THE ISSUES IN NIGERIA RESOURCE CONTROL IN THE NIGER DELTA
ABSTRACT In every society,
economic development is an important part of social living, especially the
specific economic activities of government in ensuring the development of that
society. But then integrated effort towards this development will be incomplete
where cognizance of the existing resources and ways of tapping as well as
equitably allocating the resources is undermined. For some time now, this has
reflected in the Niger Delta region of Nigeria and the inequitable allocation
of the resources especially to the areas of their derivation has led to the
constraints in developmental efforts and consequently deterioration in the
lives of the rural dwellers. The effects of this have been marginalization and
unsavory reactions from the affected communities and these have led to national
insecurity. This paper examines these issues in the context of resource
control, causes of agitation for control of resources by the Niger Delta
dwellers, the contending trend of uneasiness in the nation and actions that can
be taken by the government to ensure grassroots development in the area, thus
pulling an end to the insecurity of lives and property in that region, and the
nation as a whole.
INTRODUCTION Arising from various concerns, agitations,
claims and counter claims, quest for equal representations especially by the
Niger Delta states at the national interest to ensure grassroots development,
the case for resource control generated a burning debate in Nigeria. Better explained,
the revenue allocation formula in Nigeria is at the edge of precipice: It is
now a hydra that has generated a controversy, which is symptomatic of turning
the tides of fiscal and political policies in Nigeria that had hitherto been singled
out as the precursor for instability and underdevelopment. The continuous
concern has been that the Niger Delta region, which is believed to generate the
bulk of the nation's income, has been relegated to the background.
Grassroots development in the Niger Delta, to enhance favorable competing
relationship between the rural and urban sectors of the economy has also been
of no concern to successive administrations. The situation has far reaching and
threatening national implications. Instability in employment and high income
insecurity among the young school leavers without the remedial effects of
social protection has a negative impact on the economy and impedes development.
The gross social inequality that this situation promotes has no complementary
effect on the social equality profile of the country. The situation also
threatens the very existence of society through its negative impact on the
family. There is increasing level of poverty and inadequate basic amenities in
the Niger Delta. It is rightly so because this concept straddles the ethnic,
the macro-economic and the political existence of the region and does address
the key question of whether Nigerians should be citizens or subjects and slaves
in their own country. The general assessment is that the Niger Delta has
experienced stunted growth for the greater part of the period since
independence in I960. The first half of the 1980s was particularly bad, characterized
by negative growth rates that reflected the worldwide economic recession. The
Nigerian economic crisis that became manifested in the 1980s (following the oil
boom era of the 1970s) has been particularly severe resulting ill massive dislocations:
from external disequilibrium to high levels of domestic macro-economic
imbalances. This reflects in inflation, low capacity utilization, lack of
capital, high unemployment, shortage of capacity inflow, and a general debase
of the grassroots. Furthermore, the debate surrounding the issue of resource
control shows that it appeals’ to the heart of the Nigerian polity. But the
misconception of resource control is that most agitators for resource control
only refer to the petroleum oil and not other resources that are prevalent in
other parts of the nation outside the Niger Delta.
RESOURCE CONTROL: WHAT DOES IT MEAN? While making effort to
assess what had been the trend of this national uneasiness, it becomes
important to consider the meaning of resource control. Like other contending
issues, several scholars have related varying opinions to its meaning. The
practice of true federalism and natural law in which the federating units
express their rights to primarily control the natural resources within their
borders and make agreed contribution towards the maintenance of common services
of the government at the center". The success should be seen in its
effects on the individuals. This fact is buttressed by the view of Chief Obafemi Awolowo who said "the
benefits of resource control should accrue to the individuals and not to the
state, following the principles finally expatiated upon the Adam Smith in The
Wealth of Nations in 1776". Resource control has also been seen both as
economic and political tool. As economic tool, resource control is seen to be
"ground in the fact that land, labour, capital and entrepreneurship are
factors of production. The price of labour is wage, capital attracts interest, and
entrepreneurship is driven by profit while land attracts rent and other
royalties. Rent is thus a return for the use of the original and indestructible
properties of the soil. From the above, it therefore means that resource control
should be effectively implemented; there must be evolved a system in which
individuals and their communities are rightly entrenched in the ownership of
assets and resources that are taken from their land. In another view, the
governor of Edo State, Lucky Igbenidion (Tell, April 9, 2001) asserted, "Resource control is not all about crude
oil. It covers all natural resources-solid minerals, cash crops, and
everything". Thus individuals have the right welfare. It is therefore not
out of place for the Niger Delta citizens to agitate for participation and
benefit in the proceeds of their natural resources. Resource control, at other
instances has been seen as political, rather than economic tool, regarding the
issue of revenue allocation and derivation. From the inception, the use of sharing
formula for the nation's resources had been formulated to serve the interest of
whoever is at the top. The British administered the country initially mainly
from the proceeds from oil palm trade derived largely from the Eastern region.
