INVESTIGATION AND EVALUATION OF RESOURCE CONTROL AGITATION AND POLITICAL STABILITY IN NIGERIA A CASE STUDY OF SOUTH-SOUTH NIGERIA

CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background to the Study
Resource control is contentious issue that has not been addressed over the years. The agitation for resource control by the producing states in the Niger Delta is one of the major challenges confronting the country. The controversial issue resurfaced during the National conference held in 2015. The delegates from the oil producing states demanded for between 25.5 to 50 percent derivation funding which was not approved by the conference delegates. The report on derivation and resource control was stepped down because the controversy could not be resolved; instead the conference advised President Goodluck Jonathan to get up a technical committee to handle the matter.

The oil-Rich-Niger Delta Region has been in the fore front for the return to status quo to give the federating units the control of their economic activities and finances. Expert in political Economy, Dr. Frank Ezimora noted that the contentious issue had been settled by the 1960 independence and 1963 constitution. He recalled that it was the law of Nigeria before and after impendence that the federating units, the Region controlled their economic and finances, keeping so percent of all avenues to the federation account, out of which 30 percent was shared among the regions, leaving 20 percent to the federating government. He said the law was changed in 1969 by the General Yakubu Gowon military administration when the crude oil from (the Niger-Delta became the mainstay of the economy in order to get more funds to persecute the civil war) the change was done without consultation with or mandate from the people, he said according to him, the Niger Delta people are simply asking for a return to the post-independence practice after more than five decades.

Since the inception of the entity called Nigeria following the 1914 amalgamation, there have been schemes, schedules, modes, methods and patterns of relationship among the federating units in terms of administration and finance (Chijioke et al, 2013). This according to Adeleke (2013: 145) was carried over to the post independence Nigeria where unrelenting struggle for resource control and revenue allocation has constituted a threat to the continued existence of Nigeria as one indivisible nation. The year 1957 marked a turning point in the history of Nigeria Federating nation as oil was discovered as its main source of economy, for instance, before then, the Northern part of the country is reputed for the production of groundnut pyramid, the West cocoa production while oil palm was produced in commercial quantity by the Eastern region (Adeleke, 2013).The crisis associated with the control of oil resources has to do with the formula for allocating the oil revenue among component units of the nation, in that each state is scheming and embarking on political manipulations with the intention of getting more allocation for its area (Adeleke,2013).

This development was as a result of the boom of oil resource and Nigeria’s over dependence on “Petro-Dollar” and the consequent neglect of all other natural resources in the country. To that effect, the Niger Delta States on Whose territory the oil resource is extracted has constantly and relentlessly demanded to have the “Lion Share” or total control of managing the oil resource within their territory and pay certain percentage to the central government. According to Adeleke (2013: 141) with the change to monolithic economy by Nigeria, revenue allocation and formula for allocating resources became problematic issue causing resentment and clog in the wheel of the nation’s progress and development. According to him, the dimension which the agitation for resource control and revenue allocation has taken is shaking the Nigerian state even threatening its continued co-existence. Furthermore, Adeleke maintained that, the centralization of the wealth resources in the hand of the federal government is another source of conflict over the control of the wealth from crude oil exploration in Nigeria.

The centralization according to Dibua (2004) has made the federal government too powerful and authoritarian thereby negating the operation of true fiscal federalism and made the federal government to distant itself from the people such that the revenue from the exploitation of natural resources were not used to implement policies that would promote sustainable development in the country as a whole and the place of derivation in Niger Delta. Protagonist of resource control pushed forward the argument that the country cannot be said to be a federation when the elements of federation such as state police, control of natural resources by the federating units, etc are lacking. Their argument was based on the precedence during the First Republic (1960 – 1966) when the 4 regions which were then the federating units had control over agricultural produce. This was at a time when agriculture was the mainstay of the Nigerian economy.

Adoti and Imuoha (2015) posit that: the 3 major regions – Eastern, Western and Northern – had control of palm produce, cocoa and groundnuts respectively. Beside this, the regions also got as high as 50 percent derivation from whatever accrued to the federation account as revenue from the agricultural produce. It may have been agreeable in the 60s because the monies that accrued to the regions could not be compared with what oil-bearing states would get today. Apart from that, major beneficiaries of that arrangement were the Igbo, Yoruba and Hausa/Fulani who dominated Nigerian politics then (Azaiki, 2006). The situation is different today as potential beneficiaries of 50 percent derivation are minorities whose voice, even if collective, is feeble and hardly have much or instant impact in a major, policy such as this. However, the people of the Niger Delta found it unjustifiable and there fore unacceptable, that along the line, the practice was abandoned, while derivation was reduced to mere 3 percent. It was only recently raised to 13 percent on 29 May 1999.

