Oil, People and the Syntax of Anger
By
Any one who circumstances enable to encounter daily the geographical entity called Nigeria, witness her crass indulgences, observe her defilement
by successive generations of treacherous leaders and is reminded promptly of her historic failings, is not likely to escape this haunting hypothesis: what if
the nation is without oil.
Coming from the Niger Delta where the oil mineral is found, this writer finds that question much more nagging following a visit to Bonny, Rivers State, last
year. Arranged by Shell, an oil giant, the tour involved journalists drawn from major print media from across the country. Assailed by accusations of neglect,
Shell wanted the senior journalists to see first-hand genuine efforts it was making to deliver amenities to some of its host communities.
Expectedly, for this writer, it turned out a forum not only to view the smiles of communities Shell had helped but also an opportunity to have a personal
glimpse of the awesomeness of the mechanized rummaging of the eco-system of the Niger Delta by the community of oil multi-nationals. Ferried by an helicopter
that day, we visited a number of places like Shell's own station in Bonny. In-between our odyssey, I recall, a colleague who sat next to me, remarked: "Ah,
Nigeria is lucky that oil is not found in this quantity in the part of the country from where I come. That would have been the end of Nigeria."
The fellow hails from the South-west. Of course, his comment was prompted by the palpable oxymoron in the spectacle that confronted us everywhere we turned:
mass poverty amid oil wealth. His observation, to me, needed no further debate for to doubt would amount to mocking the human condition in the Niger Delta.
Peering through the window during our flight back to Port Harcourt later in the evening, more confirmations awaited us in the fleeting images we saw. The space
beneath our chopper, I remember, was defined more by the macabre flickers of gas flaring. The noxious fumes spewing there-from eclipsed totally the surrounding
human settlements...
To this writer, the memory of that Bonny revelation was rudely awoken Monday following reports of the strong exception taken by the Chief Justice of the
Federation (CJN), Justice Muhammadu Uwais, to what he described as the "foul language" being deployed by some commentators and just any-one who feels aggrieved
by the Supreme Court verdict on the Onshore/Offshore dichotomy in April. The occasion was the 2002 yearly conference of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) at
Ibadan, Oyo State. Speaking through the chairman of the National Judicial Institute (NJI), Justice Musiliu Ope-Agbe, the CJN considered it unsavoury for people
to pour invectives on the jury who gave that historic judgement.
Indeed, by that ruling, the paradigm of the fiscal relations between the Niger Delta and the Nigerian nation was supposed to have shifted drastically. That was
supposed to be the climax to the suit initiated by the Federal Government in 2001 for a judicial interpretation of the seaward limits of the littoral states. A
quest provoked, no doubt, by the renewed agitations of oil states for resource control then. The long and short of the Supreme Court intervention is that the
right to benefit from the oil wealth is tied to the custody of onshore wells. States like Ondo and Akwa Ibom whose deposits are offshore are not to enjoy the 13
percent Derivation Fund any more. In fact, by the letters of the verdict, they are expected to cough out all that they had received since 2000 when the sharing
of the oil revenue started.
Expectedly, the consequences of that verdict have been monumental for the Niger Delta states. The disbursement of the 13 percent Derivation Fund, for instance,
has been stopped pending when the letters of the judgement are harmonized with the provisions that govern the sharing of the national revenue. In social terms,
the effects have been calamitous for the Niger Delta states. Projects have been abandoned abruptly. Most of the states can no longer pay salaries. Some are
beginning to resort to usurers. In sum, the pervasive feeling there now is that of suspended animation.
Some of the Niger Delta people are indeed perceptive enough to know the hand that delivered this fatal blow. Of course, their anger is directed at the Federal
Government which went to court in the first place. As Nichollo Machiavelli forever counsels, men tend to forget more quickly the death of their patriarch than
the loss of patrimony.
But to the CJN, much as criticism is welcome, "what is not acceptable and ought to be corrected is the employment of foul language and imputation of ill-motive
against the judges that gave the decision.
"I think the Bar and not the judges, have the duty to point out that the liberty taken in making such comments, undoubtedly inspired by prejudice, went beyond
the limits and impinged upon the independence of the judiciary, which is essential, not for the benefit of the judges themselves but for the nation as a whole.
"As the conflicts continue, so will the decisions of courts draw comments. What is imperative and indeed important, is that judges as independent and arbiters
must uphold their oath of office and act in accordance with their conscience."
While one appreciates the apprehension of the CJN in the context of one who is committed to the preservation of the integrity of the judiciary as one of the
cardinal institutions of society, that does not mean that what is desirable is right. To seek to defend that verdict is to assume that the premise was correct.