Derivation was not given any prominence. But when groundnut and tin from the
North and cocoa and rubber from the West became major earners of revenue,
derivation was catapulted into major criteria for the allocation, thus understanding
the linkage between regional control of the
political process and the dominant criteria to revenue allocation at any
given time. While still showing concern, it would also be necessary to
establish the meaning of grassroots development. This is a process of economic
and political transformation of the rural areas, which leads to the improvement
in the standard of living of the people in the area of income, education,
housing, health and other related social needs, decreasing inequality in the
distribution of income, urban-rural imbalances, employment and economic and
political opportunities. These are the reasons for the Niger Delta States
RESOURCE CONTROL: CONCEPTUALIZES A significant difficulty when engaging the
‘resource control’ discourse from the purview of the Niger Delta is its
conceptual ambiguity. There are three broad notions of resource control that
may be distilled from numerous definitions proffered since the Ijaw Youth
Council’s (IYC) Kaiama Declaration that expressly employed the phrase in
connection with oil resources and the Niger Delta for the first time. These
include ‘absolute’ and ‘principal’ resource control as well as increased
derivation.
[1] Proponents of ‘absolute resource
control’ take the stance proffered by the Kaiama Declaration that ‘[E]very
region should control its resources 100 per cent. [2] Advocates of ‘principal resource
control’ define resource control as the Niger Delta region having ‘a direct and
decisive role in the exploration for, the exploitation and disposal of,
including sales of the harvested resources’.
[3] Resource control is also defined in terms
of the right to control or manage the revenue accruing from oil and other
natural resources in line with the tenets of true federalism. [4] The introduction of ‘true federalism’ to
the resource control debate contributes to misunderstanding the resource
control debate. The governors of the southern states in Nigeria also refer to
this notion of ‘true federalism’ in the discourse of resource control. [5] However, they do so to promote their
agenda that states ought to control their resources and contribute (usually a
smaller percentage of such revenues) to the federal coffers. In some way, they
have elevated the notion of resource control to be synonymous with ‘true’
federalism. It is argued that while resource control is not synonymous with
federalism, a ‘true federalism’ is a Utopian notion. Federalism as a system of
governance emphasizes both vertical power sharing across different levels of
governance and, at the same time, the integration of different territorial and socioeconomic units, cultural and ethnic groups in on single polity. [6] The Constitution that allocates powers
among the strata of government is a legal document whose provisions are
determined pragmatically based on peculiar societal political and socioeconomic experiences. What the advocates of resource control appear to
describe when they speak of ‘true federalism’ is a ‘fiscal federalism’ wherein
the federating units own and manage their resources and revenues but make a contribution
to the central government to fund federal responsibilities. [7] However, it should be noted though
that fiscal federalism might also be an arrangement whereby the central
government generates most of the revenues and shares such revenues with other
strata of government. [8]A fourth
category of resource control – the ‘local’ variant – ought to be recognized in
addition to the three broad conceptions highlighted. ‘Local resource control’
simply refers to availing the inhabitants of the Niger Delta region the
opportunities to enjoy access to the environmental resources and benefits of
their ancestral land. The relevance and importance of this fourth conception is
borne out of the failures of the political class and militants alike to make
any palpable positive changes to the lives of the ordinary Niger Delta citizens
they claim to represent. While the political class have exhibited gross
irresponsibility in the management of accruing oil revenues to state coffers, the
militants enjoy the ‘rewards’ of their struggle with monthly stipends from the
government as well as vocational and educational training opportunities to the
exclusion of these ordinary citizens. In other words, the ordinary citizens on
whose behalf political and militant agitation has taken place are practically
worse off.
