It is now a year and four months since
President Muhammadu Buhari promised in his inaugural speech to continue
the Niger Delta amnesty programme and take other steps to address the
region’s multifarious oil-induced problems. But the issues in the region
have not only lingered, but they have also continued to expand,
perhaps, in ways Buhari might not have envisaged when at his
inauguration on May 29 last year he stated, “The amnesty programme in
the Niger Delta is due to end in December, but the government intends to
invest heavily in the projects and programmes currently in place.
“I call on the leadership and people in
these areas to cooperate with the state and federal government in the
rehabilitation programmes which will be streamlined and made more
effective. As ever, I am ready to listen to grievances of my fellow
Nigerians. I extend my hand of fellowship to them so that we can bring
peace and build prosperity for our people.”
The period since after that speech
has seen unimaginable increase in militancy in the Niger Delta, with a
whole slew of nascent militant groups claiming to make demands on behalf
of the region. In response, the military launched a crackdown on
militant activities in August, code-named, “Operation Crocodile Smile.”
And in a seeming tit-for-tat, the militants launched “Operation
Crocodile Tears.”
While the unpleasant turn of events in
the Niger Delta may be to the shocked dismay of Buhari, many who know
the region are unsurprised at the situation. His first steps in the
region tended to indicate that he had learned nothing from the mistakes
of past leaders who failed to pursue a holistic solution to the Niger
Delta problem, but conveniently picked and chose measures they thought
could be a stand-alone. The result is the deterioration the region has
seen.
Buhari’s inauguration came at a time when
there was suspicion in some quarters that he might re-enact what seemed
like a pattern of deliberate expropriation and repression in the Niger
Delta set by most past leaders of the country, who are not from the
region, especially, the military rulers. Being a former military Head of
State, it was suspected that Buhari would adopt the coercive strategy
in dealing with issues in the region. He did not do that. But he also
did not prevent the circumstances that could push him to the military
option.
This tactic is anchored on physical and
psychological warfare against the people to sufficiently subdue and keep
them at bay to allow unfettered flow of oil and gas from the bowels of
the delta. It had ensured an illusory sense of peace in the region and
also produced a graduation from civil protests to armed struggle, with
countless consequences for the country.
At the inception of the Fourth Republic
in 1999, then President Olusegun Obasanjo introduced some measures and
pushed through legislations to try to appease the Niger Delta people.
The late President Umaru YarÁdua, who succeeded Obasanjo, had no
illusions about the effectiveness of force in quelling the rising
agitation for economic justice and equitable distribution of the
region’s resources.
Yar’Adua declared the Niger Delta amnesty project on June 25, 2009 as a
five-year programme of “Disarmament, Demobilisation, and Rehabilitation
or Reintegration” for armed agitators who accepted the offer of amnesty.
The disarmament and demobilisation phases of the programme, which are
mainly security-based, have been largely achieved. But the federal
government has seemed to renege on the processes that underlie
achievement of the reintegration phase, which is development-based and
geared towards sustainable peace.
In May last year, Buhari promised to
further the peace and development efforts and pay more attention to the
problems of the Niger Delta. But he continued the mistakes of his
predecessors, who seemed to be engrossed in the security aspects of the
amnesty programme to the detriment of the development component. Thus,
the problems in the Niger Delta continued to expand and ricochet around
the same old stories of poverty, injustice, environmental degradation,
insecurity, and restiveness.
Yar’Adua had started the mistake in 2009,
when he picked the amnesty programme as a stand-alone from an
integrated programme of sustainable peace and development recommended by
a committee he commissioned. The Yar’Adua government had on September
8, 2008 inaugurated the Niger Delta Technical Committee headed by
Ogoni-born lawyer and activist, Mr. Ledum Mitee, “To collate, review and
distil the various reports, suggestions and recommendations on the
Niger Delta from the Willinks Commission Report (1958) to the present
and give a summary of the recommendations necessary for government
action; To appraise the summary recommendations and present a detailed
short, medium and long term suggestion to the challenges in the Niger
Delta; To make and present to government any other recommendations that
will help the federal government achieve sustainable development, peace,
human and environmental security in the Niger Delta Region.”
The Mitee committee submitted its report
in November 2008. It outlined what has been widely adjudged as the most
comprehensive agenda for sustainable peace and development in the Niger
Delta. The recommendations included the establishment of a disarmament,
demobilisation, and reintegration institutions and processes, with the
granting of amnesty to militants ready to drop armed struggle and accept
the offer of amnesty. It suggested an increment of the derivation
revenue accruing to oil producing states to 25 per cent, from the
current 13 per cent.
The committee also broadly recommended
completion of the East-West road from Calabar to Lagos; building and
improvement of critical infrastructure in the Niger Delta to support
economic development and create employment for the people; making the
oil companies operating in the region to have insurance bonds against
environmental pollution; and massive improvement in health and
educational infrastructure.
The report recommended the review and
abolition of laws deemed to be inimical to the wellbeing of the people,
such as the Mineral Act, the Petroleum Act, the Oil Pipeline Act, Land
Use Act, Associated Gas Re-injection Act, Oil Terminal Dues Act, and the
Land (Title Vesting) Act.
To facilitate proper implementation of
the of the recommended measures, the Mitee committee proposed the
establishment of some mechanisms and institutions, including National
Minorities Commission; a Multi-Stakeholder Niger Delta Policy and
Project Compliance Monitoring Committee; a Special Niger Delta
Infrastructural Intervention Fund; a Niger Delta Futures Trust Fund; and
Community Trust Fund for Oil Producing Communities.
Despite the robust body of suggestions
for lasting development and stability in the Niger Delta, the Yar’Adua
government picked the amnesty programme and concentrated on the security
aspect, which involved disarmament and demobilisation of the armed
fighters. This pattern has not changed.
There seems to be a tendency on the part
of the federal government to equate peace with uninterrupted
exploitation of oil. The Yar’Adua government’s amnesty programme, for
instance, was preceded by a massive reduction in oil output from the
Niger Delta due to disruptions caused by militant attacks on the oil
infrastructure. Nigeria’s daily oil production had fallen from about two
million barrels per day to about 500, 000 barrels.
Currently, resurgent militancy in the
Niger Delta has reduced daily crude oil production to about one million
barrels per day, from about two million barrels. And in response, the
federal government proposed the now suspended two-day stakeholders
summit on Niger Delta, scheduled to hold on September 26 and September
27. The suspension followed a rejection of the venue and framework by
many Niger Delta leaders.
In the search for lasting peace in the
Niger Delta, Buhari needs to change this propensity to use oil
production as a measure of peace, which has proved illusory and
dangerous overtime. There must be a sincere effort to invest in human
and infrastructural development in the Niger Delta. Besides, an
inclusive security strategy that extensively involves the communities is
what would guarantee the security that the government craves. The
federal government should ensure equitable land ownership rights, as
well as community participation and ownership of oil production
activities.
0 comments:
Post a Comment