|
New Page 15
The journey so far
IHEANACHO NWOSU
WHEN 22
states of the federation filed a suit at the Supreme Court, asking it to void
the Act that abolished, the controversial, onshore/offshore oil dichotomy, they
were aware that the move would stir the polity.
They were also pretty sure that the
decision was going to elicit diverse interpretations and reactions. And true to
type, events that followed after filing the suit went within the confine of that
prediction.
Barely a week after the action, Warri in
Delta State and some cities in the South South geo-political zone got heated up
as youths of these areas marched to the streets to demonstrate against the move.
They bathed arrowheads of the move with a barrage of invectives.
But the chairman of the 19 Northern
Governor’s Forum, Alhaji Danjuma Goje said the scathing criticisms of the move
by the South South were not unexpected. "We expected it. It is not strange to
us. But we know what we are doing", he said.
Nineteen northern states which include
Adamawa, Bauchi, Benue Adamawa, Bauchi, Benue, Borno, Gombe, Jigawa, Kaduna,
Katsina, Kebbi, Kogi, Nasarawa, Niger, Plateau, Sokoto, Taraba, Yobe and Zamfara
as well as Osun, Ekiti and Oyo states filed the suit. Oyo State, however,
dissociated itself from the move, a week after.
They contended via the suit filed on their
behalf by the Chambers of Yusuf Ali (SAN) that the Act grossly offended the
provisions of the 1999 Constitution and sundry anciliary laws of the country.
The states also prayed the apex court to
issue an order stopping forthwith the Revenue Mobilisation, Allocation and
Fiscal Commission (RMAFC) from implementing and relying on the Act for the
purpose of allocating revenue to states and local governments from the
Federation Account.
"If the Act is implemented, it will impact
negatively on the amount that will accrue to the Federation Account and will in
turn reduce the shareable revenue due to them", the states argued.
As is well known, the legal action has
thrown up dusts. It has also pitted the Northern governors against their South
South counterparts. The reason for that is obvious.
Before signing the bill, entitled "An Act to Abolish the
Dichotomy in the Application of the Principle of Allocation.
|