ARE WE STILL TALKING ZONING?
In a democracy, an appointment is not the same thing as an open election from which is produced a winner, even if both relate to the same office. An adopted child is entitled to all the love, care, protection and support of his foster family but that does not deny the fact that his genes do not necessarily have a semblance with those of his parents.
What is mine by inherittance does not quite change regardless of my social affiliation, it is settled. It is often because people know there is very little they can do to bar a natural beneficiary that they resort to blackmail, assasination and other deadly options, as is now playing out with the case of Jonathan.
There is a world of difference between what Jonathan represents and what zoning advocates canvass. It is called MANDATE, secured through participation in an election in which Jonathan emerged as vice president with a natural ascendancy prospect, constitutionally guaranteed, consequent on well defined scenarios, among which are resignation, incapacitation or the demise of his principal.
Honestly, certain people should be in jail over this twisted issue of zoning. Whereas majority of us were not openly aware of the zoning arrangement, the same party that adopted it, has since come to say it shall be maintained, except that in recognition of the peculiar circumstances that threw up the incumbent President, he is at liberty to contest. All this galivanting about the issue therefore amounts to subvertion, indiscipline, anti-party activity, a threat to national security and a breach of the peace.
It is an embarassment that the PDP has not deemed it necessary to call the drifters in its fold to order or sanction them appropriately, including withdrawal of membership or denial of candidacy. Likewise security agencies should warn those heating up the polity of the dire consequencies.
In fact, the issue of zoning being thrown up in the way and manner we continually witness is annoying because it is first and foremost not a binding national legislation and remains vague in many respects including tenure, parameters for considering eligibility, order of succession as has become evident in the Jonathan saga, and so on, in short a lot more work needs to be done, if at all, as against the present whipping up of sentiments which is not going to take anyone anywhere close to enforcement.
That Bola Ajibola replaced Teslim Elias as Nigerias representative at the Hague world court, does not equate with the zoning we contend, afterall that situation played out very well in our democracy as Ibrahim Mantu can testify, having remained deputy to three senate presidents of eastern extraction. We just cannot wish Jonathan away, because this is more than 'doctrine of neccessity', it is the basic and superior rule of our constitution.
The people angling for power know clearly that unless Jonathan is stopped, he is set to win the election and so are seeking devious means to checkmate him.
Atiku and company ought to know by now that PDP needs Jonathan more than he needs the party and among the remnants shouting zoning despite the outcome in favour of Jonathan at the flawless presidential primary are people who do not believe in progress.
What was Atiku thinking when in 2007 he put PDP in a precarios state? A situation that saw to his jumping ship to join the ACN and was protected by the supreme court, I wont say saved, because PDP in government was entitled to a VP from northern zone, how come Atiku remained in office? Indeed the judiciary in some delicate instances, has put us on a tail spin, we see it wreaking havoc on our democracy. The PDP zone that had the slot of VP should have approached the courts alongside the party itself, then we would have known the truth about zoning, but no one looked in that direction.