Buhari’s Security Chiefs And Others: A Precedent We Must Not Forge
By Nosa Omorodion
It is indeed unprecedented that a Nigerian President would appoint all his security chiefs, including the police boss, the DG of the DSS (until August 7,2018), and the heads of other paramilitary forces like the customs and immigration, from one part of the country. That is the present reality under President Muhammadu Buhari’s government. Interestingly, President Buhari appointed all of them in marked disregard of the Constitution of the Federal Republic Nigeria, which prescribes the application of federal character in all such national appointments.
The contemplation of the federal character provision is first, an equitable distribution of offices, appointments and employments between the north and south. After that, is supposed to be a consideration of the six geo-political zones, and then the states of the federation. Although not stated, there has also been the tradition of balancing between the two major religions – Christianity and Islam. Unfortunately, President Muhammadu Buhari’s appointments in this regard, have been very disproportionate to favour Muslims.
Taken further, virtually all these northern appointees come from one ethnic group in the north – the Fulani. The ethnic groups in the north are over one hundred but the President chose to appoint only Fulani. Instructively, President Muhammadu Buhari is a Northerner and Fulani. Of all the presidents before him, he is the only one that has adopted this arrangement. For the past three years, he has refused to yield to criticisms.
Opponents of this curious arrangement have pointed out its flagrant disregard of the letters and intent of the Constitution. They have also pointed out the fears that it evokes, which include favouritism and conspiracy theory against other sections and ethnic groups of the country. The president has refused to budge; he has maintained his stand, daring those that are opposed to it to do their worst.
Although recognized by President Buhari’s ardent supporters, as a deviation from the national tradition and a sense of equity, they have remained in solidarity with him to do as he personally wishes. They have even tried to reason with us that it is not stated in the Constitution that the President cannot make the appointments from a particular section of the country, a particular tribe and a particular religion. All of a sudden, they are preaching merit and competence as determined by the President in disregard of the Constitution. As it were, we have all come to live with this latent anomaly.
The truth is that Northern Nigeria has been the major beneficiary of the federal character or quota system. Interestingly, now, a Nigerian President from the north has taken the audacious move to challenge the relevance of the federal character in the composition of heads of military and paramilitary institutions. Understandably, President Buhari has been accused of tribal and religious bias.
The question now is can we say that President Buhari has not set a new template that subsequent administrations may want to adopt? If, and when they do, would the present generation of Nigerians, Buhari’s supporters included, have the right or morality to question their decision. Would what is good for Buhari now not be good for another President after him? How would it look like, when a southerner becomes president and decides to have all the security chiefs, the police chief, the director-general of DSS, the customs boss, the immigration boss, the EFCC Chairman, the Director of NIA, the INEC Chairman, the National Population Commission Chairman etc, from the southern part of Nigeria? How would Nigerians receive it if all these appointees were Christians? How would we react if all the appointees, for instance, were of one tribe from the south – probably Igbo or Yoruba?
No matter what the reaction to this hypothesis may be now, the truth of the matter is that President Buhari, with our subtle acquiescence, has set a precedent, which any other President only requires the political will and determination to adopt.
It is pertinent to forewarn that when that time comes we must all act as people of conscience, honest to refrain from criticism. We must not behave as if we have never seen the like of it. Those who see nothing wrong with it now, should not attempt to blackmail or threaten us with the narrative of monkeys and baboons soaked in blood.
About Author
