Obasanjo Has Betrayed Us
by
How do you respond to the federal government taking the states to court over resource control?
What the federal government seems to be aiming at is an attempt to establish something called offshore/onshore; because I have read the 10 points and don't
see where they talk about resource control there at all. They believe perhaps that the northern governors, perhaps because they have said in one of their communiqué‚s that they are not in favour of resource control where the southern governors are strongly in favour of it, they feel they should throw a cat
among Nigerians, but they will fail. All the 10 points they have made there are about offshore/onshore which is a non-starter.
Offshore/onshore has to be deliberately introduced by law and that law had since been abrogated. The law that provides for derivation says you will bring
derivation at one percent of total oil accruals whether from offshore or onshore into the federation account. There's nothing in law that exists today that
says or suggests that you should raise it from one to 13 or introduce any conditionality. So the president has absolutely been acting illegally,
unconstitutionally. I can say that without hesitation. But we have been trying to negotiate a position with him that please stop this unconstitutionality,
because you don't have any backing in law or the constitution. I went farther and brought the answer, at least, thank God I was at the Constitutional
Conference where it was clearly said and the question was put and answered that for the purposes of derivation, the issue of the offshore/onshore will not
apply. So you have got the law, you have got the spirit behind the law. So, what else can you interpret?
If the president wishes to reintroduce laws he feels should apply to offshore/onshore dichotomy in the payment of derivation, he should go to the National
Assembly to make laws. Courts do not make laws; courts only interpret the laws. So what laws are we asking the courts to interpret today? It seems we are
trying, like we did the other time, we knew who we want to give the presidency, so we went to court and say there can be 2/3 of a state. We know the law
concerning the offshore/onshore dichotomy, but we want to go to court to do what? Let nobody pull the wool over my eyes, by playing on words. You have
Nigeria as a territory; you have the bodies of water that surround Nigeria as Nigerian territorial waters. All of them are Nigerian territory, because if I
agree to associate and become a country, as far as I am concerned, there can be no distinction between territorial waters and territorial laws of Nigeria.
They remain what they are because of the agreement by various states and their bodies of waters to come together and form Nigeria. And in this country
today, there is only one federal capital territory so defined, or established by law. There is no law that establishes the body of water that surrounds
Nigeria as federal capital territory, therefore, nobody can tell me that the oil that accrues from there accrues directly to the Federal. The only thing
that can accrue directly to the federation is the thing that comes out from the Federal Capital Territory. So, to me, for people to say they want to go to
court, to do what? Bring a law? I am sorry, we are in a democracy. The only place you go to bring a law is the National Assembly, and the National Assembly
has spoken.
Three times Mr. President tried to introduce offshore/onshore. He tried it in the NDDC bill, it was removed. He tried it in the 2000 budget, it was removed.
He tried it in the 2001 budget, it was removed. So, where else are we getting this offshore/onshore? Other than, may be, a device for people to continue to
subjugate a people they feel are small. Look, the truth of the matter is all through history, those who perceive themselves as strong and powerful have
never conceded anything to those they consider as weak. But those have always claimed their rights. And by God's Grace we shall claim this right because
that is the only thing equity demands.
I think the issue of resource control is very largely misunderstood. I had an occasion sometime ago to give an example of what could happen if we have
resource control, I would at least have a say in how our oil companies are licensed. The oil companies should know that they must establish a relationship
with the communities in which they operate. But because the resource is truly controlled at a distant place called Abuja, by people who until recently had
no relationship with where these resources are, because nobody can tell me that those soldiers living Abuja knew anything about the circumstances of
exploration and exploitation of oil. I give you a very simple example. We don't want gas flaring. The oil companies would say, ah! It costs Nigeria a lot of
money, okay, don't flare gas. If you lived there, if you had an experience of what it is to flare gas, to see the deterioration of the forest, and see the
destruction, you will not flare. We are not saying let us carry everything home, where are we going to? We are Nigerians. But we are saying you should leave
the control of these resources where they are. That is not to deny whatever is due to Caesar is going to Caesar. I think the concept of resource control is
so badly misunderstood that we need to dialogue before it can be fully understood. Going to court is not the best. In any case, this particular court action
has nothing to do with resource control. Read the ten points clearly, it's all targeted at Akwa Ibom State, particularly, and all the other Niger Delta
States that have offshore oil. All the government is seeking by this court action is to be given permission to re-introduce an on and offshore law through
the courts, this cannot be fair. Read the statement clearly, nothing is said about the political control, it is about whether the territorial states have
right to claim the resources that is in the waters of all states. But nobody has declared Nigerian waters federal capital territory. As far as I know, there
is only one such territory, and that is Abuja. So you cannot now say that the resources that are coming from these other places go directly to the federal
government
But, what happens if the court rules against you?
