It is an established fact that the race unto sustainability being run around the world today is alien to Africa and Nigeria in particular. The foundations upon which developed countries are building sustainable development have somersaulted in the hands of the self serving leaders. Political Economy postulations have failed; Market Economy theories have no positive results; environmental resources portend great challenges for the survival of the nation.
Economic/political sustainability could be unattainable in an area where environmental capacity is unattended to in all fairness and justifiable manner. All over the world, issues of environmental injustice have gone to levels whereby they pose serious threat to the sovereign oneness of nations. Where members of disadvantaged ethnic, minority, or other groups suffer disproportionately at the local, regional sub-national, or suffer disproportionately from violations of fundamental human rights as a result of environmental factors, and/or access to justice in environment-related matters; which is the causal factor in most crises areas all over the world today including Nigeria as the case in the Niger Delta region, It is imperative that environmental justice be recognised as a target in the minimal, if not upgraded to a full target considering its overwhelming link to the stability of political economies of nations ravaged by wars and crises.
Environmental injustice in Nigeria transcends the unattended nature of the environments where natural resources are being explored, it also goes as far as marginalisation of these areas in terms of social amenities distribution and human capacity development, which are not only physical deprivation but also psychological. Regions and states that do not produce petroleum – the majority- derive increasing benefits from financial flows and development consequent on oil production and refining.
The major challenge in the environmental justice advocacy is the emergence of schools of thought that has now turned the campaign for environmental justice to a debate rather than a policy issue. The resultant effect of this is the lack of focus on the part of policy makers and legislators as a way of standing a non-alignment position amongst the various beliefs; hence the inability of government(s) to adopt any far reaching policy/legislation that would be acceptable to the dissenting groups. Another challenge is the command nature of the Nigerian federalism. The federalism as practiced in Nigeria is Unitary, whereby supremacy of powers is pyramidal in nature and authority flows down from the tip head of the cone. So, whatever decisions made at the lower level and opinions raised are still subject to the final approval of the central Supreme authority. This is not to say that the Nigerian political system is authoritarian or dictatorial, but the federalism is highly unitary. In essence, decisions bothering on environmental justice no matter how much favour it enjoys at the lower level, what the central government declares is the final, for instance, as much advocacy as put forward at various levels on Sovereign National Conference (SNC) to determine “who gets what when and how” has always fallen on the deaf ears of government. The two schools of thought on environmental justice in Nigeria – the resource control group advocating total or larger share control of revenue from oil exploration by the state government(s) of the Niger Delta area and the second group, championed by the central government and some other regions of the country, which says that the allocation from oil revenue enjoyed by the oil producing states is adequate are dominating the debate thus having the supreme say over the resource control group. This supremacy cuts across every institution at the central- the executive, legislature and agencies of government. Rather than toe the line of dialogue, the central government adopted the “devils strategy” – a cosmetic amnesty, which was designed as strategy to over- run non compliant groups to the amnesty at the expiration of its kangaroo deadline to renounce violence. No reasonable citizen would support violence as it is in the Niger Delta but can government also not wake up the conscience of the state in the Niger Delta case?
Furthermore, this strengthens the conspiracy between the government and the oil companies operating in the Niger Delta area. Thereby making the enforcement of legislations and court judgements against these companies an Herculean task for the law enforcement agents. For example, In August 2001, Corp Watch (An accountability organization) reported that many residents have fled Erovie (a community in the Niger Delta area of Nigeria) to avoid illness from the waste contamination resulting from Shell’s operations. But Shell has refused to respond to the community's appeal to clean up the toxic mess. Rather, the oil company and the Nigerian government claim the substance is harmless. The Nigerian government even ran a newspaper ad saying its own test showed that "the substance had no obvious significant harmful impact on human and the immediate environment." In an attempt to foreclose the controversy, the government described the advertisement as the "full and final report" on the waste's toxicity.
However, fairness dictates that a mention should be made of efforts of government in addressing the injustice, which include the establishment of the Niger Delta Development Commission (NDDC) and lately the establishment of the Ministry of Niger Delta to ensure a fast paced development in the area. What remains unclear now is the relationship between the new ministry and NDDC. It is hoped that past experience of overlap and conflict of duties/responsibilities will not pervade the terrain of development in the area, thereby rendering the new initiative into another white elephant project that will be of no development value(s).
Conscience Economics, would dictate to government that “who gets what, when and how” underlines the principle of fairness and justice in the allocation of values and resources. Nigerian leaders and the governments they represent only allocate resources and not values. Values are paramount in resource(s) allocation. Integrity is a value. Sense of Equity is a value. Sincerity is a value and above all, justification of our actions by our individual conscience(s), which in turn sums up to conscience of the state is an unquantifiable value. “Who gets what, when and how” ruled by conscience would mean good governance. Not until when the leaders and followers alike accepts to have good conscience and it is sustainable (Sustainable Conscience Development) Nigeria cannot experience any other developments that will be sustainable. Value driven leadership is leading by example, that is, doing the right thing for the right reasons and not compromising core principles. Letting good values impact the nation and governance business will amount to sustainable development.
Olaonipekun Ola
Abuja, Nigeria
Email: yosdal@yahoo.com
