Apart from the Mid-Western state created during the First Republic by the political class after a referendum, all others have been created by the military. From 12 states by the Gowon administration to 19 states under the Murtala/Obasanjo government, to 21 and later 30 states under Ibrahim Babangida and finally 36 under Sanni Abacha, no major state creation decision has been taken by the political class. Many have attributed this to the stringent conditions which must be met. Since the return to democracy in 1999, the agitation gas continued unabated. Now, about 30 requests are pending before the House of Representatives. Will these states be created? TONY AKOWE examines the latest agitation.
Section 8 of the 1999 Constitution makes provisions for conditions to be met before any state or local government can be created in the country.
It also provides for similar conditions which must be met for boundary adjustment.
For state creation, it provides that: “(1) An Act of the National Assembly for the purpose of creating a new State shall only be passed if-
“(a) a request, supported by at least a two-thirds majority of members (representing the area demanding the creation of the new State) in each of the following, namely –(I) the Senate and the House of Representatives, (ii) the House of Assembly in respect of the area, and iii) the local government councils in respect of the area, is received by the National Assembly;
“(b) a proposal for the creation of the State is thereafter approved in a referendum by at least a thirds majority of the people of the area where the demand for the creation of the State originated;
“(c) the result of the referendum is then approved by a simple majority of all the States of the Federation supported by a simple majority of members of the Houses of Assembly; and
“(d) the proposal is approved by a resolution passed by two-thirds majority of members of each House of the National Assembly.”
At plenary on February 6, Deputy Speaker of the House of Representatives, Benjamin Kalu who also heads the House Committee on the Review of the 1999 Constitution, reeled out requests for state creation spread across the country.
Even though he read from a list containing about 32 names, Kalu was to say later that the requests were 30.
The Nation observed that the request for the creation of Ogbomosho State was not on the list of states even though the bill seeking the creation sponsored by Olamijuwon Adedeji Alao-Akala has gone through a second reading in the House.
Kalu drew the attention of members with such bills as well as Nigerians submitting memoranda for state creation the conditions spelt out in the constitution for such requests to be considered.
The Northcentral leads the pack of agitators with Benue and Kogi seeking total balkanisation of the states into three parts each.
Demand for FCT state
However, of significance is the request by the people of the Federal Capital Territory for their state.
Presently, the President serves as the governor of the FCT, while the National Assembly makes laws for the territory and approves its budget.
In the last constitutional review exercise, they rejected a Mayoral position for the territory, while insisting they want their own state.
The indigenous people of the FCT have argued that the Nigerian state has discriminated against them even though the constitution forbids discrimination under any guise.
They argue they are the only people in Nigeria who cannot aspire to be either a governor, deputy governor, state Assembly member, speaker or deputy speaker of the state Assembly.
The new demands for states
The latest proposal is for seven states from the Northcentral, four from the Northeast, five from the Northwest, five from the Southeast, four from Southsouth and seven from the Southwest.
The states being considered include Okun, Okura and Confluence from Kogi; Benue Ala, Apa-Agba and Apa from Benue, FCT state, Amana from Adamawa, Katagum from Bauchi, Savannah from Borno and Muri from Taraba.
Others are New Kaduna and Gujarat from Kaduna, Tiga and Ghari from Kano, Kainji from Kebbi, Etiti from the five Southeast states, Orashi from Imo and Rivers, Adada from Enugu, Orlu from Imo and Abia and Aba from Abia.
The rest are Ogoja from Cross River, Warri from Delta, Bori and Obolo from Rivers, Toru-Ebe from Edo, Delta and Ondo, Ibadan from Oyo, Lagoon from Lagos and Ogun, Ijebu from Ogun, and Oke Ogun/Ijesha from Oyo/Ogun/Osun states.
Kalu said: “The Committee has reviewed the proposals for the creation of new States in accordance with Section 8(1) of the constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended).
“This section outlines specific requirements that must be fulfilled to mutate the process of State creation.
“Advocates for the creation of additional Local Government Areas are also reminded that Section 8 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended), applies to this process.
“Specifically, in accordance with section 8(3) of the Constitution, the outcomes of the votes by the State Houses of Assembly and the referendum must be forwarded to the National Assembly for further legislative action.
“Proposals should be re-submitted in strict adherence to these stipulations.
“The committee remains committed to supporting legitimate efforts that align with constitutional provisions and will only consider proposals that comply with the stipulated guidelines.”
Previous recommendations
The 2014 National Conference convened by former President Goodluck Jonathan made far-reaching recommendations on the issue of state creation.
Like many others before it, the Conference identified issues of minority questions, cries of marginalisation and the need for equity among others as reasons for agitation for more states.
