The debate on the national question may shape the 2019 general elections. Group Political Editor EMMANUEL OLADESU highlights the elements of restructuring that are germane to the restoration of true federalism in Nigeria.
Many questions abound about restructuring: how should Nigeria tackle restructuring? What is the role of the Presidency and the National Assembly in the exercise? Is comprehensive or wholesale restructuring possible? Can it be done piecemeal? Does the country require another national conference? Can restructuring be accomplished through referendum or constitution amendment by the parliament?
Issues that fall within the scope of restructuring are as diverse as Nigeria’s diversity. Legal luminary Chief Kola Awodein (SAN) said the major elements of restructuring include true federalism, devolution of powers, revenue allocation, regionalism, state police, and resource control. Others are the secularity of the state, rotation of the Presidency, role of traditional rulers, ethnicity, inconsistencies in the 1999 Constitution, the Land Use Act, the Petroleum Act, the powers of the National Judicial Council, and the adoption of six zone structure.
Last month, Lagos State APC expanded the scope when it drew attention to the state’s clamour for a special status. Its representative at the zonal meeting at Ibadan, Prince Abiodun Ogunleye, said the quest for a special status is a national issue because Lagos is the former federal capital, economic nerve centre and the fourth largest economy in Africa.
Eighteen years after the restoration of civil rule, Nigeria is yet to recover fully from the unitary legacy of the military. Indeed, military rulers dismantled the federal principle. Had the politically ambitious soldiers not disrupted orderly political evolution, perhaps, the country would have been more strengthened and consolidated on its stability to build enduring institutions of democracy.
Why federalism:
At independence, the founding fathers resolved to operate a federal principle to guarantee unity in diversity. In his book, “Path to Nigeria’s Freedom”, published in 1947, the late Chief Obafemi Awolowo identified federalism as the form of government that would be suitable for “the geographical expression.”
“Experts can propound learned theories as to why people having different languages and cultural backgrounds are unable to live together under a democratic unitary constitution. But, empirical facts of history are enough to guide us. It has been shown beyond all doubt that the best constitution for such diverse peoples is a federal constitution. This is exemplified by the Constitution of Switzerland, which is acclaimed to be the best and the most democratic in the world, since it gives complete autonomy to every racial group within the framework. The amended Constitution of the USSR wherein each republic becomes autonomous is able also an instance in point,” he wrote.
Under the 1960 and 1963 constitutions, the Federal Government legislated on the Exclusive List. Both federal and regional governments legislated on the Concurrent List. Also, the regional government legislated on the Residual List.
Military intervention led to what the foremost legal scholar, Prof. Itsey Sagay (SAN), described as ‘federal absolutism.’ The lopsided federal/state power sharing method foisted by the military affected seven items. They are the operation of the police, census, mineral resources, labour, trade and industrial relations, registration of business names, electric power and local government funding. Also, at a lecture in Ibadan in 2008, a political scientist, Prof. Dipo Kolawole, chided the power-loaded Federal Government for transforming itself into an octopus and a bully committing all manners of injustice. The former Vice Chancellor of Ekiti State University, Ado-Ekiti said: “Nigeria is a federation of an excessively strong central government, supposedly partnered by ridiculously weak 36 states with a Federal capital Territory supported by obviously ineffective 774 local governments. All other 801 governments combined are weaker than the Central Government.”
Frowning at the distribution of appointments, Kolawole added: “A situation where there is glaring lopsidedness in sensitive federal appointments is antithetical to true federalism. In Nigeria today, with specific reference to the centre, who dominates the Presidency, the Senate, the judiciary and the military? Is there any pretext to federal character principle?”
Core issues: Defects of 1999 Constitution:
The 1999 Constitution was produced by Justice Niki Tobi Constitution Debate Coordinating Committee (CDCC) set up by former military Head of State Gen. Abdulsalami Abubakar. It had barely two months to do the assignment in a nation of 120 million people, 36 states and 774 local governments. The constitution avoided the national question. Eminent lawyer, the late Chief Rotimi Williams described it as the worst document that lied against itself. It was a military-imposed constitution, which served as the false foundation for the current political dispensation. Under the constitution, the Federl Government has hijacked the functions of states and local governments. This accounts for the strident calls for its amendment so that it can regain a “federal face.”
