SEN. DAVID A. B. MARK: A LEGISLATOR AND SENATE PRESIDENT IN THE FACE OF ZONING AND NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT

There has always been argument relating zoning political officers with mediocrity. As a demerit of the zoning formular, a lot of people feel apportioning political and government offices to sections of the country would boomerang to perpetuate incompetency and unpopular choices amongst the people.

Citing the case of Sen. David Mark for instance, we can imagine the wealth of experience the man has garnered since 1999 when he was first elected to the Nigerian Senate. Today, he and Sen. Bello Hayatu Gwarzo from Kano State remain the highest ranking senators of the Federal Republic of Nigeria presently serving their fourth consecutive terms in the Nigerian Senate.

Back at home, in Zone C Senatorial District of Benue State where the Senate President comes from, there have been agitations in favour of zoning, which apparently presupposes that Sen. David Mark passes on the senatorial ticket of Zone C to another community or perhaps individual as is the African or Nigerian practice (federal character principle).

However, today’s democracy where the legislature exists, ranking legislators remain imperative in the sustenance of democracy through lawmaking, representation and other modus operandi of the parliament. How then do we realize a legislature which has Senators and Representatives who have spent over 35 years in the business of governance and democracy? Obviously, zoning cannot and shall not encourage this kind of situation.

While the Senate President of Nigeria has received applause and commendations from different quarters on his exemplary leadership style in the Senate (evident by the smooth operation of the Senate since he took over and arguably the only Senate President who would have successfully served for two terms in Nigeria), most of his kin’s men feel Senator David has not adequately achieved his mandate as a representative of Zone C. Invariably, the man has dual portfolio, first, as the representative of the people of Zone C in Benue State and secondly, as Senate President of Nigeria. There is no gainsaying the fact that, the man David Mark has encountered challenges to remain in the Nigerian Senate since 1999. His successes at the polls and election tribunal put him amongst the most maverick Nigerian politicians of his time. At one time, his fellow contenders for the position where encouraged to step down, since it was more than just being elected as senator but ascending the height of the coveted senate president seat. Of course, the Idoma people would prefer to have the Senate President than a mere representative, given their marginalization in their quest for the position of governor of Benue State.

In the entire elective including other public service positions in Nigeria, the clamor for zoning persists. Issues such as greed, corruption and personal aggrandizement constitute the reason for zoning. This means that purposeful representation and leadership will likely do away with apportioning positions which in most times, disregard the best fit and competent candidate from assuming such positions. 

However, Sen. David Mark must also draw a line between a representative of Zone C Senatorial District and Senate President of Nigeria. One would have naturally imagined that as Senate President, it would be double advantage to his people, given his increased affluence to attract more dividends of democracy to his people, but agitations from some quarters suggest otherwise (I stand to be corrected!).

Hence, to what extent do we draw the line between self and community interest against national interest and development?

NATIONAL SOVEREIGNTY IN THE FACE OF A GLOBAL SOCIETY

Wikipedia online posits that sovereignty, in political theory, is a substantive term designating supreme authority over some polity. The concept of sovereignty has changed in its definition and application over time. The current notion of national sovereignty presupposes four basic aspects consisting of territory, population, authority and recognition.

 

In a society like Nigeria, representative democracy ensures that the exercise of sovereignty is transferred from the people to those they have elected to form a legislative body called the National Assembly or the executive (where different arms of government exist) or a combination of the different arms of government.

Accordingly within the context of international law, sovereignty means that a government has full control over affairs within a territorial or geographical area or limit. Thus, determining whether a country is sovereign has not being specifically defined, and has being often times a matter of diplomatic dispute. In today’s global society, where partnership and interdependence of states or nations has become prevalent, absolute sovereignty becomes difficult to ascertain. This means that a state or country could have full national jurisdiction and sovereignty on some aspects like national airspace, territorial land and water but not territorial airspace, exclusive economic zones or the stretch of the seabed adjacent to the shores of the country.

International law is a set of generally accepted rules which become binding in advancing the relationship that exists between states or nations. It provides a framework for the promotion of stable and organized international relations. International law is primarily applicable to countries rather than individuals. However, state laws may become international laws when treaties delegate national jurisdiction to international law courts such as the European Court of Human Rights or the International Criminal Court. Hence, treaties such as the Geneva Conventions may require national law to conform.

The challenges of national sovereignty have continued to confront nations and international/regional blocs. One may wonder why enacting an anti-gay law cannot not be the sole preserve of Nigeria as an independent nation, but continuous to receive reactions from other countries like Britain threatening to cut ties with the Black Country. It is true that in recent times, there has been incessant global challenges including issues of terrorism that require collective efforts to deal with; however, within a recognized league of nations, lies their peculiarity in ways of doing things which includes culture, system of government, religious practice and socio-economic status amongst others.

A pertinent point to note is that while international treaties, pacts and agreements require national consent or ratification, the peculiar nature of countries is rather undermined during decision making, since most other smaller nations act as mere members and rarely contribute to the enactment of such universal set rules that tend to govern them.

Hence, to what extent nations are sovereign in the face of globalization, remains a concept that has to be defined in international law. The recent pull out of Gambia from the common wealth of nations is a rider which expands this debate.

Nations must act independently but not to the detriment of their neighbors or others, however, they must also assume sole responsibility in taking decisions that concern them especially to reflect the choice of the people rather than what these international organizations stand for. In this manner, international rules may remain guidelines as such, allowing member nations to deliberate with its citizens and consequently provide independent ways of doing their things.