s creating a lot of injury for our party.
__________________________________________________________________
Related articles:
You will lose Villa run if Ayu remains, George tells Atiku
Makinde joins Wike. Where’s Atiku gonna get votes?
George backs Wike, says he is fighting for justice
__________________________________________________________________
For your suggestion to have a new Chairman before the commencement of campaigns, what’s the constitutional roadmap within the PDP and how can this be achieved?
It is possible. In our constitution, people decided ab initio that there was no need to talk about zoning and that we had passed the stage of zoning but our constitution is so clear on that.
Section 7 (3c) states “We must adhere to zoning and rotation of elective and party offices”.
But when we gathered and there was a report of a zoning committee, only the party offices were zoned. They left out elective offices. Due to that, when we met at NEC [National Executive Council], we told everybody that there was a need to ensure equity, justice, and fairness.
The National Chairman then set up a review committee, where I was initially a member. The first meeting was very stormy. This was because people were talking about no need for zoning and that anybody that wanted to contest can do so until we showed them this particular section of our constitution.
That meeting ended in chaos. After we confronted them with that provision, the people were then sober.
Then, they said they accepted but added that in the last six months, everybody has been going around campaigning and had expended a lot of money and energy, and why can’t we be kind enough to allow at least for now everybody to go out and campaign for votes?
They pleaded that we should not throw the baby and bath water away. That committee accepted with a caveat that from now on, six months before the commencement of the sale of forms, the party must come out pointedly to declare where each of the elective offices would go.
And we said all right, let us look at it despite what is in the constitution. We did that at that time to bring about peace.
So, what is so sacrosanct now? We are saying in the interest of balancing, inclusivity, equity, and justice, the Chairman should step down honourably. Our stand is based on facts and for the people to trust us, as we go into the campaign.
Ayu pledged that he would resign if the [presidential] candidate emerged from the North. Now that the candidate has emerged from the North, he is breaking his pledge.
How will the electorate who are more in number than those of us who are card-carrying members of the party trust us?
We are saying that we in the South are on the disadvantaged side; let us look at this issue holistically and see how best we can win the minds and the hearts of the electorate.
We want to win this election. But he who comes to equity must come with clean hands. That is all we are saying.
Constitutionally speaking, if Ayu steps down, the person to take over is the Deputy National Chairman, who comes from the Northeast, the same place as your presidential candidate. How do you work around this to achieve what you want?
Let me start with the issue of constitutionality. I referred you to our party constitution which explicitly states that there will be zoning and rotation of elective and party offices. If we had stuck rigidly to that, Atiku would not have emerged as the presidential candidate.
So, now it is not a question of the next in line to succeed Ayu. It is not when it suits the North, we refer to the constitution and then it doesn’t suit them, we back away from the constitution.
We decided for moral purposes, to make it a family affair because people had spent and gone round to canvas for votes; that was why we relaxed zoning, which paved the way for the emergence of Atiku.
If Ayu resigns, the same principle will apply. We had altered the constitution to get the presidential candidate. We must go one more step to allow the South to produce the National Chairman when Ayu resigns.
Would you say the campaign council was inclusive enough?
As I said, the National Working Committee (NWC) is still there. But, I said, once the national campaign team is unveiled, only the Chairman will be involved in the campaign, unless you have one or two other members of the NWC on the campaign organisation.
It looks murky. The easy question is this: are you interested based on the facts on our party’s constitutional guidelines? If we could allow the candidate of the party to come from any zone then, which is against our constitution, what is good for the goose is good for the gander.
No matter what happens, at the end of the election, whether we win or not, there will be a convention to revisit the whole issue. We bent the constitution based on moral suasion purposes for justice and equity to allow all the zones to contest.
Now when we are saying that the South should be allowed to produce a National Chairman, they are saying no. It is the responsibility of our National Chairman to present our presidential candidate.
So, what happens? The North will present the North?
Governor Godwin Obaseki of Edo State allegedly said he will leave the party if Ayu is forced to leave. What do you have to say to that?
Maybe when he understands, he will change his mind. As I said, I’m privileged because I was there in 1998 and I saw the way the whole thing was managed.
And if I am still alive by the grace of God today, I should be able to explain because some of these people who just joined the party don’t know it. It is the culture of our party and we don’t need to threaten anybody. We should not also personalise this issue.
With all your interventions and cries, what will you do if Ayu chooses not to resign?
People amuse me. What is personal about this? When we met in Abuja on the revisitation of the zoning committee, there was no [Rivers Governor Nyesom] Wike at that time. But Wike saw the sense in what we were saying.
You are being accused of supporting the governorship candidate of the Labour Party in Lagos. How true is this?
You talked about Gbadebo Rhodes-Vivour that he’s my boy. Yes, he is my boy but he is not my direct son. Does that mean I am in the Labour Party? No.
Gbadebo’s father was my classmate; we graduated the same year about 53 years ago. Should I now disown him? I can’t.
I am an irredentist member of the PDP. But what is good for the goose is also good for the gander. For anybody to say I have my full strength behind Gbadebo Rhodes-Vivour, I have only one vote.
What was my contribution to the emergence of the Lagos PDP governorship candidate (Jandor)? You need to know.
I am saying this because someday even if we win the election, we will remember that there was that voice in the party that called for fairness, justice, and equity.
