Essay
By Pof. Mike Ozekhome, SAN
Introduction
THE first part of this discourse was essentially ontroductor. It prefaces what is to come with a discussion of the conceptual framework, with a focus on the foundational issue of law as analysed by such philosophers as St. Thomas of Aquinas, (“the Natural School of law”); John Austin (“Legal Positivism”); Roscoe Pound (“the Sociological School”); Jeremy Bentham (“the Utilitarian School”) and Oliver Wendel Holmes (“Legal Realism”). In today’s installment, we shall start off with the meaning of law and more on to National Integration. Enjoy.
Conceptual Framework
Law (continues)
The Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English, (The Living Dictionary), defines law, at page 909 as:
(1) The whole system of rules that people in a particular country or area obey.
(2) A rule that people in a particular country or area must obey.
The Black’s Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, describes “law” on page 884 as:
“(1) That which is laid down, ordained, or established. (2) A rule or method according to which phenomena or actions co-exist or follow each other. (3) Law in its generic sense is a body of rules of action or conduct prescribed by controlling authority and having binding legal force. (4) That which must be obeyed and followed by citizens subject to sanctions or legal consequences is a law. (5) Law is a solemn expression of the will of the supreme power of the State.”
We live in a democratic society. Our laws must be seen as reflections or demonstrations of the interest and wills of the people.
National Integration
National integration, or Nation building, or National cohesion, or National unity, or National Loyalty, or National patriotism or the National Question is quite a complicated phrase. It answers the question of existence. It has been seen as a process, and a means – depending on the idiosyncrasies and societal appreciation of the authors.
Jocob and Tenue, define national integration as “a relationship of community among people within the same political entity… a state of mind or disposition to be cohesive, to act together, to be committed to mutual programmes.” They were referring to a society of people of living in oneness and harmony.
Viewed as process, Morrison said, it is a process by which members of a social system develop linkages so that the boundaries of the system persists (sic) over time and the boundaries of sub-systems become less consequential in affecting behaviour. In this process, members of the social system develop an escalating sequence of contact, cooperation, consensus and community (Morrison, Donald G. et al (1972). Black Africa: A Comparative Handbook. New York: The Free Press).
According to Elaigwu in Aderonke, (Aderonke, M. “Federal Character Principle as a Recipe for National Integration in Nigeria: An Overview.” International Journal of Advanced Research in Management and Social Sciences. Volume 2(6), 2013:65-84. www.garph.co.uk) national integration is determined
by the degree to which members and groups in a plural society adapt to the demands of national existence while co-existing harmoniously. On the practical note, national integration is a process, not an end in itself and it is usually affected by contending social forces. It is a process leading to political cohesion and sentiments of loyalty toward a central political authority and institutions by individuals belonging to different social groups or political units. It is a process whereby political actors
in distinct national setting are persuaded to shift their loyalties”
expectations and political activities towards a new centre, whose
institution possess or demand jurisdiction over preexisting nation-
state”.
According to Duverger, it simply means the forging of agreement among the members of a state on the extent of unity they wish to have as well as the type of political structure and institutions they desire. (Duverger, Maurice (1976). The Study of Politics. Hong Kong: Nelson Political Science Library. It is also seen as the consensus on the limits of political communities and regimes). It is also a “process of unifying a society which tends to make it a harmonious city, based on an order its members regard as equitably harmonious.” (Liddle, R.W. (1970). Ethnicity, Party and National Integration: An Indonesian Case Study. New Haven: Yale University Press). Etzioni (1965) has argued that a community can only be considered cohesive when it meets the following touchstones:
•It has effective control over the use of the means of violence;
•It has a centre of decision making capable of effecting the allocation of resources and rewards; and
•It is a dominant focus of political identification for a large majority of politically aware citizens. (Etzioni, A. (1963). Political Unification. New York: Holt Rhinehart and Winston. Poser: does this variable pay bare the meaning of national integration?. How do you recognize National integration?, is it by it’s antithesis?, What institutions or governance can National integration be easily inferred from?).
Karl Deutsch, seems to have considered these issues when her defined integration as “the attainment, within a territory of a ‘sense of community’ and of institutions and practices strong enough and widespread enough to assure, for a long time, dependable expectations of peaceful community.” (Deutsch, Karl et al (1966). Political Community and the North Atlantic Area, Integrational Political Communities: An Anthology. Gardens City: New Doubleday. Deutsch, Karl W. (1974)).
By living together as a community and resolving disputes when there arises, national integration seem to be in existence. Little wonder Emeka Odumegwu-Ojukwu sees it as ‘active nation-building’ which means “forging out a nation out of our diverse ethnic groups.” In his words, the failure to achieve this in respect of Nigeria is that: “Today, the result is that tribalism and ethnicity have become a potent source of friction, rather than diminish in the face of an emergent, virile and modern nation.” (Odumegwu-Ojukwu, Emeka (1989). Because I am Involved. Ibadan: Spectrum Books Ltd).
Ogunjenite, believes that national integration relates to the building of nation-states out of disparate socio-economic, religious, ethnic and geographical elements. According to him, this entails the translation of diffuse and unorganized sentiments of nationalism into the spirit of citizenship through the creation of state institutions that can translate into policy and programmes in line with the aspirations of the citizenry. (Ogunjemite, Lewis O. (1987). “Federal Character as an Integrative Mechanism: Alternative Political Future for Nigeria.” In Stephen Odugbemi (Ed.). Nigerian Political Science Association (NPSA) Publication. Lagos).
National integration is therefore the process of unifying a multi-ethnic country, not necessarily into’ a single-ethnic, one but into a united indivisible entity where primordial affiliations are made secondary for the greater good of the united nation. It can also be seen as the building of a national state but of disparate social, economic, religious, ethnic and geographical elements which entail the translation of diffused and unorganized sentiments on nationalism into a spirit of citizenship through the creation of state institutions that can translate into policies and programmes and aspirations of the citizenry. (Oni, M., & Ogundinwin, A Four Republics: A Critical Discourse of the Culture of Political Parties, In Osuntokun, A, Ukaogo, A., Akachi, O (Eds). Nigerian Studies- Readings in History, Politics, Society and Culture. New Jersey: Goldmine and Jacob publishers, 2010). (To be continued).
Thought for Week
“Society cannot exist without law. Law is the bond of society: that which makes it, that which preserves it and keeps it together. It is, in fact, the essence of civil society”. (Joseph P. Bradley)
A.
-October 04, 2023 @ 10:39 GMT |
Tags: John Austin Pof. Mike Ozekhome