The report said: “In the early years of independence, minorities in the country continued their agitation for the creation of their states.
“Over the years, the issue of the rights and freedoms of minorities and ethnic nationalities concerning marginalisation and exclusion has come to constitute a serious challenge to national cohesion and development.
“The sustained agitations have roots going back as far as the commencement of the amalgamation processes which culminated in the unification of the Southern and Northern Protectorates and the Colony of Lagos in 1914.
“In all, the ethnic minority and the National Question are, the products of the balkanisation of nationalities resulting in their spread across states and even international boundaries.
“However, despite the provisions of constitutional safeguards for the protection of minorities and other forms of discrimination, some minority groups have remained disadvantaged by lumping them together with powerful hegemonic groups who monopolised political and economic power – thus provoking their persistent and consistent demands for the creation of additional states and/or re-adjustment of boundaries in the existing states.”
According to the report of the 2014 constitutional conference, the subject of State creation has remained a huge political issue in Nigeria.
To address the issue, the conference recommended the creation of about 18 new states.
It said: “Conference examined the Reports of the 2005 National Political Reform Conference and the Report of the Presidential Committee on Review of Outstanding Issues from Recent Constitutional Conferences 2012 (the Belgore Report) and after wide consultations and extensive deliberations and in the interest of equity, justice and fairness.
“In addition, Conference therefore resolved that In the spirit of reconciliation, equity, fair play and justice, there shall be created an additional State for the South East Zone and that all other requests for State creation should be considered on merit.”
The conference also set criteria for the creation of new states.
It said: “Any new state sought to be created must be viable. In considering viability, any new state should be economically viable; it should have human, natural and material resources; it should have a minimum land mass/water mass; and the viability of the existing state(s) should be taken into consideration as well, so as not to create a situation where new state(s) would leave the existing state(s) unviable.
“It also said that state creation should be on the basis of parity between the geo-political zones to ensure equality of Zones. Additional States should be created in each of the six geo-political zones to bring the number of states in each zone to nine.”
It recommended the creation of Apa State from the present Benue State; Edu State from Niger State; Kainji State from Kebbi State; Katagun from Bauchi State; Savannah from Borno State; Amana from Adamawa State; Gurara from Kaduna State; Ghari State from Kano State; Etiti State from the present South East Zone; Aba State Abia State; Adada State Enugu State; Njaba-Anim State from Anambra and Imo States; Anioma State from Delta State; Ogoja State from Cross River State; Ijebu State from the present Ogun State and New Oyo State from Oyo State.
SANs speak
Constitutional Lawyer, Prof Mike Ozekhome (SAN), described the state creation move as a joke.
He said: “How can they be talking of creating additional states when over 2/3 of the present states are unviable entities on life support and are merely dependent on the federal centre for monthly oxygenation under section 162 of the 1999 Constitution?
“How can we be talking of going through the stringent provisions of section 8 of the 1999 Constitution for a meaningless exercise that adds no value to a nation gasping for existential breadth?
“How can they be talking about creating new states when hunger, starvation, squalor and melancholy envelope inhabitants of the present minion states that literally beg for crumbs from the Abuja master’s table?
“All that Nigeria needs now are only two things to correct the inherent injustices in our warped federalist system and move towards growth and development: one additional state in the Southeast to equal others; and a brand new Constitution that is legitimate, people-driven, autochthonous, credible and referendum-compliant to help correct our deep fault-lines and lopsided federation that make some states mere vassals consumers of the national cake without knowing or caring how the cake is baked.
“The National Assembly should immediately drop this provocative, funny and phoney butterflies-chasing and stop insulting our collective intelligence. Their present venture amounts to rubbing hot pepper deep inside Nigerians’ already bruised bodies of gaping sores.”
Former Second Vice President of the Nigerian Bar Association, Monday Ubani (SAN) said there was no justification for new states.
He said: “The motive behind the current agitation for more states is not a good one. Except for the Southeast, which ought to be given one more state to keep it on par with the other regions, Nigeria doesn’t require new states.
“Fortunately, the other areas where we require constitutional amendments are currently receiving attention from the committees that have been set up to look at constitutional provisions.
“These include the administration of justice generally, local government autonomy, revenue generation and sharing, creating a proper federal structure to strengthen the states and local governments and fiscal policies such as granting states derivative formulas for all mineral resources in their domain.
“The above are issues that deserve constitutional amendments, not the creation of states where such proposals have not met the constitutional requirements.
“Most existing states are not viable, so asking for new states is not in the country’s interest.
“It doesn’t make sense to ask for more states when many existing ones do not meet their financial obligations.
“Some of them ought to be merged to make them more viable.”