The agitation for resource control is naturally tied to the demand for the control of Land (Adeoti and Imuoh, 2015) while revenue allocation in Nigeria according to Orokpo and Makoji ( 2014) implies the allocation of oil revenue, therefore, oil is central to the politics of inter-governmental fiscal relations. The fact of the above statement is that from Late 60s till date, revenue allocation in Nigeria has remained more or less a matter of allocation of oil revenue, and as such may breed endless conflict and controversy between Northern and Southern Nigeria of Niger Delta extraction. The struggle for the control of the nation’s resources according to Ikeji (2011) has been based on the regional cleavages and entangled with political conflict. Resource control has thus being associated with political considerations with the purpose of influencing wealth allocation from federation account (Adeleke, 2013).

For Orji and Jaja (2007) the political economy of resources control has assumed the status of an impediment to the Socio-economic development and political stability of Nigeria’s democracy. As such, Jaja and Orji maintained that unless some urgent meaningful steps are taken, there will be no socio-economic progress in Nigeria. This is because the degree of violent issues relating to resource control has reached its crescendo to the extent that the political stability and socio-economic development of the nation is being threatened (Adeleke, 2013).

The reasons given for the violent agitation on the part of the Niger Delta communities includes but not limited to deprivation and environment (such as oil spillage and gas flaring) which has constantly bred youth restiveness and militancy. Fishing and farming which were the main means of livelihood of these communities prior to the discovery of oil were seriously hindered thus, making majority of the Niger Deltans to live in abject poverty and penury. Adeleke (2013) therefore, contends that the oil-producing communities are likely to remain marginalized and lacked basic infrastructural facilities. This according to Salami (2011) is attributable to the revenues allocated to the oil producing states which is not commensurate with the perceived environmental destruction being witnessed in those areas. Thus, some observers have argued that there is a need for more revenue to accrue to the oil producing areas of the Niger Delta to improve the deplorable conditions in the area. This study therefore argues that part of the cause of Niger Delta agitation for resource control is their perception of being shortchanged for other regions of the country in terms of revenue allocation by the federal government.

1.2 Statement of the Problem
The issue of how to share resources has generated a lot of heat which is almost suffocating the whole nation. This is because Nigeria’s fiscal relations centers on the fundamental question of who gets what, when and how of the national cake (Ukwueze, 2011). By implication, the revenue-sharing formula in Nigeria thus emphasized the federal government’s interest, which encouraged the centralization of oil proceeds with the federal government (Oyovbaire, 1985). To a large extent, this was to pitch the ordinary people of the Niger Delta, such as Ijaws and Ogonis, against the non-oil producing states in Nigeria (Ejobowah, 2000). For instance, the former Chairman of Northern Governorship Forum (Babangida Aliyu) maintained that the underdevelopment and poverty of the Northern Nigeria is due to the poor allocations the 19 states in the region receive from the federation account. He equally sees the 13 percent derivation allocated to oil-producing states as cheating on the Northerners and therefore should be scrapped (Odebode et al., 2012). In the same context, the former Central Bank of Nigeria CBN Governor (Sanusi Lamido) also claimed that the low financial allocation to the Northern states was the major reasons for the underdevelopment and activities of such groups as Boko Haram (Adeleke. 2013). According to Adeleke, Sanusi’s assertion, coupled with Aliyu’s outburst had heat up the polity and consequently polarized the nation along North and South divide.

In reaction to the Northern demand for new revenue allocation formula of oil resources that will favour them, some key south-south figures described the call as insulting and a further proof that the North is ungrateful to the south (Adeleke, 2013). In response to the agitation for more resources to tackle the gross environmental degradation, which had been the consequence of the oil exploration in the Nigeria Delta, the then military government raised the derivation of oil states to three (3) percent in 1992 and to 13 percent in 1999, just before the advent of the present democratic dispensation (Okpi, 2012). In similar context, Itse Sagay argued that the reduction of the derivation of producing states was mainly because Niger Delta ethnic groups were in the minority, while the major ethnic groups controlled the federal government (Okpi, 2012). He further argued thus: in 1960, there were not petroleum resources of any significance.

The political class according Igbuzor, is just playing games with the lives of Nigerians. Assuming there was no oil, does it mean we would all die? Instead of focusing on how to develop our human capital and other aspects of our economy, they are focusing on how to share oil money. It is just a lazy argument. There are mineral resources in virtually every part of this country, why don’t they think of how to develop them?

The problem of this study is therefore, how to among other factors (such as deprivation, environmental pollution etc) isolate revenue allocation (which according to this study is the allocation of oil revenue) as the main cause of the Niger Delta agitation for resource control.