RESOURCE CONTROL: PURSUING LEGAL REALITIES It is acknowledged that the
drivers for the agitation for resource control are wide-ranging. However, as is
the case in modern societies, law is a tool of social engineering that
determines the relations between the state and its citizens. Indeed, successive
governments, colonial and otherwise, have used the law to effectively wrest
control of land, including natural resources from the inhabitants of the Niger
Delta. For instance, while the Constitution maintains unequivocally that oil
resources belong to the State, the Land Use Act that generally vests ownership
of land in the state permits land to be appropriated for any oil-related
activities subject to the payment of miserly compensation. These culminate in
the Niger Delta people becoming antagonistic and prone to conflict at the
slightest misunderstanding. Based on this reasoning, it is posited the law, particularly
the Constitution that regulates the relationship between the federating units
and the federal government as well as the legal framework regulating Nigeria’s
oil industry, is the fundamental cause of resource control-oriented restiveness
in the region. In essence, irrespective of which of the four broad classes of
resource control is being advocated, amendment to the extant legal framework is
necessary. The extent of review is however dependent on the variant of resource
control being advocated with all but the ‘local’ variant requiring
constitutional amendment. Amending the Constitution is a convoluted process
that the Niger Delta states are unlikely to achieve due to their minority
status in national politics. The region’s experience at the National Political
Reforms Conference (NPRC) in 2005 where they failed to garner the support
required to obtain the conference’s approval to propose an increase the
derivation percentage of oil revenues allocated to the region is a recent
reminder of the difficult, if not impossible, task the region faces in the
agitation for resource control. Realizing this fundamental weakness, it is
suggested that the Niger Delta region makes a tactical withdrawal from
relentlessly engaging the political rhetoric of resource control since it lacks
the political muscle to instigate the requisite legal changes. Instead,
achieving elements of ‘local’ resource control should be recognized and
prioritized. These elements are not only relatively achievable (since what is
required is the amendment of extant subsidiary legislation) but also have
direct positive impacts on the ordinary citizens’ lives. The laws referred to
in this regards include those that implicate land use, oil operations,
oil-related compensation, access to information, participation in
decision-making and access to justice in environmental matters. The amendment
of these laws will avail local communities the opportunity to participate in
decision-making process concerning their land and natural resources while providing
access to legal avenues to resolve matters of dispute thereby reducing recourse
to militancy. While legislators from the Niger Delta states may sponsor bills
to amend the relevant laws, the States ought to explore partnership
opportunities with specialist organizations and NGOs to assist in achieving
‘local’ resource control. There are also international organizations that may
contribute to the achievement of ‘local resource control’ such as the United
Nations Environmental Programme and the newly created United Nations Indigenous
Peoples Partnership (UNIPP). The former’s report ‘Environmental Assessment in
Ogoni land’ commissioned by the Nigerian government has certainly raised the
profile of the bad environmental situation in Ogoni land, both locally and
internationally, in recent times. The UNIPP created in May 2011 on the other
hand has as its primary mandate the assistance of indigenous peoples to fully
participate in governance and policy processes at the local and national
levels, including conflict prevention in regard to ancestral land and use of
natural resources, in essence ‘local resource control’. Of course, State
governments maintain the primary responsibility to promote the human
development of their citizens. Evidently, a major factor that hampers human
development in the region is hindered access to environmental resources caused
by the activities of the oil industry. In essence, citizens should be empowered
by their states to protect and enforce their environmental rights including provision
of legal aid to access administrative and judicial processes to seek remedies
in the event of land appropriation, oil-related environmental pollution, among st other oil-related issues that have negative impacts on them. Indeed,
access to environmental resources not only provide the economic basis of the
region’s population but also determines their socio-cultural existence. While
the hindered access to environmental justice has generally contributed to the
violent agitation for resource control in the Niger Delta, providing access to
ordinary citizens enables them to use legal processes to assert their right to
‘resource control’.
REASONS FOR AGITATION FOR RESOURCE CONTROL The issue of resource control, to be or not be is
firmly rooted and better understood from the concept of federalism, as well as
on the federal basis of the Nigerian State. An essential feature of federal as
opposed to con federal states is the "division of political power between
the federating (states) and central (federal) government with each tier of
government having the final say in respect of matters assigned to it by the
constitution. The, frustration in the Niger Delta region comes from the fact
that in the days before the oil, the
nation relied on cocoa, groundnuts, palm oil and other economic crops to run
the economy. This reliance is based on the allocation formula derived by the
colonial authorities before and immediately after independence. This formula
gave about 50% of the income from resources to the regions from where they were
derived and the country did very well. With the discovery of oil in huge
quantities, nobody cared about the resources anymore, especially since
exploitation of oil is more reliable economically. There was rush to drill oil
to stuff the coffers of the government not minding the effects of pollution
caused by the oil spills on farm lands and the waters made non-conducive for
marine life. Other long-term investments in other minerals and agricultural
resources become less attractive.
