The woman who lost her son, in King Solomon’s story, asked King Solomon to kill her neighbour’s son.[1] She stole her neighbour’s son after she had mistakenly killed her own son by rolling over him while sleeping. Hence, she insisted that killing the remaining child belonging to her neighbour serves justice by enforcing a balance of misfortune. However, the king’s judgment showed that an equal distribution of evil, misfortune or injustice does not amount to justice.[2] Likewise, the balance of misfortune in the society does not change nor reduce the nature and horror of evil, instead it spreads evil.
Some spouses are criticized for divorcing cheating or abusive partners because some other people are stuck in such relationships. Presently, some sections of Nigeria are criticized for seeking dissolution or a re-negotiation of the basis of Nigerian partnership.[3] The critics suggest that agitating sections should just endure since other sections suffer the same problem of poverty. Let us leave and endure together since we all suffering the same thing; what do you want again? It appears that there is an eager effort to justify the balance of misfortune and solidarity in political slavery in Nigeria.
Federal system of government is described as progressive because it creates the chance for different people to partner for their good.[4] In such systems, different communities agree to collaborate and contribute from their resources for the progress of the partnership. The major aim for the partnership is the progress and self-actualization of the different peoples that form the partnership. However, once the aim of the partnership is no more realizable within the partnership, different partners seek their way out. If, however, the unsatisfied parties are forcefully held down in the partnership, the partnership turns to captivity or hostage.
The major conditions for instituting a legitimate federal system is the free consent of the communities who enter the partnership. In their free consent, they agree to terms and conditions as guiding laws for their partnership on the path of progress. For a successful operation, it requires values such as tolerance, power-sharing and a generally shared belief in the laws rather than power as a means to resolve conflicts.[5] The component units in a healthy partnership are encouraged to take initiatives without conflicting with the laws. This freedom for harmonious initiatives from different composite units facilitates creativity, competition, development and progress within the partnership.
But when freedom for productivity and initiatives is suppressed in a partnership, the units become unproductive, stagnant, hungry and poor.
The Nigerian union was imposed on the various ethnic communities by British colonialists,[6] without the consent of component units. The imposed partnership has been kept together at gun-point since its inception. Also, the freedom for productive initiatives was suppressed by the military-imposed Land Use Act, and Mineral and Mining Act.[7][8][9] Since then hunger, poverty, stagnation, unproductivity and crime have risen beyond gauge in Nigeria. Like an abusive and unproductive partnership, the Nigerian project has become sour and sterile in its hostage form.
It may be wise for the different ethnic communities in Nigeria to tear themselves out of the stagnant partnership. This disengagement from the Nigerian partnership may allow them concentrate on their self-development and progress.
On the other hand, Nigerians can decide to re-negotiate the basis of their nationhood from the angle of different ethnic communities. Nigerians do not need the forceful and dogmatic solidarity holding the balance of misfortune for all ethnic communities. Instead, the ethnic communities, who are the original custodians of the peoples’ customs and traditions can discuss on a way forward. It might not come easy, given the bitterness that has built overtime. Yet, with openness in engaging one another for progress, it will be possible.
[1] Good News Bible, 1 Kings 3:16-28
[2] Ibid
[3] Lawrence Njoku et al, South-east governors’ bid to stop agitation for Biafra fails. https://guardian.ng/news/south-east-governors-bid-to-stop-agitation-for-biafra-fails/31-08-2017. Retrieved 12-10-2017
[4] S. O. Oyedele, Federalism in Nigeria, In Issues in Contemporary political economy of Nigeria (Edited by Hassan A. Saliu, (Ilorin: T.A. Olayeri publishers, 1999). P54
[5] Ibid. p55
[6] Ibid. p57
[7] Nigerian minerals and mining act 2007 act no. 20, chapter 1, Part 1, Section 1, paragraph 2
[8] Nigerian minerals and mining act 2007 act no. 20, chapter 1, Part 1, Section 2, paragraph 1
[9] Nigerian minerals and mining act 2007 act no. 20, chapter 1, Part 1, Section 1, paragraph 3