NIGERIA CENSUS: THE UNTOLD STORY

---

Nigeria plans to conduct a head count to determine the actual population of the country on March 21 through March 25, 2006. To accomplish this, activities and movement throughout the country will be restricted. 

Without a doubt, population census has remained the most sensitive and most controversial in the politics and administration of Nigeria. Many will be surprise to learn that it was the indirect cause of the Biafran civil war and the 1975 coup d?etat. 

For the 2006 census, Nigeria plans to spend $121.4 million half of which is contributed by the European Union. Already, controversies are raging on the plan to eliminate data on religion and tribe. The first census conducted in any part of Nigeria was in 1866, when British colonialists counted Nigerians only in the then Lagos colony.

 Another census took place in 1911 in both northern and southern protectorates. The first nationwide census was conducted in 1921, seven years after the amalgamation of the northern and southern protectorates by the colonialists in 1914. Following this, censuses were conducted in 1931, 1952, 1953, 1962, 1963 and 1973. 

The last census conducted in Nigeria took place in November 1991. Contrary to the projected figure of 100 million people, the nation's population was put at 88.5 million. As soon as the figure was released, a lot of eyebrows were raised. Like all the previous census results, it was terribly flawed. One such census was conducted in 1973. Those prominent Nigerians charged with this important project, like those before them, could not put aside tribalism, as a result, the resulting figures didn't even add up as those (military) in power manipulated the exercise to secure anticipated advantage in national revenue sharing and political representation. 

An earlier projection of Nigerian population, based on the 1963 census, put the population at 120.5 million. This same estimate was projected by international organizations. The final 1963 census figure put Nigeria at 55.66 million. Was Nigeria really 55.66 million in 1963? This question became necessary when considering a projected 120.5 millions and a recorded 88.5 million. How wrong was the figure in 1963 or how right was the figure in 1991? Otherwise why were these projections by several organizations so far off base? Overestimation of more than 40% is no estimation. One could as well simply pull a number from the top of his head or from the lottery machine and use that to represent the country.

advertisement

It is true that even in advanced countries, such as the United States, problems are encountered in the course of population count. 

Following the 1990 U.S. Census, several states and urban centers indicated that they were undercounted. The U.S. Census Bureau issued a statement acknowledging an error in the 1% region. Considering that sound economic planning in any society is based on a sensible census figures, how reliable are our figures? What are the drawbacks of such undoing? 

Perhaps to fully understand the census figures of 1991, it might be necessary to revisit the previous census figures of 1963. The first post independent Nigerian head count occurred in 1962 that put Nigeria population at 45.26 million. At the end of the exercise, northern Nigeria was 22.01 million while the south was 23.25 million. Southern hopes for reapportionment of legislative seats were buoyed by the results. When this result was presented to Abubakar Tafawa Balewa, the Prime Minister, who was a northerner, he rejected the result outright. 

Abubakar saw no reason why southern Nigeria should have been more populated than the north. He promptly fired the British representative, J. J. Warren, who was in charge of the census and usurped the position. He then called for a 1963 census. Following the recount, he announced that northerners were undercounted by a whopping 8.5 million!

The nation's population was reported to be 60.5 million, a figure which the census officials believed to be impossibly high. The figure was scaled down to 55.66 million. With this new addition, the northern figure ballooned to 31 million and this result was deemed acceptable by the Prime Minister, Abubakar.

The South did not waste time disputing the new figures. Following a little doctoring, the North was finally put at 29.8 million, a little less than the 31 million attained previously in the recount while the South was reduced to 25.9 million. In the recount, the East, Midwest, and Lagos remained virtually where they were in the 1962 census at 12.4, 2.5, and 0.7 million, respectively. The West increased from 7.8 million in 1962 to 10.3 million in 1963. 

The figures were rejected by both Premiers of the East and Midwest, M. I. Okpara and Dennis Osadebey, respectively. Okpara sued for the nullification of the census figures, but his suit was dismissed. Akintola, whose party was in alliance with Abubakar's party, accepted the figures. Not surprisingly, therefore, the West, like its political partner, the North, had a sizeable increase. It was this same 1963 census figure that led to the election controversy in the West in 1965. 

