In Nigeria, a range of voices have called for the review of the federal system of government. They include former president Olusegun Obasanjo; an academic and former electoral agency chief, Mahmud Jega; and a coalition of ethnic nationalities.
Nigeria’s federal system currently consists a central government headed by a president, 36 states headed by governors, and 774 local governments. The Supreme Court recently granted autonomy to the local governments. They were previously under the control of state governments.
Some of the political restructuring arguments have an ethnic colouration founded on grievances over perceived domination or marginalisation. The ethno-regional groupings in Nigeria champion different and competing demands for a restructured federal system.
The calls for restructuring have increasingly become a strategy of political elites angling for power and its associated material opportunities.
Reasons behind the calls include a perception of neglect of southern Nigeria which became heightened under the immediate past president, Muhammadu Buhari. The callers claimed people from southern Nigeria were left out of political appointments. Other reasons given are a high concentration of power at the centre, the revenue sharing structure, and demands for the creation of more states. Some have recently begun to call for the regional model that characterised the system after independence.
The calls have been coming since the post-independence era, that is for the past 60 years. They have come from citizens, politicians and ethnic agitators.
This call has been used by elites too. These are members of the political class whose main quest is political power.
As a political scientist I have conducted research, alongside a colleague at Canterbury Christ Church University, Dele Babalola, on Nigeria’s federal system and examined the arguments around the proposal for reforms. I conclude that while the calls appear logical, they are elitist and politically motivated.
The calls have been hijacked. They are now basically a tool in the struggle for power among the political elites – a way to mobilise ethnic sentiments for political popularity and access to national wealth. Constitutional reform might be necessary, but in my view it is not the primary solution to Nigeria’s problems.
The problem bedevilling Nigeria is a governance deficit. Nigeria has consistently ranked low in the World Governance Index in areas such as government effectiveness, political stability, the presence of violence and terrorism, rule of law, and control of corruption. Failure to address the fundamental problem of bad governance will continue to produce the same outcomes.
Read more: Nigeria has a democracy deficit -- corruption and a lack of welfare policies are to blame
Hijacked by political elites
Some triggers for the reform of the current federal system include growing security threats from separatist movements in the southern region. Examples are agitations by the Indigenous People of Biafra and the Yoruba Nation groups.
The activities of herdsmen unleashing terror across the country are also a trigger.
Minority groups have complained of political marginalisation, ethnic domination and the fact that the federal government wields enormous power.
Enter the political elites. These are politicians in different political parties across all the ethnic nationalities. They have amplified these calls for reform to serve their their own agendas, particularly after losing an election. Calls become muted from members of the party in power.
Read more: Nigeria has failed to marry its rich cultural diversity and democracy. Can it be done?
Improvement in governance is more critical
With the reform agenda hijacked by political elites, we suggest it should be ditched in favour of improvement in governance.
There are other reasons we think some of the demands are not desirable.
One of the demands of those calling for the reform of the federal system is for the creation of more states. This usually ends up satisfying some people and leaving others aggrieved.
Nigeria’s current 36 state structure is costly to run, given the nation’s deteriorating economy. Each state has its own bureaucracy which gets a monthly allocation from the federation account, derived from its share of national revenue. More states would add administrative expenses. It could also lead to the emergence of new unproductive and predatory government elites focused on the expropriation of resources.
Some have also called for a return to the three regions, like those Nigeria had in the immediate post-independence period. But that might revive minority apprehensions and bring new unrest. This is because concerns remain about ethnic domination and the minority question under Nigeria’s federal system.
Due to its intricate character and historical context, Nigeria requires a federal system that guarantees the preeminence of the central government over the states. The country needs a robust central administration capable of efficiently regulating competition among states for national resources.
In response to rising insecurity, there have been calls for the decentralisation and devolution of security powers. Currently, federal government controls the police and there have been calls for the states to control the police. Such calls, however, ignore the actions of the state governors in dealing with opposition and overt control of the political landscape. This was evident in how some governors suspended local governments’ chairmen.
I conclude that improvements in governance will deliver improvements in the lives of ordinary citizens more than the reform of the federal system. I think citizens are more concerned about good governance than the reform of the federal system. The calls for restructuring have been hijacked by the political elites. Good governance is a catalyst for national peace, stability and development.
The way forward
Sixty years after independence, Nigeria is still grappling with multi-dimensional problems such as poverty arresting its development. The structure of the state character may not be the source of the problem, and restructuring may not be the solution.
The calls for political restructuring are more political than developmental. I argue that leaders’ commitment to good governance is what can deliver mass-oriented development that can improve people’s living conditions.
Nigerians want a state that meets their security and welfare needs. This is achievable in an environment of free and fair elections, accountability, rule of law, and strong democratic institutions and transparency.
Hakeem Onapajo does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.