The court cannot rule against justice. We have seen it before by the way, under the same president, when the court ruled that on 13 two thirds and everybody
wondered how can there be two third of a government? We know that the government has been advised by everybody that should advise it that what it is doing
is wrong. So going to court I want to hope is merely futile, but if the court rules and the judgement is seen to be unfair and unjust, even God will resist
an unjust decision and that is true. Nigeria is now under democracy and we hope that justice and equity will continue to reign. That is what I am reacting
to and we will insist that justice reigns.
But all the states are PDP States, and they are from the South South...
That is the betrayal, because first of all, the states wanted to take the federal government to court because of this 13 percent and this supposed to have
started the day the constitution came into force, but as PDP governors and we have a PDP government at the federal level, we decided to down play the whole
issue with the hope that again, common sense and logic would reign. And we know this might have been discussed at the party caucus level, and we were told
that we should not take any action because the federal government was not going to take any action, but rather the full 13 percent was going to be paid. We
have been told through every organ that should tell and then the federal government even assured us, and then suddenly it goes to court. So I am wondering,
because we must not forget that even though the federal government is PDP, that ministry is not controlled by PDP.
With the wrangling among the parties, are we not seeing a situation that would lead those aggrieved to form another party?
He who fights and runs away lives to fight another day. But if you insist on correcting wrongs, you stay where you are and correct wrongs. I was there when
PDP was formed. I was a member of the G34, I signed the memorandum to form PDP. So, there's no intention of surrendering it to anybody else, but if there
are wrongs within the PDP, we must stay, face those wrongs and correct them.
You are said to be building a refinery, but given the epileptic nature of federal owned refineries, what and what have you put in place to overcome or
circumvent this problem? Besides what efforts have you made to resuscitate state owned ailing industries?
Perhaps, you have been reading people who have accused me of building refinery of N1.2 billion of 12,000 something barrels. But I am not building a
refinery. And I have been shouting it from the rooftop. I am only creating the possibility for the private sector to come in and do things in Akwa Ibom. One
thing I realised early in the day was this. The only reason why those industries failed in the past was because government went in and did the things they
do not know and in the process, they made a lot of mistakes like borrowing a lot of money and signing a guarantee to repay the money. I can never fall into
that kind of a trap. What I am doing is creating an enabling environment, I am pursuing the licenses. I am giving all the tax breaks and all the incentives
I can possibly give to make it possible for private investors to come in here and do what they want to do. Like there Akwa Ibom people living in America who
want to come in and build the 12,000 barrels per day topping plant, in which they will refine and produce kerosene, diesel and nafta. The next refinery I am
pursuing is a full-fledged refinery with a cracking unit. And that will process a 100,000-120,000 barrels of oil a day. So all I do is provide the land,
provide the infrastructure and pursue the licences for them, so even if it costs N10billion, it is not Akwa Ibom money. This one is going to be an
export-oriented refinery. Two reasons the presidency gave me for insisting it must be export -oriented is that (i) installed capacity of already existing
refineries in Nigeria is in excess of what we can consume (ii) every refined product in Nigeria is heavily subsidised, so the president doesn't want to lose
any more money selling his oil at less than world market price. The refinery is to be sited at Ikot Abasi, and the people have come, inspected the site and
they are satisfied with it. And, in fact, the one benefit that we are getting with it is, as you know, any modern refinery comes with its own independent
power plant. The investors know they must put in a 50 megawatts power plant in that refinery. And we are saying to them, please start with the power plant,
so that you can finish in six months. So I, as a government do not own a power plant, what I will do is to sign a guarantee to buy the 50 megawatts and
distribute it to Akwa Ibom people, so there will be constant power in Akwa Ibom. If by three years from now and they are ready with their refinery and NEPA
has improved as the president has promised us, then they take back their power plant. But if, as I suspect, NEPA has not improved sufficiently for us to
depend on it, they will then install yet another 50 megawatts. That is really the issue.
