The on-going review of the constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999, has shown that the National Assembly has to grapple with a number of important issues which stakeholders feel are very crucial to the survival of the nation and its citizens.

Top on the discussion list around the country is the agitation for creation of more states, concerns about state Police, corruption in high places and the unique system of federation which we practice based on a mono economy a situation many think breeds corruption.

It is gratifying though that even as some states made, sort of, convincing arguments for establishment of state police, others like Kano and Cross River voted against the monster, at least for now. Why is there this general feeling that corruption cannot be reduced, let alone, eradicated in Nigeria? Some argue that the problem with Nigeria is that corruption has been institutionalised, even by the leadership.  And that “if gold could rust, what would iron do?”

Others posit, that the root of the escalation in the rate of corruption is the nations adoption of false federalism that is dependent on the export of crude oil which proceeds are eventually distributed among the federal government, the states and the local councils, but that with true federalism, whereby the various states are encouraged to exploit their resources, and develop at their pace, as is done elsewhere, corruption would be reduced. In fact they posit that with the level of rot in the oil sector corruption cannot be controlled because dependence on the sector is an impediment to the development of other sectors.

This, they argue, explains why the National assembly and the Execution arm of government are at variance in stipulating the Presidency. One group believes that if not for mutual suspicion over motives of the actors, should there be bickering on the benchmark which has now become subject of debate to the extent that the House of representative has warned the Presidency not to play politics with the benchmark for the 2013 budget and that its decision to peg the oil benchmark at $80 was final? There has been a lot of discussion on this crucial issue of crude oil benchmark. The House of Representatives pushed up the benchmark from the $75 proposed by the presidency on account of the allegation that some people benefited directly from the sharp practices there. According to the Reps its position was informed by the need to reduce internal borrowing.

However, while defending the proposal by the Presidency, Minister of Finance Dr. Ngozi Okojo Iweala had warned that benchmark price is professionally and technically determined, citing Chile where a committee of experts determine their benchmark.

Though the Minister seemed to have advanced enough convincing reasons, like the fact that a $75 benchmark would make the economy less susceptible to economic down turns, enhance savings that could boost our foreign reserves to hit the $50bn target by year’s end, the lawmakers seem not to be impressed. Since the House considers its stand on the issue as final, a committee could be raised to handle the matter like is done in Chile, a proposal the outspoken Governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria, Lamido Sausu Lamido had supported.

We should not shy away from borrowing ideas from other climes for the betterment of our people. Thus, in fighting corruption, more active roles should be played by the institutions like the Police, the Independent Corrupt Practice Commission (ICPC) and the EFCC charged with responsibility to fight the malaise.

I believe it was in exasperation over the cankerworm that in its proposal to the National Assembly on the review of the constitution, the Arewa Consultative Forum ACF, suggested capital punishment for those found guilty of corruption.

 The group argued, it was reported, that since “The law classifies crimes according to the severity of their consequences both on the individual victim, the community or the country. If crime holds a high potential to gravely harm or kill its victim, the more severe the punishment, which was designed to punish and deter offenders.

This is to say that punishment must always fit offences. One crime that has proved capable of gravely harming or killing its victims is corruption. Sadly, our laws have not recognised corruption for what it is. ACF recommends that corruption be recognised as a capital offence and made to carry capital punishment”.

I agree no less with the ACF because it is corruption that creates the out of stock syndrome that has made our hospitals useless while costly air disasters could have been averted, if not for corruption. What about the dangers brought on the populace by the collaboration of an importer and his customs accomplice who looks the other way while adulterated and substandard drugs are allowed to cross our borders along with arms and ammunition. Thus, while the constitution is being amended, effort should be made by the relevant authorities to institute social welfare facilities for the less privileged to forestall a situation where the growing divide between the rich and poor and the apparent restlessness and sense of anomie does not result into implosion which could be harmful to the country, all because of pervasive nature of corruption, particularly in high places.