Fatherland Group disagrees with Northern Elders, faults Parliamentary System

By Ologeh Joseph Chibu and Samuel Ogunsona

One of Nigeria’s largest global coalition, Fatherland Group has disagreed on the proposed Parliamentary system being proposed by some lawmakers

The group led by progressive lawyer, Mr Dele Ogun said the proposed Parliamentary System is an attempt to delude Nigerians and cover up fundamental issues of self determination

In a statement made available to Irohinodua Fatherland
issued a comprehensive critique of Nigeria’s current governance system, advocating for a radical change in response to years of perceived failure.

Disagreeing with the assessment that only the presidential system has faltered, the group extends the blame to encompass the entirety of Nigeria’s 28-year experimentation with presidential governance.

It said that Nigerians should be the people to determine their future and not people who are largely products of questionable systemic structures.

“Fatherland Group disagrees with the Professors claim that Its totally unfair to say that the parliamentary system failed in Nigeria . . . it was not given sufficient time,” the group said

In contrast to the Northern Elders Forum’s emphasis on returning to a parliamentary system, the Fatherland Group argues that the parliamentary system has not been given adequate time to succeed.

Instead, it pointed to inherent weaknesses in colonial governance structures and questions whether Western models are suitable for Nigeria’s unique challenges.

Fatherland Group noted that, “the parliamentary system is a system of government, in operation in England and France, in which the executive arm of government is a committee of the legislature. It contrasts with the presidential system in which the executive is free standing from the legislature. Both parliamentary and presidential systems are systems of representative democracy, the aim of which is intended to be that of ensuring sufficient fairness between one person and the next, in terms of access to basic means of life (food, water, shelter) the right to found a family and to a fair trial etc.”

Referencing historical precedents and scholarly analysis, the Fatherland Group highlights the failure of parliamentary democracy in former British colonies like Burma, Pakistan, and Sudan.

The coalition emphasized the need for economic and industrial growth that aligns with political institutions for parliamentary democracy to thrive, a condition they believe Nigeria has yet to fulfill.

Fatherland Group does not believe that Nigeria has addressed these concerns that were highlighted in 1959 historic conference before the 1960 independence.

Identifying ethnic fractionalization as a critical obstacle to effective governance, the Fatherland Group rejects a binary choice between parliamentary and presidential systems.

Instead, the coalition proposes a novel solution termed the Orange Union, which advocates for qualified independence and autonomy for Nigeria’s original nations within a shared sovereignty framework.

This proposed arrangement would empower each original nation to choose a governance system that aligns with its history, culture, and aspirations, potentially fostering greater political consensus and accountability. With the Northern Elders Forum echoing calls for a constitutional change, the Fatherland Group’s proposal adds momentum to the growing debate over Nigeria’s future governance structure.