Creation/merger of states:
State creation has polarised the country. Some aggrieved ethnic groups want separate states, claiming they are victims of oppression in their present states. They complain that they were lumped together without with other tribes without considering cultural contiguity and the need for identity preservation. Some groups are calling for state mergers. Some sub-ethnic groups want to join their kith and kin in other states.
State creation agitations are anchored by the elite, who thirst for an increased access to state power, resources and privileges. However, some towns, communities and villages have endorse the agitations because they want separate local governments. Historically, council creation is preceded by state creation. State creation agitation may be fuelled by the distributive practices of the Federal Government and a sense of neglect by minorities across the states. Putting this into perspective, Larry Diamond, a political scholar, said: “Ethnic minority fears and grievances centred around obtaining a fair share of the reward and resources of an expanding economy and state; contracts, loans, scholarships, processing plants, water supplies, street lights, schools, hydro-electric projects. Minority demands for separate states based on the belief, actively promoted by their leaders, that minorities were being cheated in the distribution of these resources by the majority-dominated regional governments.”
Although there is a popular argument that state creation should not be considered because many states are not economically viable, the argument has not suppressed the clamour for more states. The agitation for state creation is being fuelled by the feeling of marginalization. For example, the Ekiti people in Kwara State who occupy two local governments have not relented in their desire to opt out of the state and re-unite with their relations in Ekiti State, or a separate state is created for them and other Yoruba people in Kogi. In fact, as far back as 1947, Awo objected to groupings that violated geographical contiguity and cultural identity. He observed that the three regions-North, West and East- were constituted without regard to ethnological factors. “The Yorubas of Ilorin, Offa and Kabba are included with the Hausas in the Northern Region…There is no justification whatsoever for this arbitrary grouping. Certainly, these minority groups are at a considerable disadvantage when they are forced to be in the midst of other peoples who differ from them in language, culture and historical background. “ he said. As Awolowo also noted, “under a true federal constitution, each group, however small, is entitled to the same treatment as any other group, however large. Opportunity must be afforded to each to evolve its own peculiar institution. Each group must be autonomous in regard to its internal affairs. Acknowledging the multiplicity of states that may emerge under a federal system, Awo said: “We need not be alarmed at the number of autonomous states, which would thus emerge.”
The people of Ibadan and Ijebu have been calling for separate states. Ijebu’s and Remo’s claim is that it is the only province that has not been upgraded into a state in the country. In the North and Southsouth, aggrieved ethnic groups believe that state creation is the liberator from the yoke of majority ethnic groups. The East has a major complain too. They want parity, pointing out that it is the only geo-political zone that is made up of five states, unlike the West, Southsouth, Northcentral, and Northeast which have six each and the Northwest, which has seven.
However, state creation process is tedious under the 1999 Constitution. Unlike under the military, the procedures are very difficult. Section 8(1)(C) of the 1999 Constitution makes creation of state impossible. The section states that the result of the referendum should be approved by a simple majority of the states of the federation, supported by a simple majority of members of the Houses of Assembly. But, the constitution has not indicated how a simple majority of states can be determined.
Derivation principle and Resource control:
At independence, the revenue allocation was based on the principles of derivation, need and national interest. The formula was altered by the military. Then, the regions controlled their resources and remitted taxes to the Federal Government. Thus, regional growth and development were premised on proper revenue generation by competing regions. However, the Federal Government now has exclusive powers over the main sources of income, especially oil and mineral resources.
The question is: what percentage of federal collectable resources, including crude oil, solid minerals and Value Added Tax (VAT), should be given back to their sources? Should states, regions or zones be allowed to exclusively or personally own, exploit and tap the financial benefits of natural resources in their domain and just pay taxes to the Federal Government?
Currently, Item 39 of the Exclusive Legislative List gives the Federal Government the sole and exclusive power to legislate on mines, minerals, including oil fields, oil mining, and natural gas. The picture contrasts sharply with the provisions of the 1960 and 1963 constitutions, which described the three, later, four regions, as “self-governing regions of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.”
Sagay recalled that Section 140, which made provision for the sharing of the proceeds of minerals, including mineral oil, stated that “there shall be paid by the Federal Government to a region a sum equal to 50 percent of the proceeds of any royalty received by the Federation in respect of any minerals extracted in that region and any mining rents derived by the Federal Government from within the region.” Civil society groups have pointed out that, if revenue allocation by derivation had remained at 50 per cent, there would not have been crisis in the Niger Delta region because the states in the region would have had more resources to develop their areas, in view of the irreversibility of resource depletion and environmental degradation.