The aftermath of those doctored figures led to the crisis in the West and eventually the first military coup d?etat in 1966 by Nzeogwu.

Because of this selfish-and-win-at-all-cost attitude, figures that can never be replicated by any two persons are being thrown about everywhere. This is partly as a result of the undisciplined and corrupt political and economic environment, which in large part has given rise to an unprecedented wave of white collar crimes, such as oil bunkering, drug trafficking, and the advance fee fraud popularly known as "419" which is now the order of the day. 

In spite of its known flaw, the 1963 national Census figures have been continuously used by local and international "experts" in making economic, political and social welfare projections for the country! It is therefore not shocking to have power and telephone lines that are forever overloaded, because no one knows how many people they are serving.

In the political arena, politicians of today, much like in the days of Abubakar, have made politics a life-and-death affair. To them the end justifies the means irrespective of how subversive the means might have been. During the 1991 census, just like in any election, there were reports of the enumerators much like "electoral officers vanishing into the toilets and bushes with the results and later emerging with doctored figures." 

The passion for doctored figures is stronger now than before because the higher a state is in population, the more revenue allocation it receives from the Federal Government. This means that those at the helm of affairs must make sure that their states and ethnic groups are always higher in number to be able to receive the lion's share of the national cake. Apart from the oil revenue, with this posture they can justify their dominance in the military, political positions, contract awards, and the rest. 

The end result is that the country does not have a population figure that worth the paper it is written on. 

As in the previous results, as soon as the 1991 census results were released, the affected states, mostly the southern minority states denounced and rejected the figures. Again, like in 1973, these protests were silenced prematurely. The provisional 1973 figure released by General Gowon showed Nigeria to be 83 million with the overwhelming number in the North. Southerners protested, and the figure was again revised and reduced to 79.8 million. The final figure showed the Southerners to be just a fraction less than the Northerners. 

The situation became very explosive. Northerners protested and accused Gowon of treachery. The confrontation engendered almost led to a physical altercation between Chief Awolowo and General Murtala Mohammed, who became the champion of the Northern hegemony. The stalemate that resulted from that census figure became one major reason Gowon decided to postpone his handing over date from 1976. The 1973 census figure also became one major reason Murtala Mohammed had to overthrow Gowon's government in 1975, and promptly canceling the figures.

It is true that Nigerians have ways to deal with figures and numbers. As long as it doesn't adversely affect those involved, anything is possible. The 1979 presidential election, for instance, gave an added meaning to two-thirds of nineteen states, which became equal to thirteen states. With that arithmetic, Shagari was declared a winner of the presidential election. Whether this was inter-ethnic or intra-ethnic arithmetic, it was hard to say. 

However, to avoid a repeat of that arithmetical fiasco and to exert the numerical strength of the North, the military created new states and increased the number to thirty six, with nineteen in the North and seventeen in the South. 

Now comes the 2006 census. What should Nigerians expect or why should we expect anything different? As long as tribes in Nigeria continue to be distrustful to one another with competing goals, cultures, religion, and interests, etc., Nigeria shall never produce any census result worth the paper it is written on. 

Reference:

Mbeke-Ekanem, T. 2000. "Beyond the Execution: Understanding the Ethnic and Military Politics in Nigeria".
Udo, Reuben K; 2000. Population Census in Nigeria: Depoliticization

Gay Marriage: How Right is Obama

It is by now no more news that the American President, Barak Obama has voted his support for the American Gay community and their quest for legal license to Gay Marriage. 

The same subject when brought to the floors of the Nigerian National Assembly had the Senate rule it off with the excuse that the bill seeking for the domestication of the law in Nigeria is introducing an Un-African sexual relationship, with little or no regards to the fact that the bill seeks to protect the rights of a minority group in the nation.

