It appears that some people misunderstand my article titled "Calabar/ Ogoja Accord has been overtaken by Events" in which I had argued that events had overtaken the accord.
In the article, I did say that the accord was no longer enforceable because the parties to the accord were all dead. It is akin to what lawyers called "obiter" - when a Judge in writing a judgment says a lot of things which are not germane to the reason (s) for giving his decision one way or the other.
The kernel or thrust of my argument is that the accord is a document which the proponents of the movement for the creation of Cross River State out of the old Cross River State used to demand the creation of a state in 1980, which State was never created. Rather Akwa Ibom state was carved out of the old Cross River State.
I also argued that there was a fundamental change in the constitutional order on which the accord was based following a military coup and the suspension of the 1979 constitution.
In 1999, a new constitution came into force which replaced the 1979 constitution, did away with the Calabar and Ogoja Senatorial Districts and replaced same with three senatorial districts - Cross River South; Cross River Central and Cross River North.
You cannot use an agreement to alter a legislation such as the constitution. The constitution is the supreme and fundamental law of the country, and any new legislation or regulation inconsistent with a constitutional provision is void to the extent of its inconsistency with the constitution. It goes without saying that the Calabar Ogoja accord cannot be used to override the provisions of the 1999 constitution, which divides Cross River State into 3 (three) Senatorial Districts. The proponents of zoning of the governorship position should rely on the provisions of the 1999 constitution, not the Calabar/Ogoja Accord, which is inconsistent with the provisions of the 1999 Constitution (as amended).
In 1980, some individuals from the Calabar and Ogoja Senatorial Districts of the old Cross River State entered into an accord on the political arrangement and sharing of administrative offices in the 'new Cross River State', which they had proposed to be created. At the time of the proposition of that Accord, the constitutional order that was prevalent in the country was the 1979 constitution.
The 1979 constitution provided that each of the states of the federation must be divided into five senatorial districts. Accordingly, there were five Senatorial Districts in the old Cross River state, namely Calabar, Ogoja, Ikot Ekpene, Uyo, and Eket.
What is Calabar Ogoja Accord? In July 1980, some political leaders from the then Calabar and Ogoja Senatorial Districts of the Cross River State decided to demand the creation of a state out of the old Cross River State and entered into an accord spelling out how political positions should be shared between these districts in the event the State they were demanding was created. The demand never saw the light of day.
However, in 1983, a military coup led to the suspension of the 1979 constitution and supplanting the constitutional order with decrees, and a military government that governed the country from 1983 to 1999.
In 1987, Akwa Ibom State was carved out of the old Cross River State, which drastically altered or rendered otiose the Ogoja and Calabar Accord provisions. Also, in 1999 another constitution was promulgated and came into force which divided the States into three Senatorial Districts, namely: Cross River South, Cross River Central, and Cross River North. There is in reality no more senatorial districts known as 'Calabar and Ogoja' in Cross River State. The coming into force of the 1999 constitutions means that the 1979 constitution is no longer the relevant and applicable law regulating how the country is governed.
It follows that the substratum upon which the Calabar Ogoja Accord was hinged has been destroyed. So how can there be any rationality in advocating the use of an agreement which has been fundamentally altered by subsequent events or overtaken by events or which structure has been destroyed? Its trite law that where an agreement has been altered, then it cannot be enforceable again.
We cannot continue to cite and rely on an accord made 41 years ago to decide what should happen now, when it is obvious to the discerning that the accord has become anachronistic and legally unenforceable.
The solution is this: should we be desirous of another accord to guide us on the sharing of positions, then stakeholders (political parties that are the only platforms for choosing elective leadership in the country in the prevailing legal order) should craft an accord that is in tune with the prevailing social and constitutional order. There are no more Calabar and Ogoja Senatorial Districts, the wind had been taken out of the sail of the Calabar-Ogoja Accord dated July, 1980.
OKOI OBONO-OBLA
Publisher: Don Martyn L.O
Ikeduru APC Media Hub
08032950897
Ikeduruapcmediahub@gmail.com
0 Comments