Also, in the First Republic, 30 percent of federal earnings from resources went into the distributable pool (for all the regions, including the producing region), 20 per cent went to the Federal Government; 30 percent of import duties went to the distributable pool; and import duty on petrol and diesel consigned to any region was refundable to that region. . Under the 1963 Constitution, 85 per cent of mining royalties and rents went to the regions while the Federal Government took 15 per cent. Today, the Federal Government takes 100 per cent. The agreed formula was turned upside down by succeeding regimes, which reduced it, right from the period of the civil war.
The revenue allocation formula is an issue of discord. There are puzzles: what should be the new sharing formula among federal, state and local government that will reflect their share of constitutional responsibilities? What should be the right of states in the ownership and control of mineral and natural resources on an underground?
Devolution of powers:
Many stakeholders want the Federal Government to shed weight. What items on the Exclusive Legislative List should be transferred to the Concurrent List to enable states have direct responsibility on state police, community police and prisons?
During the 1994 Constitutional Conference, the Committee on Power Sharing observed that the inequitable distribution of power between the Federal Government and states underscored a departure from the principle of federalism. It noted that: “In a country like Nigeria, with its diverse peoples and their corresponding diverse political, cultural and economic endowments, true federalism must reflect a genuine attempt to regulate relationship among the groups, as well as a reflection of these identifiable divergences within the framework of national unity. The particular complexion which a country’s federal system takes reflects its diversities, historical experiences and the disposition of its peoples at a particular point in time and each federating unit within a true federal system should have its powers and functions demarcated and guaranteed in such a way as to strike a compromise between local particularisms and national integration. The problem of power sharing had been responsible for much of the tensions, emotions, conflicts, stresses and strains in most countries.”
Over time, calls for devolution of more powers from the centre to the federating units have preoccupied the advocates of true federalism. One of the questions begging for answer is whether the Federal Government, the sole distributor of national revenue, should continue to exercise direct powers over the local governments. Many have also asked: what is the role of the Federal Government in agriculture? Who owns the land? What is the justification for the federal control of primary schools and local government through financial allocation?
Rejecting the obvious seizure of concurrent and residual powers of state by the Federal Government, the late Justice Kayode Eso said: “Over-centralisation of power invariably stifles local initiative, promotes inefficiency and a sense of over-dependence on the Federal Government. The paternalistic form of federalism, which is the order of the day in Nigeria, is not sustainable, in view of the ever growing demand on the dwindling resources of the Federal Government.” His colleague, the late Justice Ayo Idigbe, agreed with the submission. He said: “The maintenance of the authority of the states over matters of purely local concern was essential to the preservation of the supremacy of the federal power in all matters entrusted to the nation by the Federal Constitution.”
Over-centralisation of power by the Federal Government has created a culture of over-dependence on the Federal Government by the fledgling states. This has made the states to neglect the development of resources which the governments of the defunct four regions depended upon to fund their respective developmental programmes before the advent of oil.
Another contentious issue is the Land Use Act, with its injustices. The provisions of the Act violates the customs of many communities. For many states, it has become an avenue for extracting money from citizens.
State police:
Opinion is divided on state police. Politicians, lawyers and rights activists have pointed out that a united central police organisation makes serious and effective policing difficult and almost impossible. The chain of control in the Nigerian police is too long and remote from the centre of operation, thereby weakening discipline and resulting in an ineffective law enforcement process. Reflecting on the avoidable limitations to policing, Awodein (SAN) said: “The centralisation and unification have also resulted in significant delay in the administration of criminal justice. Today, the police is overburden as it is responsible for enforcing all federal, state and local government laws and regulations. This is in addition to its responsibilities of investigating cases, prosecuting offenders, controlling traffic and doing other welfare services.”
The opposition to state police is due to the likely abuse of the institution by governors. Many believe that state governors may use state police to intimidate and harass political opponents and perpetuate electoral fraud. However, majority of Nigerians agree that maintenance of public order and public safety in a federal country is a huge task that has made the decentralisation of security more compelling. In Nigeria, governors who are chief security officers lack control over the Commissioners of Police in their states. They rely on the distant Inspector-General in Abuja, the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) to maintain law and order. In countries like Australia, Canada, United States of America, and India, policing is decentralised, with functions allocated to the tiers of government.
