ADDRESS DELIVERED BY ALHAJI ABDULLAHI ADAMU (SARKIN YAKIN KEFFI), EXECUTIVE GOVERNOR OF NASARAWA STATE AT A PRESIDENTIAL RETREAT ON PEACE AND CONFLICT RESOLUTION IN SOME CENTRAL STATES, NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF POLICY AND STRATEGIC STUDIES (NIPSS), KURU, PLATEAU STATE, JANUARY 24-26, 2002.

For over a decade now, North Central Nigeria has been plunged into a vortex of communal disputes. Hitherto peaceful communities are at each other's throat. Peoples that have cohabited peacefully in some instances for over a century are up in arms against each other. The age-old bonds that once bound communities together are falling apart with the unfortunate consequence that very minor disagreements often result in violence. From Kaduna to Jos, from Bauchi to Taraba, Benue and Nasarawa, a situation is rapidly developing which threatens to destabilize the entire Middle Belt or the North Central Zone. As leaders we are faced with a predicament we never prepared or bargained for. The meagre resources we get in the region are being frittered away on conflict management in a zone that is unarguably the poorest in Nigeria.

The situation in the Middle Belt demands urgent national attention for several reasons. First, this belt by its strategic geographical location is the connecting rod that binds the rest of the Nigerian federation together. Because it is so centrally located, instability in this region if left unattended could gradually tear the country apart. The movement of people and goods between the North and the South passes through this region. A major crisis in the region therefore has immense social and economic implications.

What has not been adequately highlighted in the current crisis in Taraba, Benue and Nasarawa states is the immediate danger it poses to Nigeria's food security. It is incontrovertible that these states are vital to the food needs of Nigeria. A high proportion of the nation's food production takes place in these states. Much of the yams, beans, fruits and rice consumed in the South and the far North come from these areas. If the nation fails to invest in resolving the current crisis in the region it will complicate the nation's food shortages in the years ahead with serious consequences for the nation.

The crises in the region also pose serious dangers to the stability of the nation's democracy. If left unattended these crises could rapidly erode people's confidence in democracy and shake the foundations of democratic institutions in the region and in other parts of the country. It is important that the nation work with the governments and peoples of the North Central zone to resolve the crisis as soon as possible.

Over and above the foregoing, the lingering crisis portrays our country as unstable and could scare investors away not only from investing in the region's rich economic potential, it could also scare international investors from Nigeria as a whole. No investor would want to take his capital into a country where there are incessant reports of ethnic wars.

The nation, therefore, must come to the aid of the North-Central Zone to invest in peace in the region because the Middle Belt has made the most sacrifices for the unity of Nigeria. This region bore the brunt of the civil war and has consistently made enormous sacrifices for the unity of Nigeria. Many families in this region lost precious sons for the unity of Nigeria. It is therefore fair to ask that the rest of Nigeria should stand by us in our hour of need.

I, therefore, wish to thank Mr. President for the abiding interest his administration has shown in resolving the crises in the zone. His perseverance in helping us come to a resolution of the crises is a source of inspiration for my colleagues and me. It reassures us that we are not alone and it strengthens our resolve to persevere until peace is attained. I am particularly delighted by the opportunity this retreat offers us to reflect and come to terms with the reality of dialogue as the only viable option out of our quarrels. I urge us all to take advantage of the opportunities offered by the retreat to take concrete steps to resolve the crises.

I am supposed to discuss the plenary presentations by the Hon. Minister of State for Justice, Hon. Musa Elayo Abdullahi and Alh. A. G. F. Abdulrazak (SAN), titled Constitutional and Practical Aspects of Nigerian Citizenship and the issue of "Indigenes" and "Non-Indigenes". As a discussant, I am supposed to be armed with copies of the presenters' papers in advance to be able to discuss the issues they raise therein. However, since I did not have access to their papers before the retreat, I have had to put down my own reflections on this important subject.

The Webster Dictionary of English Language defines a citizen as an inhabitant of a city or town, a member of a country, native or naturalized, having rights and owing allegiance. Citizenship and the issues associated with it are at the core of any nation. When President Clinton was leaving office at the end of a glorious two terms in office he remarked that he was happy to return to the most important title his country could offer him, which is Citizen Clinton. He said to be a citizen was more important than to be president because without the former, he could never have been president of the United States.