Are you satisfied with the federal presence in your state?
Let me tell you one story to answer that question. When the president visited Akwa Ibom State, I complained about absence of federal presence in the state
and in his usual way, he joked away the question. He said he could not understand what I was complaining about. He looked around and saw all those black
uniform (policemen) and said are these not federal presence, look at all these policemen? Of course, he was serious. The point is, there was nothing he
could point to as federal presence.
Your state voted massively for Obasanjo. Are you sufficiently satisfied with his performance to ask your people to vote for him again?
You are loading the question too much. Let me dissect it and take it one by one. Whether we feel that we have enjoyed sufficiently the fruit of our labour,
the answer is no, and we have said that unequivocally to the federal government. And we won't say this without giving reasons. You see, we did not just vote
for President Obasanjo, but we voted overwhelmingly especially when considered that at the point of nomination, we had a candidate from the state. It's easy
when you are to decide between two people, but when you say no to one of your own in preference to somebody else, it is a stronger mark of favour, that is
clear in any situation. That Akwa Ibom State knows one of its own was in the race and nominated Obasanjo shows that right from day one the exercise of
trying to promote him in the state has been very widely accepted. Then according to the actual voting , we came only second to Niger State in terms of the
ratio of votes to total numbers of votes cast. And then in return we have one minister of state, one minister of state not a full minister; the consequences
became obvious to me and I didn't hesitate to tell him. I went through all of the ministries and made him realise ministers appoint heads of parastatals
from their constituency. Thus, leaving us with a minister of state means we don't have anybody heading any federal government parastatals (at least, at that
point in time). So, I made him realise that when the time came for him to constitute the boards of parastatals that since we did not have any head of
parastatals he should give us a chance to appoint some chairmen from Akwa Ibom. But what did we get? No one single significant chairman, despite the fact we
have two federal parastatals in our backyard, ALSCON and Oku Iboku paper mill . Even when I agreed through discussion with the federal government that I
will inject money into the resuscitation of the companies, it is money we could have used for other purposes. But to our greatest surprise, not only did we
fail to have a chairman, but even a single board member. So I told Mr. President, I'm sorry, I totally fail to understand. On many occasions you have said
to Akwa Ibom people that I, Victor Attah, I'm not just their governor but your friend. What manner of friendship have you shown me that I can go and tell
Akwa Ibom people this is why the president says that I am his friend. And because of that we refused to make that investment. We did not make that
investment because the federal government has failed to convince us that there is a proper resuscitation programme for these two industries. So, clearly to
answer the first part of your question, we are highly dissatisfied.
As to the question of whether he has performed, 36 states voted for him. If he is good for democracy or if overall, he is performing well, Akwa Ibom wants
to see the advancement of democracy. We want to be sure that the military can never come back. So, if today Obasanjo proves to be good for democracy, good
for this country, Akwa Ibom will vote for him .
We are talking about the dividends of democracy to your state...
I am putting it blankly that we are very dissatisfied
That is what we are saying, and based on this, will you ask your people to vote for him again?
We are saying that if he proves to be good for democracy and good for this country, then we could still vote for him. Why not? See, we are not looking at it
purely from a selfish point of view, a man that will come and do this for us or do that for us, we are voting for someone that will be good for this
country.
Having said that the Federal Government has not done enough for your people, what have you done as the state governor?