"The result of those irresponsible policies is the devastation of
the fishing waters and farmlands in the
oil producing areas of the country with mass poverty and hopelessness as
the real gains of the people"It is important to note that over 80% of the
Nation's wealth, individually and collectively, is derived from oil and as
Ikhariaje rightly observes, none of the excessively affluent individuals who
follow the order of "winner takes
it all" is from the oil producing areas, so the regions that have produced
the top rulers take all the oil wealth
while the owners watch helplessly at their detriment and risk of leaving nothing left for posterity. The period since
independence and particularly during the era of the military rule has witnessed
the increasing federal supremacy and authority over the states. The essence of federal
system, comprising of the autonomy of the national government on one hand and
the state government on the other hand. However, Nigeria's effort at federalism
from its original conceptualization and design evidently rests on the concept
of administrative decentralization, for territorial decentralization is
implicit rather than functional, with no reduction of central control. For
instance the revenue sharing formula, which allocated (apart from the federal
governments share), 25 percent to state, 20 percent to local government
councils. 13 percent to derivation and 1 percent to the Federal Capital
Territory (FCT) still placed as much as 41 percent under the control of the center.
This is central-distinct to the ideals of federalism. The key question is: who
owns the natural resources in a federating unit? The answer is posited by
Natufe (2005) that before the intrusion of the military in Nigerian politics on
January 15, 1996, derivation was based on 50%. The military regime of Lt. Col.
Yakubu Gowon later decreed and placed the natural resources under the exclusive
jurisdiction of his government. This usurpation was subsequently inherited by
succeeding military regimes (1966-1979, 1983-1999) and the federal governments
of Shehu Shagari 1979-1983; and Olusegun Obasanjo. 1999 to present has refused
to relinquish. This has been the cause of the current political instability
vis-a-vis Niger Delta States (Ntufe, 2005). From the concept of Equity, Justice
and Fair play, this is unfair to the Delta resource owners, and is a gross
abuse of the power by the majority in denying the minority its rights over
control of its own resources, the same rights that the majority accorded
themselves in January 1966 Nigeria, on the basis of true federalism
(Natufe, 2005). This use of majority power by the central government and
supported by the Northern and South-Western majority governments, to ignore the
agitations of the Delta owners for fair allocation, has caused serious frustration
and made instability inevitable in these areas and Nigeria at large. We cannot
however, adequately discuss the issue of revenue allocation in Nigeria without
taking a recourse into the 1999 Federal Constitution, section 162 (1) which
says:1.That "the federation shall
maintain special account to be called" "the federation
account"" into which shall be paid all revenues collected by the
Government of the federation".(2)that: not less than 13% of revenue
accruing to the federation account be paid directly, from any natural resources
to the states .The formula will take
into account the principles of population, equality of states, internal
revenue generation, landmass and
terrain. The issue of derivation is added as a provision to the sub section
as follows: "Shall he formula as
being not less than 3 percent of the revenue accruing to the federation account
direct from am natural resources"'. This constitution has however not
specified the nature of the natural resources, thus giving way for fraudulent
application. Darah (2001) makes the presentation that the fraudulent implications
of these principles are also manifest in the failure of the constitution to
specify what natural resources are and that could be the reason why the
derivation principle applies only in revenue from mineral resources, primarily
oil and gas. Yet cattle grazing grounds, ports hydro-electric systems, clams,
fisheries, timber and other forest bio-diversity produce are as natural as minerals.
On March 31, 2000, the meeting of the South-South zone governors and 48
National Assembly members from this zone in Asaba resulted in grievances some
of which included "the attempt by the federal government to introduce a
dichotomy between on-shore and off-shore oil and gas deposits. This dichotomy
first came into the Nigerian statute books through the Executive Economic.
SOLUTION TO THE NIGER DELTA PROBLEM AND
GRASSROOTS DEVELOPMENT The people of the South-South see the case of
the region as a matter of equity, justice
and fairness and anyone who holds a contrary opinion does not appreciate
the enormity of the problems in the Niger Delta region and the importance of justice
in any human
setting. According to the governor of Rivers State. Peter Odilli, (2005)
the adjustment from 13% to 17% though considered as adequate by the North, he is grossly unhappy with the
arrangement especially from point of injustice, thus a suitable relationship
cannot be built, lie therefore said "a permanent solution to the nagging
problem would be realized in Nigeria when leaders have the courage to deal with
it. The issue calls for political will, a sense of justice and fear of God and
God's design". The governors of the South-South states share this
position. As long as any attempt to the solution ignores the' welfare of the
people, it is bound to fail. Various studies on problems of peace building and
conflict prevention, especially in less developed economies have most times ignored
the contributions of ethnic conflicts and violence resulting from asymmetries;
in the distribution of access to job, food and social security. "it is a
socio-economic truism that the more people are empowered to employ and feed
themselves, the more they are fulfilled in life
and at peace with themselves and their neighbors. The Nigerian
government should empower individuals, especially in the Niger-Delta region to
account to at least 80% of the Nigerian Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and
thereby make the US dollar irrelevant and more attractive. This was expressed
by Uwatt (2003) in an alternative way by saying that "by empowering the
federal, state and local governments as well
as communities, resources control
will eliminate the unhealthy fiscal competition among them.