President Clinton's remark underlines the all-important place of citizenship in the life of a nation. The constitutions of all nations dwell on this subject. Our constitutions since 1960 have all defined citizenship of Nigeria. Chapter 25 of the 1999 Constitution, which is in force, is devoted to the issue of citizenship. It defined a citizen as any person born in Nigeria either before or after independence either of whose parents or grand parents was born in a community indigenous to Nigeria; or every person born outside Nigeria either of whose parents is citizen of Nigeria. This is citizenship by birth.

The constitution also offers conditions on how any person who so desires could acquire Nigerian citizenship either by registration or naturalization. The constitution therefore offers the chance for even non-Nigerians to be citizens, provided they fulfil conditions prescribed therein. Being a citizen confers on one certain rights and duties which non-citizens could never enjoy. These rights and duties are also contained in the constitution, especially chapter four of the constitution, which dwells on fundamental human rights of citizens.

The Word "indigene" is not in the dictionary and may indeed be a uniquely Nigerian coinage from the word "indigenous" which is defined in the Webster Dictionary as born or living or found naturally in a locality, not imported; of or relating to natives. It is a biological term that has also assumed serious social and political meaning in Nigeria and around the world. For example, the term "indigenous people" has come to assume specific and significant meaning in the lingo of the United Nations over the decades depicting the conditions of peoples around the world who suffer rights violations in conditions of settler colonialism in new nations with altered demographic realities by "newcomers". This term mainly focuses on rights violations on the basis of racial differences in multi-racial societies of the Americas, some parts of Asia, and North Africa where the populations of indigenous peoples of these regions have been swamped over the centuries by newcomers often of different races who now dominate economic and political power and use such power to limit the rights of indigenous racial groups.

The world "indigene" which is a Nigerian coinage is used to define natives of a particular place as against other citizens of Nigeria found in that locality. It is not discussed in the constitution, but it has assumed political connotation in virtually all parts of Nigeria as various communities and political units seek to protect themselves against newcomers. It is largely a product of Nigeria's multiethnic and heterogeneous status. It is used to confer special privileges on the natives which are beyond the reach of non-natives. At independence, all the former regions sought to use it to offer their peoples special protections in an environment. The nation was young and the regions were suspicious of each other.

The conflict between citizenship and "indigene" or "non-indigene" was there but the regions were very big and indigenes of each region enjoyed relatively the same privileges. A northerner was a northerner no matter where he lived in the North, just as a westerner was a westerner anywhere in the Western region. Although some level of dissent was noticeable in the multi-ethnic North and East, there was nothing close to what is witnessed today.

In spite of the obvious conflict between the rights of citizenship and the local protection of "indigenes" in the byelaws of the regions, it was fashionable because it hardly applied to members of communities within local units which were large enough to absorb the stress. Then non-indigenes were largely from afar and less interwoven than is the situation today. In the North, for instance, non-indigenes were largely citizens from Eastern or Western parts of the country and vice versa. Besides, opportunities were many for employment and very few qualified persons were available in the regions.

Further fragmentation of the country into smaller political units over the years have made the conflict more acute. Whereas a non-indigene in the First Republic in the North was hardly indigenous to the North, and was found mostly in the city and without any cultural or historical attachment to his place of residence, the situation prevailing now is quite different. Communities which hitherto belonged to the same political units and shared the same rights and privileges as "indigenes" suddenly find themselves on the opposite sides of the divide, one "indigene", the other now "non-indigene", the former enjoying privileges hitherto jointly enjoyed, the latter now on his own, deprived of the rights he/she had previously enjoyed in the same community which is also his natural habitat.

Although he is still indigenous to his place of residence, local political arithmetic alters his/her life suddenly, bringing him in sharp conflict and state of animus with his former brother and neighbour. This is the situation that has posed the greatest challenge in the North-Central zone, and which I also believe is relatively prevalent in other parts of Nigeria, especially the minority belts of the South-South and the North-East zones and some parts of North-West zone, which is perhaps the most heterogeneous zone in Nigeria. Indeed, I am told that even the homogeneous parts such as the South-West and the South-East suffer these shocks although on a relatively milder level compared to the North-Central. Examples of this conflict are the Ife/Modakeke, Umuleri/Aguleri, Urhobo/Itsekiri/Ijaw, the Zangon-Kataf, the Jos, Tafawa Balewa, the Tiv/Jukuns inTaraba, the Igbura/Bassa in Toto, and Nasarawa South communal conflicts which have so much hate and destruction.

Several factors fuelled the conflict between "indigenes" and other citizens. Ethnic differences account for only a narrow part of the explanation. In several cases, Ife-Modakeke for instance, the feuding communities have lived together for centuries and are of the same ethnic stock. The same goes for Umuleri-Aguleri. So the conflict between "indigenship" and citizenship is not restricted to communities of different ethnic nationalities. People of the same ethnic origin are caught in the same trap in several places in parts of the country. And as stated earlier, it does not matter how long people have lived together.