Adducing reason for state police, former APC Interim National Chairman Chief Bisi Akande said :”We ought to have even moved from state police to community police by recruiting policemen from the ethnic groups to be served so that they live in the community, speak the language of the people and understand their culture and environment for effective policing”.
Local or community police formations may have sprang up in varied forms, owing to the pressing need for an alternative to the central police. Awodein pointed out that, in spite of fears expressed on the establishment of state police, there is the existence today of ethnic militias and vigilante groups performing the statutory functions of the police in terms of crime control.
What can Nigeria learn from other developed countries? In Australian Federation, the Federal Government has no general power over crime. Public order is under the jurisdiction of states. Local policing, especially matters of domestic violence, is a matter for the states. The Federal Government can only come to the aid of the state at its invitation.
In Canada, both the Dominion and the Provincial Governments have the power to establish their police. Only two of the 10 provinces maintain police services. The rest rely on the Dominion Police for law enforcement.
In United States of America, there is a parallel police; a federal police for the enforcement of federal laws and state police for the enforcement of state laws. This has created a challenge of rendition of criminals, which is being curtailed by cooperation among the states through the enactment of uniform laws on the process of rendition of criminals.
Federating units:
The question is: should the Nigerian federation be based on regions or zones as units or maintain the current 36 state structure?
Under the federal system, there is a “general government” or central government and component units that are coordinate with the central government. The former component units, the regions, were collapsed in 1966, following the military coup. Yet, there is a sort of emotional attachment to the defunct structures. Despite the collapse of the regions into states, there is the retention of loyalty to the regional arrangements that formed the federal union at independence. The clamour for regional economic integration by contiguous states sharing common identities, cultural values and aspirations is a fall out of the internalisation of regionalism without compromising the federal health of the heterogeneous entity. Thus, experts have canvassed two options, which are focal points of federalist persuasion in contemporary Nigeria. The first is the organisation of the six zones as federating units while retaining the present states as units of government within the zone. If this line of thought is accepted, there is the need to enshrine the six geo-political zones in the constitution. The logical consequence is that states within each of these six zones should be constitutionally empowered to create a zonal organisation for the management of common services, interest and promotion of economic and political cooperation. The second is that the states should remain as federating units.
However, it appears that regionalism is now old fashioned. There are indications that while states prefer regional economic integration, they loath a return to the old political and administrative regions. Shouts of gedegbe l’Eko wa has deep meaning. Lagosians do not want to return to Ibadan. At the recent Southwest stakeholders meeting, where the APC Committee collated views, majority rejected the push for regionalism, contrary to the suggestion by the Yoruba Assembly which had held a conference on restructuring at Ibadan. They called for the preservation of the 36 state-structure.
Second Republic Secretary to Lagos State Government Olorunfunmi Basorun observed that regionalism is outdated. “How do you now want the man in Zamfara, Sokoto, Borno to go and report now in Kaduna? How can you now ask the people of Edo to go and report in Port-Harcourt? Or Lagos, Ogun, Osun and Ekiti to go back to Ibadan?” he queried. Besides, regionalism may aggravate the high cost of administration and governance. “The states cannot wind up. Additionally, there will be regional governments across the six regions, with a regional government, ministers or commissioners and parliament. This will drain the purse of the government,” he added.
Form of government:
The debate on the form of government has also polarised the polity into three divides. A section wants the retention of presidential system. Another divide has called for a return to parliamentary system, which was practiced in the First Republic. The third group is canvassing a middle way approach, which means that Nigeria should develop a hybrid of the systems?
The presidential system is expensive and it permits wastage of public resources. In the view of Governor Rauf Aregbesola of Osun State, it may lead to doom. Under the system, electioneering is also expensive, unlike in a parliamentary system, where costs of administration and seeking office are comparatively lower. Many advocates of good governance have contended that a system of administration that does not provide for adequate measures to curtail executive excesses is prone to abuse and corruption. That is the dark side of presidential democracy in Nigeria. Under the current presidential system, checks and balances have been very weak, especially at the state level in Nigeria. Also, Aregbesola pointed out that party supremacy and party discipline can only be maintained under parliamentary system because the party system appears stronger under the cabinet system.
Parliamentary system is comparatively less expensive.
