STATEHOOD AND THE CRISIS OF SOCIAL CONTRACT IN NIGERIA: A CASE OF AMOTEKUN. By Kay Aderibigbe.

STATEHOOD AND THE CRISIS OF SOCIAL CONTRACT IN NIGERIA: A CASE OF AMOTEKUN.

By Kay Aderibigbe.

 

The Nigerian state, since inception in 1960, has been grappling with the contents, scope and definitions of certain do's and don'ts that revolve around who gets what, when and how. Consequently, different ideologies have continuously been infused into the federal paraphernalia agreed upon at the London constitutional conference of 1953. But the most problematic characterization of Nigeria's social contract idea is that the constitution keeps tilting towards centripetalism, instead of maintaining its initial centrifugal mannerisms that can help the federating units grow and blossom at their respective pace.

Due to numerous reasons, and obviously, the overloading of the exclusive legislative list (68 items), the federal government has failed considerably in discharging its primary duties of securing lives and property as enshrined in Sec 14 of the 1999 constitution. This very act of incapacitation on the path of federal government has become quite acute, most especially in the last ten years; thereby, prompting the six governors from Western Nigeria to come together, after months of deliberations, and launch what has been described as a supplementary effort to the conventional national security outfit with the code name 'Amotekun'.

Amotekun as a security ideology has been bitterly criticized and declared illegal by the federal government through the office of Attorney General of the Federation Mr Abubakar Malami. The reason for such condemnation according to the AGF stems from the fact that the outfit runs contrary to constitutional provisions in the second schedule, under items 17 and 45 of the 1999 constitution. Whereas, there is also a widely believed insinuation that a staid suspicion exists in the core North, whose indigenes dominate the present-day federal government, on the modus operandi of Amotekun.

The emerging reactions from different quarters concerning why the federal government made a move to outlaw Amotekun have polarized the country into there groups. One, the group of Western Nigerians who believe there is an urgent need to do more in terms of securing the West and their sympathizers who believe in restructuring. Two, the group of federal government who condemned Amotekun on the ground of illegality and those core Northerners who believe that Amotekun is embedded with sinister objectives. Three, the group of middle-range rational thinkers who are neither persuaded nor dissuaded by ethnic sentiments but by facts, fairness, realities and pragmatism.

All the groups have spoken as audibly as possible but I want to use this piece to echo the voice of the last group to the best of my ability. An empirical analysis of the concept of Amotekun will reveal some sound judgments about its making; the inherent advantages and its​ intrinsic flaws. Likewise we shall be able to juxtapose the essence of Amotekun with the functions of conventional security apparatus of the state and how it does not in the real sense undermine or amount to duplicity as espoused by some.

To start with, one should ask if Amotekun was a well-thought-out idea? We could say yes because the Western Nigeria is in dire need of an appropriate security after years of kidnappings, killings and robberies in daylights when people go about their normal businesses. We could as well say no because there is more to security than just the willingness to provide security. Economic factor, such as, funding (remunerations​ and maintenance), political factors such as communal relations, and psychological factors such as the scope of operations, training/orientation, and succession plan must be considered in setting up a security outfit of such large scale.

In the case of Amotekun, we are talking about a security outfit that consisted of a large number of uneducated and untrained personnel, but who are versatile in policing the terrain earmarked for its operations. It is not a bad idea to bring up such an arrangement in the face of necessity but how can we be so sure that this is not another OPC, or bandits in the making? We should be careful not to breed a Leviathan we may not be able to control. From the angle of viability therefore​, in one word, since the Nigerian state is broke and the federating units are also poor, the progenitors of this noble idea should work more on the convocation of investment plans that can: foot the bill of a training institute for Amotekun; take care of its welfare; monitor its operations; candidly checkmate its excesses and sanction any erring member(s). Unless this is done, the same Amotekun we are happy about today will likely metamorphose into the highly detested OPC, the Nigerian police and a host of other security agencies that have become public nuisance to the Nigerian society.

The question of legality raised by the federal government, and the insistence of the governors of Western Nigeria to forge ahead with Amotekun​ has transmogrified into a political pregnancy which is capable of bringing forth anything; but only time can tell. Can one say the establishment of Amotekun is unconstitutional? We can say yes because the creation of such an outfit is under the exclusive competence of the federal government according to the 1999 constitution. While we can also say no because there are other security outfits such as Hisbah police in the North West and Civilian-JTF in the North East, whose establishment cannot be traced to the constitution but are still performing security functions under this same all laws-knowing federal government.

Though the existence of other security outfits in the North does not legitimize Amotekun in the real sense while a critical and philosophical appraisal of the constitution will find loopholes in our conventions and as such, negates the claims of the federal government. Let's take for instance, Lagos State laws forbids anyone from erecting street gates. But the activities of hoodlums and miscreants made it necessary for people to clamour for street gates all over the places and it has become a norm. Another example is a case where the federal government through the Office of Inspector General of Police licensed private security outfits to carry arms and function as defenders of the state despite the fact that the constitution does not expressly permit such activities.

As far as the case of Amotekun is concerned the question of legality shouldn't be the bone of contention. After all, the country is under-policed while the business of crime strives effortlessly. Since Sec 11(2) of our constitution encourages the government to ensure the peace, orderliness and good governance of its people, I believe the federal government should ask questions about the viability, operational scope and the political dimensions of this outfit called Amotekun​. For instance, if a guarantee pact can be signed that the outfit will not be manipulated. This is because Amotekun is a supplementary program to the conventional policing system. Instead of rivaling or frustrating the endeavour, the federal government should support the outfit with a caveat or absolve Amotekun into the conventional police in order to provide succor to the people of the West. This way, the federal government will receive praise for restoring the strained relationship between the people and a government that has been described as dormant since 2015.

In conclusion, the very hue and cry about Amotekun should be politically managed because we do not want to witness a face-off between Western Nigeria and the federal government. The case of seizure of Lagos State allocations for 14 months by Obasanjo's government in 2014 for instance, though illegal, should remind one of how a dictator in a civilian garb could act irrespective of what a competent court says.