Other underlying factors fuelling the conflicts in the North Central zone and elsewhere are land scarcity, declining economic opportunities and competition for scarce resources. Some of these crises have a long history, but their escalation in recent years coincides with Nigeria's economic decline, dwindling opportunities and grinding poverty. And in the absence of a buoyant economy, elites in the areas look forward to political office as the surest access to resources. This makes politics a do-or-die affair where every tactic is employed to wrest power at the local level. This also fuels the circle of crisis.

It would appear therefore that the lasting solution to the crisis is the deliberate deployment of resources to invest in the region's vast economic potential in order to expand employment opportunities for the youth most of whom are unemployed and ready to foment trouble at the slightest opportunity. The Federal Government of Nigeria must therefore develop a Marshall Plan of sorts to save the North-Central zone from the crippling poverty, which fuels the conflicts in the region.

The region also has a high number of ex-servicemen who after serving the country diligently have retired into poverty. The eruption of crises couple with the free flow of arms in the zone enables them to feel useful once again, by placing their martial expertise at the disposal of their communities, or serving as mercenaries to the highest bidder in the conflicts. Something must be done to monitor and engage the ex-service men in the region productively in order to stop them from being used to fuel these crises.

The challenge before us as leaders is to build a country of equal opportunities for our citizens. The permanent management of scarcity through quotas and restrictions can only breed crisis and poverty. Our new democracy must deliver results to assuage our peoples' frustration, which makes them prone to violence at the slightest provocation. The answer lies largely in strategic investments by the Federal and State governments, and transparent management of resources towards target national goals of economic revival and prosperity for all citizens. This will dissipate the fears that now drive communities and which fuel the fierce competition for scarce opportunities with attendant violence in the zone.

OPTIONS FOR CONSTITUTIONAL REFORMS

The constitution cannot fix all problems. It is neither desirable nor helpful to do so. But it must address the practical problems of citizenship and seek to assuage the fears of the weak in order to achieve the prospects of national integration and development. How this can be achieved is the enduring challenge of our young federation. This challenge is very enormous because attitudes are still far behind the general trends around the world toward integration. But we must start from somewhere.

In the course of the crisis in Nasarawa South Senatorial District, which pitched the Tivs against their neighbours, our administration took the pragmatic path and declared that as a multi-ethnic and multi-religious community, the basis of our unity should be to accept this reality. As a government, we offered protection to all the groups and sought peace through unity in diversity. This was not an easy path to take but the alternative is separatism and perpetual turmoil.

I believe a way out of these problems must be sought through appropriate constitutional review to give vigour to common citizenship, while finding a way to protect the weak and local sensibilities and mores.

I believe further integration will promote rather than deter development. I believe we cannot build a country of our dreams without resolving the question of citizenship. And, I believe we can have full citizenship rights for all our people with adequate protection for the weak and the minorities through affirmative action where necessary and a determined expansion of opportunities.

In conclusion, I urge participants at this retreat to come up with constitutional as well as pragmatic proposals for ending the crisis in the North-Central and in other regions of Nigeria. I propose a two-prong approach of constitutional review to enforce common citizenship rights as well as provisions to protect minorities through affirmative action. I propose the rapid expansion of economic opportunities for all Nigerians as the lasting solutions to most of the crises, which are rooted in poverty and scarce opportunities. I propose a coordinated and deliberate plan by the Federal Government to develop the North-Central Zone in order to save the region from poverty and crisis.

I urge our leaders not to seek the cheap option out of the current crises, which is separatism and permanent enmity and perdition. Our people must be reconciled because that is the only road to peace and development in the Middle Belt. We are bound together by history and geography and common destiny. If we fail to accept one another, the rest of the country shall definitely leave us further behind. At a time, some nations are in space and working on missions to

put life on Planet Mars, we cannot be permanently trapped in mundane village quarrels with neighbours who have shared history and destiny. We must aspire beyond the village level or else, we risk the prospect of weakening the foundations of Nigeria's greatness, which is the only hope that the black man shall one day join his Caucasian cousins in the common project of advancing the place of humanity in the universe. Our people deserve peace and we must work hard to secure reconciliation and peace. This is our enduring challenge, and the challenge democracy places on us and our people. Once again, thank you Mr. President, Mr. Vice President and distinguished participants, ladies and gentlemen for your attention.