The Prime Minister is the Head of Government and a member of parliament. His ministers are also legislators. He will contest election from his constituency. However, there is no separation of powers under the Westminster model. When it was practiced in the First Republic, ceremonial President Nnamidi Azikiwe and Prime Minister Tafawa Balewa were usually at loggerheads. The personality clashes constituted a strain on the system.
Independent candidacy:
Should there be a constitutional provision for eligible citizens to contest elections without being members of registered political parties? The practice of independent candidacy has been popularised in British and American democracy. During the First Republic, it was also in the vogue in Nigeria. The Olubadan of Ibadanland, the late Oba Samuel Lana, was an independent member of the House of Representatives. He was appointed by Balewa as Parliamentary Secretary. In the fifties, when the late Abraham Adesanya was not given the House of Assembly ticket in Ijebu-Igbo, he ran as an independent candidate. He lost. Also, Akinola Aguda and S.O Awokoya, ran as an independent candidate, when he could not secure the re-run ticket for the House of Assembly.
Every politics is local. A community that has confidence in the ability of an individual may become a beneficiary of independent candidacy, if the individual is edged out of the party’s nomination process.
Local government autonomy:
Should local government areas be independent of states and have direct revenue sourcing from the Federal Government as the third tier of the federation? Should they be administrative units of states?
In Nigeria, states are at liberty to create and dissolve local governments, but the National Assembly reserves the right to list the newly created councils in the constitution. This, according to analysts, is an aberration in federalism. Many were taken aback when President Olusegun Obasanjo stopped allocations due to local councils in Lagos State for three years. The move crippled effective grassroots administration; local councils being the closest level of government to the people.
The push for autonomy of local government has polarised the polity. But, there are questions begging for answers: are councils not administrative units of the state at the grassroots? Is council a third tier in Nigeria? What remains of the state when the local governments are taken away? If the Houses of Assembly are empowered to create the councils, what is the basis for the agitation for autonomy? But, are the governors giving the local governments a fair treatment?
It is expected that states should also allocate funds to the local governments, apart from the funds accruable to them from the national treasury. Remarkably, during the Second Republic, former Governor Lateef Jakande of Lagos sustained the fiscal practice of allocating 10 percent of the state revenue to the 23 local governments in the state. The governor released the allocation, following proofs of genuine people-oriented programmes by the local government chairmen and his councillors. But, today, the Joint State and Local Government Account (JAC) is monopolised by many states, without consideration for the councils.
Awodein pointed out that some state governments have continued to subject the local government to great manipulations, including suspending their chairmen at will and threatening to dissolve the councils. Under federalism, the development of the local government falls within the purview of the states. But, there must be adequate constitutional provisions and safeguards to ensure a smooth operation of the system.
It is also wrong for the Federal Government to deny recognition to councils legally created by the House of Assembly by insisting on their listing in the constitution. This provision should be deleted. It is an abnormality in a federal system. But, complete autonomy for councils may be impracticable because of lack of institutional capacities at the council level. Most local government engineers are mere technicians. In many councils, accountants and treasures lack professional status. The pervading view among anti-autonomy crusaders is that political, administrative and financial autonomy for councils will aggravate corruption in the local governments.
Power sharing and rotation:
Should Nigeria have a policy of rotation of key elected positions on regional or zonal basis for national offices and by senatorial districts for state offices?
If this is adopted, what will be the place of merit, competence and credibility? Should these virtues be sacrificed on the altar of zoning?
The presidency has not been a symbol of national unity. Nigerians still perceive the number one citizen through ethnic lenses as “Hausa/Fulani” president, “Yoruba president,” and “Ijaw or Southsouth.” president.
To foster a sense of belonging, the 1994/95 National Conference recommended power rotation between the North and South. But, the zoning principle has not become a way of life in the states and districts. For example, since 1999, some minority groups have not been able to produce governor due to the disadvantage of number.
Type of legislature:
Does Nigeria need a bi-cameral or uni-cameral, part-time or full-time parliament?
In the First Republics, legislators served as part-time members of the parliament. They held on to their professions while serving as in the legislature.They were also not collecting bogus salaries.
Status of Lagos
Lagos is the former federal capital. It played the role between 1914 and 1990. It is still the commercial capital, and headquarter of many multi-national companies. There is a daily influx of people from across the federation, thereby making congestion a major challenge. There is a monumental pressure on the social infrastructure. Lagos is host to the major port. The highest VAT is generated from Lagos. Therefore, Lagos deserves a special status within the federation.