We just woke up one morning in Nigeria and at the heat of the American Presidential race and campaign for the soul of American Voters, to our greatest surprise; the incumbent American President shook the world with his breaking news that he is all out to support the gay family and defense of their fundamental rights.

Some of such inquiries with a view to the prevailing political climate of America could be, first, is Obama’s political statement the current stand of his sponsoring political party, what has being the reactions of the democrats since the statement went public, are the Republicans relaxing or are they counting on the strength of the religious American voters to sway the democrats at the polls.

Trust the American democratic culture, after the presidential pronouncement, political research institutes hit the town running with polls and researches conducted up and down, sampling the public opinion on the resultant attitude of American Voters.

Obama's endorsement of gay marriage for sure may have been seen in most American political quarters as a political cum campaign overture towards wowing the votes of the American Gay Community, according to a new Gallup poll, it doesn't seem to be changing the American Gay Community in his favor.

Sixty percent of Americans say Obama's announcement won't sway their vote in the presidential election. But just 13% say his support of same-sex marriage will make them more likely to vote for Obama, while 26% say they are less likely to cast their ballots for him.

Not surprisingly, just 2% of Republicans say his decision makes them more likely to vote for the commander-in-chief, while 52% say they are less likely. The results among independents fall in line with the overall results.

At a post poll media chat, Jeffrey M. Jones from Gallup maintained that" Those figures suggest Obama's gay marriage position is likely to cost him more independent and Democratic votes than he would gain in independent and Republican votes, clearly indicating that his new position is more of a net minus than a net plus for him,"

President Obama’s then and now changing position on Gay marriage is an issue worth investigating, if not for any reason on will want to figure out why the Number one global citizen had to change his stand twice within the space of four years.

When Obama ran for President four years ago, he said he backed civil unions but wouldn't support same-sex marriage. But, the biggest surprise of all is the modern day wonders of the Obama Led administration, as the first black American President has set a new American record, as the first sitting president to argue married couples should be granted the same rights as heterosexuals.

Trust the American press on controversial issues when they hang around public figures, some left wing American press has branded Obama ‘American’s First Gay President’ but the burning issue is how right are these American media houses.

Another question calls to mind, is Obama the 'first gay president' as American press proclaims?

The opposition has argued that the occasion had given him opportunity to focus on strengthening American’s falling economy, especially, now that the Asian Tigers are pulling the world economy off the grip of America, than his controversial new support for same-sex marriage. 

Of a truth, both, Mitt Romney and President Obama had thought that American voters would have been silent on the same-sex marriage question, so that issues more important to most Americans, say (the economy, security, tax, etc) could become the focus of the 2012 Presidential campaign.

Why has American voters chosen less serious issues, third world nations would like the nations would be presidential aspirants to address, to be thrown behind them for a lesser survival issues that borders on individual privacy, does it mean the average American is more concerned about their private privacy right than a committed concern for nation building and survival, a food for thought for African citizens, especially, Nigerians at home seeking opportunities to shape public policies and the sexual orientation rights of their fellow citizens.

According to a new Associated Press-GfK poll, Americans are growing more pessimistic about the economy, and handling it remains President Barack Obama's weak spot and biggest challenge in his bid for a second term.

Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney said "marriage is a relationship between a man and a woman" and that he will continue to hold that view. Pragmatically as much as he could, Romney steered clear of the Gay Marriage issue and was of the opinion that Obama is merely trying to distract average American voters.

The Gallup poll revealed that 51% of adults approve of Obama's decision, while 45% disapprove. The survey was conducted among 1,013 adults.

The cover of Newsweek magazine portrays Obama with a rainbow halo and proclaims that he’s the “first gay president.”

A media publication that drew response from Americans first openly gay member of congress, Rep. Barney Frank of Massachusetts, whose opinion was straight, “It may be true that Obama is coming out on behalf of same-sex marriage this past weeks will not make much difference in November’s election.

"If you were going to cast your vote based on a candidate's position regarding same-sex marriage, you were already going to vote for Obama [or] Romney based on that,"

 "I literally don't think anybody's vote was changed by this one way or the other." 