But the truth of the matter is that the formula on which that pronouncement was couched is inconsistent with the logic of natural justice. Sure, the letters of
the law may appear sound, but there is something ghoulish about its spirit. It takes an appreciation of this fact for any-one to begin to understand the basis
of the new anger in the Niger Delta. To seek to tutor the aggrieved to adopt "parliamentary language" in expressing their socio-political frustrations will,
therefore, be a Herculean enterprise indeed.
The Vanguard newspaper, I believe, helped to calibrate part of the synthax of this new anger Monday with a twin 4x3 col photographs on the front page
illustrating the sharp social dichotomy in the town of Egwa, Delta State. With "Outrage" as the banner headline, the pictures depict the rosy life in area
inhabited by oil workers and the obscene squalor of the neighbourhood occupied by natives.
The message in the footnote reads in parts: "The money comes from here- the petro-dollar. More than 96 percent of our foreign exchange earnings, the money the
politicians fight over, the money the dictators loot, the money spend to provide infrastrature for the megacity of Lagos, the model city of Abuja, the
administrative capitals of Kaduna, Enugu, and Ibadan and the commercial cities of Aba, Onitsha, Kano, etc. While the oil workers work and live in relative
paradise in the same difficult terrain, the locals whose swampy land is wasted to accommodate oil rigs, pump-heads, tank farms and pipelines live in thatched
houses, drink polluted water, live in darkness..."
Egwa is only a metaphor for the social reality of Niger Delta. According to figures reeled out by the Central Bank Monday, Nigeria netted $2.4 billion from oil
in the first half of this year. But how much of that has trickled back to the Niger Delta even as nourishment for the milking cows? So, how, in good conscience,
do we begin to teach, for instance, the people of such nameless civilizations in Niger Delta to adopt "parliamentary language' when lamenting their own
condition?
Today, I doubt if the Federal Government itself harbours the illusion that all is well. Otherwise, it would not have raised the Tony Anenih Committee to find a
"political solution" to the puzzle the Supreme Court verdict has invariably invented.
It is wicked, for instance, to continue to insist that there be a dichotomy between offshore and onshore in the sharing of oil wealth. Fine, the sea belongs to
the Federal Government. So, ordinarily, it would sound logical that every thing that inheres in it should belong to the government at the center. But to seek to
uphold such argument is to pretend as if the neighbouring states are not the ones bearing the horrendous pains of environmental degradations. That is to turn a
blind eye on the beneficiaries of acid rain and sufferers of aquatic plagues.
In case the CJN is yet unaware, the Niger Delta anger of today is being fuelled partly by the awareness of what used to be. Which leads us to the next question:
federalism without fiscal domain. Before oil became the main-stay of the national economy, cash crops like cocoa, palm oil and ground-nut used to be. These
crops were to be found in Western Region, Eastern Region and Northern Region respectively. That was in the First Republic. The Derivation formula then ensured
that the regions kept the lion's share while only a small fraction was remitted to the center. Of course, that arrangement derived its own inspiration from the
Constitution fashioned at independence which can be regarded as truly people-oriented unlike the ones imposed on the nation in the intervening decades by
soldiers.
This is why the people of Niger Delta today cannot understand why the Derivation Formula of today is such that leaves them with the crumbs. This essentially is
the inspiration behind the agitation for resource control. Of course, this case also refers to fiscal federalism. But, in reaction, the Nigerian state always
seems to argue that oil is "God's gift" for the benefit of all. Such attitude always informed the institutional palliatives like the Niger Delta Development
Board (1962), Niger Delta Basin Development Authority (1976), OMPADEC (1992) and now Niger Delta Development Commission (NDDC).
In a cowardly attempt to dodge this nagging question, some even travel an absurd distance by propounding all kinds of dubious theories. The one that readily
comes to mind is that of Dr. Bala Usman who, while countering the agitation for resource control, last year described what is today regarded as oil as "the
residue of the ancient fossils of the North". But how did they get to the Niger Delta? Simple. They were washed to the Delta by the relentless forages of River
Niger, says Dr. Usman in his "political geology". Such historical fallacy.
But to argue this way is, in itself, a negation of the concept of federalism. For, a federation is supposed to be a union. Nigeria, therefore, should derive its
own being from the federating states and not the other way round. So, this cry- cold and plaintive- howling from the dark creeks of Niger Delta should be seen
properly as a protest against the big lie Nigeria daily perpetuates. But those whose portion it is to ply the magnificent highways of Abuja and luxuriate in the
comfort of its splendid neighbourhoods without caring about where the money is coming from are not likely to understand this message.
Sept 2002