Former Nigerian President Goodluck Jonathan recently addressed the lingering question of why his administration did not act on the recommendations of the 2014 National Conference, a landmark initiative he spearheaded to tackle the country’s pressing challenges.
Speaking on Sunday, March 2, 2025, during a condolence visit to the family of the late Afenifere leader Chief Ayo Adebanjo in Lagos, Jonathan pointed to the chaotic political climate of the time as the primary barrier. His comments, reported by Journalist101 on March 3, 2025, offer a fresh perspective on a decision that has long sparked debate among Nigerians.
.jpg)
Jonathan explained that the timing of the conference’s conclusion—August 2014—left his government with little room to maneuver. With the 2015 general elections looming just months away, the nation was already swept up in campaign fervor.
He argued that presenting the extensive report to a National Assembly preoccupied with electoral politics would have been impractical. “The political situation in Nigeria at that time was too turbulent to accommodate presentation of the recommendations,” he said, noting that lawmakers were either on recess or focused on their constituencies, leaving no space for the thorough legislative process required.
The former president also highlighted internal party strife as a complicating factor. He revealed that a key figure in his People’s Democratic Party (PDP), the then-Speaker of the House of Representatives Aminu Tambuwal, defected to the opposition All Progressives Congress (APC) in late 2014, taking several PDP lawmakers with him.
This shift turned the National Assembly into a hostile environment for Jonathan’s agenda. “A prominent member of the legislature from my party mobilized against me and moved to another party,” he said, suggesting that this betrayal, coupled with broader efforts to undermine his leadership, made pushing the report through parliament a risky move. “It was not the right moment to present such a document,” he added.
The 2014 National Conference, convened under Jonathan’s administration, brought together nearly 500 delegates from diverse backgrounds to address Nigeria’s structural and systemic issues. The resulting 900-page report offered bold proposals, including devolving power to states, enhancing local security control, and rethinking resource allocation—ideas many believed could ease ethnic tensions and economic disparities. Jonathan had envisioned the conference as a platform for Nigerians to forge a shared path forward, urging delegates to discuss everything except the nation’s sovereignty.
Yet, despite its ambition, the report has remained largely unimplemented, gathering dust through successive administrations.
Jonathan expressed confidence that the recommendations, crafted by credible and apolitical figures, still hold value. “We believe the outcomes remain highly relevant to our society,” he asserted, expressing hope that a future government might revisit and act on them.
He had anticipated winning a second term in 2015, which he believed would have given him the four years needed to push through key reforms. “My expectation was that I would win a second term within which period I would have worked for the implementation,” he recalled. His loss to Muhammadu Buhari dashed those plans, leaving the report’s fate uncertain.
The condolence visit, where these remarks were made, saw Jonathan joined by notable figures like former Sierra Leone President Ernest Bai Koroma and former PDP Deputy National Chairman Chief Olabode George.
They paid respects to Adebanjo, who passed away on February 14, 2025, at 96, and was a staunch advocate for restructuring—ideas echoed in the 2014 report. Later that day, former Vice President Atiku Abubakar also visited, underscoring Adebanjo’s unifying legacy. The gathering morphed into a broader political reunion, with Jonathan and Atiku attending a dinner hosted by former President Olusegun Obasanjo, alongside other PDP stalwarts like Bukola Saraki.
Critics have long questioned Jonathan’s commitment to the conference, with some accusing him of using it as a political stunt. His latest explanation counters that narrative, framing the non-implementation as a matter of circumstance rather than intent. He suggested that the process—requiring constitutional amendments, committee reviews, public hearings, and legislative approval—needed at least a year, a luxury his administration lacked as it neared its end. “Those knowledgeable about constitutional reforms know it couldn’t have been possible at that time,” he said, pushing back against claims of inaction.
The 2014 report’s dormancy remains a sore point for many Nigerians who see it as a missed opportunity to address festering issues like regional autonomy and resource control—grievances that continue to fuel agitations, including in the Southeast, where the Biafra movement persists.
Jonathan’s remarks tie into broader discussions about Nigeria’s unity, echoing sentiments like those of Abia Governor Alex Otti, who recently argued that the Igbo seek equity within Nigeria, not secession. Whether Jonathan’s optimism about a future review bears fruit depends on the political will of current and upcoming leaders.
For now, his reflections serve as both a defense of his tenure and a call to action, spotlighting a roadmap that, a decade later, still stirs hope and frustration in equal measure.
Post a Comment
0Comments