Other solutions should include:
1.Role of Oil Companies: The solution that
could yield faster relief is for the central government to include in their
agreement with the oil exploring companies the fact that most of the
developmental programmes such as schools,
hospitals, roads, electricity,
and employment of
the indigene in
the companies are implemented. The
activities of the oil companies in this region and their neglect to clean-up
after themselves, which have fallen below internationally accepted standard,
has contributed in no little measure to the dilapidation of the area, damaging
the aquatic and marine life of the communities, that had sustained them for
decades. The oil companies should be compelled to clean up the oil spills to
make the land fit for cultivation. 2. Provision of free health services: The
continuous pollution and flaring of gas emanating from the oil exploration has
rendered the environment hazardous to health. So the residents of these areas,
with pollution related diseases should be treated at no cost to them.
3. Borehole water: The mortality rate in
this area has increased due to poor and contaminated sources of drinking water.
Borehole water should be provided for the people. 4. Provision of roads and means of
transportation: Most of the Niger Delta regions are inaccessible by road and
some of the areas have never seen a car. The government cannot claim not to
know that these areas should be given bridges linking them with the outside
world. It is surprising that in this present era, some areas of these regions
are still only accessible by boat. Bridges, roads and other means of
transportation should be provided for the residents of these areas. 5.
Scholarship: One might be deceived by the fact that the oil companies award
scholarships to "Nigerians". The relative number of Niger Delta
beneficiaries is highly insignificant. The scholarship awards to the indigene
of the Niger-Delta region should be increased and not linked to the awards to
other parts of the country. In fact, not less than 80% of Niger Delta youths
should benefit from the federal government or oil companies' scholarship schemes.
The solution to the problems, if to be enumerated would be endless.
CONCLUSION Briefly, we have attempted to
clarify conceptual issues related to defining resource control, a term that
represents the agitation of the impoverished, politically and socially excluded
and environmentally devastated Niger Delta region to control its environmental
resources and enjoy its benefits. This article identified the categories
‘absolute’ resource control, ‘principal’ resource control and increased
derivation as the three established broad conceptions of resource control. It
argued that the conceptualization of resource control be broadened to include a
‘local’ variant that should aim at ensuring that ordinary citizens have access
to their environmental resources and enjoy the benefits thereof. This article
also examined the legal realities of achieving the variants of resource control
and revealed that ‘local resource control’ is the most practicable at this time
in the country’s history. In conclusion, it is suggested that resource control
in the Niger Delta be reconceptualised to recognize and give priority to the
‘local’ variant of resource control for the benefit of ordinary citizens while
providing the basis to promote peaceful resolution of ‘resource control’
issues. For decades now, resource control has received
much attention in Nigeria, that one would be tempted to conclude that Nigerians
are just a set of people who like cheap money, greedy and lazy. This is so because
resource control is only likened to petroleum oil that yields easy dollars, at
the detriment of other resources, which could be equally as economically viable.
From the agitations, both by government and those who do not even have a drop
of oil and from history of derivation in Nigeria in the era of the regional
governments in Nigeria, it is obvious that when the oil dries up in the Niger
Delta, and other resources become more viable, the region will be forgotten,
being a region of the minorities. It is therefore necessary that whatever
should be obtained be obtained now or never. In this paper, it has been
revealed that the resource control option, if not properly implemented by
granting the 25% derivation agitated for by the region could minimize conflict
in the region and increase stability and security of life and property. There
is no doubt that it has become imperative for government to go back to the
drawing board and reconsider issues. For the issue of resource control
agitation borders on true federalism, as the present formula for revenue
allocation has become necessary, as every federating unit should be able to
effectively control the resources, which it produces, for over-centralization
of resources is precarious, resulting in cut-throat rivalry, social tension and
political instability. Resource control is the heart of ethnics, of
macro-economic and of politics. It is all about lanting every Nigerian firmly,
from the womb to the tomb, at the beginning, at the center and at the end of
every aspect as Nigeria's public policy. It is indeed, all about social
inclusion and giving every Nigeria his rightful place due to at all times.
Resource control is all about taking us Nigerians back to our equalitarian and
communitarian roots. It is simply the bottom-to-top marked development of
Nigeria". Unless this issue is properly and justly resolved, the Niger
Delta and subsequently Nigeria at large will continue to be at war.