Oh, the ones that are within my power to do. But I cannot appoint members to federal boards, I cannot resuscitate Oku Iboku or ALSCON. I cannot do the
things the federal government should do and has not done. But if I should answer that question, I have said in my earlier statement that we have reached the
point now, where we draft the people to serve the state. And last night I had a meet-the-people forum, an interaction with the Akwa Ibom people and somebody
made a statement that so much echoed what I have just said. He said I thank God for you because you are not a politician, politicians are only concerned
with elections, but you are a statesman, you are concerned with development. If what he said is true, then I want to believe that come 2003, the people of
Akwa Ibom will decide whether they want this man to carry on with further development or whether to substitute him with somebody else. My emphasis has been,
what can I do to change Akwa Ibom State? If I change Akwa Ibom sufficiently in a positive direction then the people may be the one who will ask me to stay
on and then I will have to decide whether I want to stay or not.
The question is what have you done so far?
What have I done so far? What do you want me to say, write my report card? You have to come to Akwa Ibom to see things for yourself. But that is if, you
knew it before; if you did not, then you have to talk to the people you meet there.
At the PDP convention in 1999, the disagreement between you and Chief Don Etiebet almost disrupted the convention. Have you resolved your differences
now?
1999? My memory does not take me that far. All I can tell you now is that Akwa Ibom is quoted as the best example of several things in the PDP. Relationship
between the executive and the legislature, relationship between government and the party. Go to PDP caucus meeting today and they will quote that for you.
So crisis comes up and if you are mature enough, you resolve them. In any case, why should I go back to the cause of the crisis that occurred in 1999, how
will it help us? What you must know is that there is so much peace in Akwa Ibom today that we are being quoted as the best example of a peaceful state
nationally.
Now about the NDDC, are you satisfied with the composition of the board? And what are your expectations from the commission to your state?
I am satisfied with the membership of the board. I must give credit to the president totally on that. He consulted the governors fully before appointing the
people from their various states. There is only one aspect of the board that we as governors feel uncomfortable with. That is, this business of appointing
an external chairman for one year, when it is going to revolve among the states. Now look at the situation where this is a governing board, we are all
participating members of this board, we have a four year term and a member is brought from Abia this year to come and be chairman. One year, and then he
goes away and you go to Akwa Ibom, bring somebody to come and be chairman. Either there will be no continuity or he will stop and then that chairman who has
not anticipated his appointment must spend time becoming familiar with what direction will be given the commission and so on before he can fully act. What
we had expected and what we thought should be, is that there are commissioners from all of these states, now just bring one commissioner from Abia to chair
the meeting this year, he finishes next year you pick the commissioner from Akwa Ibom to chair the meeting, this way, there will be continuity, the whole
thing would be smooth. So, this external chairmanship is one thing we have been uncomfortable with. We think there will be disruption and won't make for
smooth running, otherwise we are quite happy with the composition I must say. I have a very open mind about the composition of NDDC. But they say once
beaten twice shy. I have been beaten twice, I have been beaten by OMPADEC, I have been beaten by PTF. Therefore, I repose very little confidence in these
external things that are managed by somebody else that owe responsibility to somebody.
That is why till tomorrow, my fight is for what I am entitled to, the one I know that is my own, and I can account to the Akwa Ibom people how I use, that
is the 13 per cent. I will not compromise on it. I will not accept any reintroduction of onshore/offshore.
I let people know that these things brought Nigeria to the brink. We cannot pretend about it. For three days, there was no movement at the Constitutional
Conference and everybody that talked agreed that it is an item that can scatter Nigeria. And they meant it, until one committee after another then the
compromise committee under Gen. Shehu Yar'Adua, (God rests his soul in peace) who came up with 13 percent. And it is clearly stated there that whatever
there is in Nigeria today by territorial water, that dichotomy between offshore/onshore, shall not apply in respect to derivation. That is the spirit of the
constitution we wrote.
Your state has been warring with the sister Cross River State. Are there any plans to cease the feud?
This is democracy, we don't go to war, only soldiers do. But I can tell you frankly that the president has intervened positively and we are dialoguing.
There is hope of amicable settlement. The president has set up a committee to study the situation and come up with a solution and I want to strongly believe
that they will come out with a solution.
Culled from ThisDay