REPLY TO DOKPESI By ECHEFUNA’ R G ONYEBEADI

Thank you so much my very beloved and distinguished High Chief Engr Dr Raymond A A Dokpesi for your kind and well-crafted post under reference.

However, there are very important missing links and gaps in your article under reference that needs to be filled.

Your position is clear enough in that you prefer that another northerner (from wherever), particularly, North-East, should be allowed to take over the governance of Nigeria come 2023 after a straight eight years rule of the incumbent president who is a northerner. But, how fair, equitable and just is this?

You also seem to have ignored the fact that “by 2023, the North alone would have ruled Nigeria for 45 years out of the 63 years of Nigeria’s independence.”

How fair, equitable and just is this to others that make up Nigeria?

By the way, what have we to show as a people/country for the long rule of Nigeria by northerners whether in khaki or agbada?

Is Nigeria better now as a result of the long rule by the North?

How does this your proposal in this regard further the course of peace, progress, inclusiveness and the preservation of the corporate entity called Nigeria?

To start with, whereas the position of head of state and that of head of government were distinct and separate in the First Republic, the two positions have since been lumped together since January 1966 when the military took over government till date.

Whereas the head of state was mainly ceremonial in the First Republic, the head of government, who was then designated as prime minister, was the one actually vested with the power and authority to govern the country Nigeria.

The present day North-east you deferred to in your article have already governed this country for more than five years after independence in 1960, in the person of Sir Abubakar Tafawa Balewa, who governed Nigeria as the Prime Minister/Head of Government from October 1, 1960, to January 15, 1966.

You may also wish to remember that the same Balewa from North-east had been made the Head of Government Business at the Centre in the years preceding Nigeria's independence while still experimenting with the regional governments of East, West and North.

Abubakar Tafawa Balewa from the North-east was the very first and remains the only Prime Minister/Head of Government of Nigeria to date.

So, it will be wrong to infer that the North-east has not produced head of state/head of government, which were positions the current operating 1999 Constitution (as amended) lumped together and re-designated as President/Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces.

The core issue at stake and pertinent question now is: Which geopolitical zone of the country has not governed the country since independence in 1960?

Clearly, the answer is none safe South-East.

My Beloved High Chief, your reference to IPOB as an albatross for South-east to have a shot at the presidency come 2023 appears somewhat curious. It seems geared to give a dog a bad name in order to hang it.

You seem to have overlook the fact that the same North-east you are supporting and/or proposing to produce the next president come 2023, is the headquarters of the Boko Haram terrorists and bandits that have held and continues to hold Nigeria hostage, to which humongous human and material resources of Nigeria have continued to be needlessly wasted in the last 10 years or so.

Therefore, what special obstacle does the “over bloated” and deliberately demonised armless IPOB constitute against the emergence of a Nigerian president of South-east extraction that Boko Haram Terrorists and Bandits domiciled in the North-east and spread across the entire North not constitute even in higher and more dangerous dimensions, that should now favour the North-east in particular to produce the next president come 2023?

If in your rating, the Boko Haram terrorists and bandits that have continued to sack and occupy indigenous ancestral lands, including hoisting their own flag, appointing their own administrators and field commanders in “conquered” territories in the North-east geopolitical zone does not constitute any threat for North-east to produce the next president, how then can an ordinary IPOB become a barrier for the South-east to produce the next president?

You may wish to be reminded, my very beloved High Chief, that political parties are mere vehicles used to deliver potential candidates for the electorates to choose from. That, by itself, does not remove the fact that whichever candidate(s) the political parties produce are from localities and/or geopolitical spaces but, the “space(s) governed” remains the same. So, to isolate political parties from the governed territory is like begging the issue.

The real contention here isn't who any political party had fielded or not and/or have won elections in the past or not on the platform of any political party but, who and where those that have so far ruled this country are from.

In any case, the country has to exist first before the political parties and their candidates can strive in it. So, looking at the bigger picture, no political party, person(s) and/or group(s) is/are bigger than the country.

Therefore, it stands to reason that the political aspiration of any individual and/or group cannot be equated to the collective of the entire country of over 200 million people, no matter how highly placed and/or connected such an individual or group may be.

If elective and even appointive positions are meant to render services to the citizens and humanity, should there be any desperation on the part of any person to acquire such positions?

If all the other geopolitical zones have had substantial share of tenure to serve at the highest level of governance in the country, safe South-east geopolitical zone, will it be fair, equitable and just to continue to exclude and/or deny South-east the opportunity to produce the president of Nigeria next time around, particularly, come 2023?

Let me also use this opportunity to remind the High Chief that the “Nigeria”-Biafra war that lasted for only three years to which the country never borrowed any money to prosecute, ended 51 years ago with a declaration of “No Victor, No Vanquished” by the then “Federal” military government.

Was that declaration meant to be a mere lip service?

By contrast, a group of people constituted themselves into Boko Haram terrorists and bandits that took up arms against their own country in an unending war of attrition to which, so much money in hard currency have been borrowed and still counting, to which generations unborn will yet pay for, in addition to several innocent people they have sent to early grave. Yet, you posit and seem comfortable to propose that this same people and/or region should be trusted enough to govern the entire country while the peaceful people of South-east should be denied same.

How rational is this, my beloved High Chief?

By the way, going by your own line of argument, my beloved High Chief, what guarantees that a president from North-east would not defer to Boko Haram and bandits to overrun the country in view of the way the incumbent President who is a northerner is pampering the terrorists and bandits with palliatives, ransom, rehabilitation and reintegration into the larger society, including recruiting them into the armed forces of the country?

My dear High Chief, Nigeria is presently in coma. Indeed, Nigeria is in a “perilous and dire straits” as you rightly stated in your article under reference.

Therefore, genuine efforts should be made to revive the country instead of hastening her demise.

This country Nigeria is not a private estate of any individual or a group of persons who must always have their way.

What is good for the goose should also be sauce for the gander!

•Echefuna' RG Onyebeadi, Professor of Engineering Economics and United Nations Fellow, is the Inegbse of Oligbo Kingdom.