Obama’s position on gay marriage may generate enthusiasm among his liberal base, it will continue to generate critical comment, including from some commentators on the left.

New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd said that President Obama’s embrace of gay marriage was not a profile in courage.

“Even when he does the right thing, by the time he does it and in the way he does it, he drains away excitement and robs himself of the admiration he would otherwise be due,” Dowd wrote.

The AP-GfK poll finds that fewer than one-third expect their household's economic fortunes to improve in the coming year, down from 37 percent in February. Eighteen percent see their finances as worsening, up from 11 percent in February.

New polling by the Washington Post and ABC News shows the same problem for Obama. In none of his major economic accomplishments – the economic stimulus package, increased financial regulation, and the auto industry bailout – does he win majority approval (47 percent, 48 percent, and 49 percent respectively in those three areas).

“That none of Obama’s major economic proposals garner majority support has to be worrisome for the president and his political team, who recognize that the incumbent’s stewardship of the economy will be the critical issue for many undecided voters in this election,” write Chris Cillizza and Aaron Blake in their Washington Post column “The Fix.”

American voters and some concerned political analysts are actively considering who the Gay Marriage issue hurts the most, as well as the question “ is Gay Marriage a vital campaign issue Barack Obama or Mitt Romney really needed.

Seeking who this stubborn American Gay Marriage political question on will bite harder on, could be x-rayed on two premises, while religion will shape Romney’s luck as well as Obama’s hope of victory hangs on the poll conducted by USA Today/Gallup poll team.

Given the trend in public attitudes, it’s relatively easy to paint him “on the wrong side of history” for his opposition to gay marriage, especially among younger voters (18-34), 70 percent of whom approve. American women too are more likely to be comfortable with gay marriage than men

Romney is a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saint, a religious group Americans fondly call the Mormons, a religious group who for their faith may not be ready to help convince their undecided members to vote against their faith and not even the more conservative voters in their ranks.

The Mormon Church is opposed to same-sex marriage, believing that “homosexual and lesbian behavior is sinful,” Romney stressed that his long-standing opposition to same-sex marriage is “based entirely upon a civil understanding of the needs of a society like our own.”
 
But while 13 percent say Obama’s shift will make them more likely to vote for him, twice as many – 26 percent – say it will make them less likely to give him their vote.

Perhaps more significant in a very close race, those “less likely” voters include 10 percent of Democrats and 23 percent of Independents.

Violence Free Society Is Morally Stable……NWAKA

Delta State Commissioner in-charge of the Bureau for Special Duties, Dr. Tony Nwaka has said that society that is morally and spiritually attuned would be less vulnerable to violence.

Dr. Nwaka stated this in Asaba while briefing the press on the activities of the bureau.

He said that the bureau for supervises the activities of the Muslim and the Christian Pilgrims Welfare Boards in the state.

Dr. Nwaka said that Delta State Governor had sponsored 101 muslim pilgrims for the year 2011 Hajj operation Jeddah and Mecca, adding that the board also assisted in coordinating the participation of 74 privately sponsored pilgrims to attend the pilgrimage.

The Commissioner disclosed that about 1060 Christian Pilgrims were sponsored to Holy Land in Israel and 29 pilgrims to Rome for Catholic pilgrimage.

He said that the office of the State Fire Services which is an arm of the bureau attended to 385 fire calls, adding that apart from some lives saved, property worth over N12 Billion were rescued in 2011.

The Commissioner further stated that the Combined Quick Response Scheme was established to provide an enabling environment for public and private sector to fight occurrence of fire incidence in the state.

Dr. Nwaka disclosed that government had given relief material and other grants through the State Emergency Relief Agency (SERA) to different communities confronted with various natural or man-made disasters including communal crisis across the state

According to the commissioner, the beneficiaries of the relief grants included Ayakoromor, Ododegho in Ughelli North Local Government Area, Bolou-Ndoro, Torugbenein in Burutu Local Government Area, and Commercial Centre in Bomadi among others.