FEDERALISM AND NATIONAL QUESTION IN NIGERIA · 2017-07-16 · Federalism and National Question in Nigeria Sahel Analyst: ISSN 1117- 4668 Page 137 Conceptual analysis The term federalism

Sahel Analyst: ISSN 1117-4668 Page 135

FEDERALISM AND NATIONAL QUESTION IN NIGERIA

Okunola Muyiwa Olabode1

Abstract

The political history of Nigeria and its attendant challenges could be traced to

the period of the amalgamation in 1914. The pattern of integration since the

amalgamation of Southern and Northern Nigeria had hindered the

achievement of shared values, mutual trust and common national identity.

Thus, the bloody Nigerian civil war from 1967-70 had explained consequence

of structural defect and other challenges inherited from the colonialist by

political elites and unequal struggle for power which provide strong support

for the thesis of the inevitability of instability since independence. The paper

explains that Nigerian federal system merely exists in principle, as what is in

practice in Nigeria today is superficial federalism. The polarisation and

instability in Nigerian federation today arose from the brazenly sectarian

behavior of the ethno-military governments that ruled the nation from 1984-

1999. Exploring secondary data, the study examines Nigerian federalism and

its consequential effect on National question. The paper concluded that the

modality for the harmonious relationship among the federating-States cannot

be achieved without first addressing some issues like the structure of the

federation, management of the economy, power sharing and resources re-

distribution etc. The author added that resolving these issues will not only

ensure political stability but stimulate healthy fiscal competition among

regions or states. The author proffered compliance to the rule of law and

constitutionalism, devolution and decentralisation of powers to states or

regions as envisaged by the country’s founding fathers as the best ways

towards desire national integration.

Keywords: Federalism, Minority Problems, National Question, State-

Creation and Sovereign National Conference

Introduction

Nigeria is a product of British colonial creation that was established out of

sheer necessity. It is generally believed that the country‟s population is more

than 170million with over 250 ethnic groups unevenly distributed over a

national territory of 923770sq.km comprising 36 states and Abuja. “Nigeria

1 Department of Political Science, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, Federal

University Kashere, P.M.B 0182, Gombe - State. [email protected]

08030623394

Sahel Analyst: Journal of Management Sciences (Vol.15, No.2, 2016), University of Maiduguri


has been established by necessity and remains by choice a federal state”

(UNCED, 1992). However, since it became a sovereign state more than five

decades ago, the country‟s democracy has remained fragile, with centripetal

and centrifugal forces exerting their pressure on the polity for the control of

the nation‟s resources. At 56 years of nationhood, the country is still facing

multiple crises ranging from economic, political, insurgency, corruption,

militancy in the Niger Delta area, resource re-distribution, high rate of

unemployment and insurgency and militancy. It was these challenges that

eminent Jurist Akinola Aguda in October (2000:26) lamented, one thing is

certain the present edifice called Nigeria as we know it today has come nearly

to the end of its life. The cracks on the walls are too great for the edifice to

continue to stand.

Basically, the colonial origins and the foundation of Nigerian federalism are

two fundamental factors critical to understanding the challenges associated

with Nigerian federalism and origin of National Question. The British

introduced divide and rule politics in Nigeria and thus refused to build on

organised structure of pre-colonial Nigerian setting, Dimo (2001) asserted:

Colonial administration, directly and indirectly Institutionalised

Socio- political conflicts between the different Ethnic groups and

between the different religious groups. Ethnocentrism, parochialism

and sectionalism were bequeathed to the Nigerian people through

the Introduction of discriminating policies by the colonial master.

Moreover, parts of the National question in Nigeria today are political

struggles for the control of the centre between the North and the South, which

predated January 1914 amalgamation. Perhaps, these enormous challenges

were the reason why prominent political actor described it a “mistake of

1914” (Bello, 1962). The contentions of the National question in Nigeria were

set of unresolved issues facing the country since her nationhood. This paper

therefore attempts a critical analysis of the meaning, component and the

dimension of Nigerian National question. It further examined the challenges

as it affects the stability of the country and democratic consolidation. Finally,

some efforts that hopefully, would assist in finding solutions to the challenges

are suggested and the concluding remark follows

Scope of work The scope of this work covered pre-colonial period, colonial and post-

independent period of the present thirty- six (36) states structured system. The

research paper covered various fundamental problems confronting Nigerian

centralised federal system and the consequential effect of National question as

the search of National cohesion continues.

Federalism and National Question in Nigeria

Sahel Analyst: ISSN 1117- 4668 Page 137

Conceptual analysis

The term federalism is derived from the latin word, (foedus) meaning pact or

agreement. Fundamentally, federation is not like a confederation where a

member can pull out of the union when dissatisfied. Simply put, federation is

a permanent union and it is illegal for a unit to secede, withdraw or threaten to

withdraw from the union unless there is a written agreement to do otherwise

in future. Livingston (1952:81-95) asserted;” the essence of federalism lies not

in the institutional or constitutional structure but in the society itself”.

However, federalism as a concept has various definitions and meanings.

Wheare (1964:112) added; … Any definition of federal, government which

fails to include the United States of America would therefore be condemned

as unreal…for the federal principle has come to mean what it does because

United States has come to be what it is.

A federation is established when there is a treaty or mutual agreement

between dependent states and the new unit of government, which they agree

to, create. According to Kapour (2011:377), a states is, thus, created to which

the hitherto sovereign States surrender this Sovereignty and agree to become

its component parts, Known by different Names-States in the United States,

Australia and Indian Provinces, Canada and Pakistan, Cantons in Switzerland,

Union Republics in the erstwhile Soviet Union and the Lands (Lander) in the

former German Federal Republic in different federal states.

Federalism is about how the various units that form the federation are

autonomous and enjoying some measure of independent and self governing

without any distraction from the centre. The ideology is anchored on a balance

arrangement between unitary and confederation. It is against this background

that federalism offered the best way of accommodating multi-ethnic and

pluralistic nature of Nigerian federation. Perhaps, Nigeria, Malaysia, Indian

are the only countries in the world where a federation has survived the early

years of decolonisation period in any recognisable form. In these countries,

however, “the federal principle had to operate under severe strains, and it has

assumed a highly centralised form” (May hood, 1984). Federalism as a system

of government was best suitable for the process of building political unity

within a diverse multi-ethnic, cultural and different background. In fact,

federalism by nature is meant to strengthen the component units and enable

them to be centre of development. But the Nigerian type of federalism dictates

the reverse. Fundamentally, the idea in power sharing among the federating

units is to strike harmonious balance between the centrifugal force of the units

and centripetal forces of the centre” Udenwa, (Daily independent December

21, 2005:88)



Theoretical analysis

Cultural pluralism theory was adopted to analyse and explain Nigerian

political system before colonisation, colonial period and wide ranging issues

that ensued immediately after independent. Among other theories like

modernisation, dependency, neo-Marxist etc, cultural pluralism model remain

the best approach to discuss the fundamental problems confronting Nigerian

federation which arose as a result of Lord Lugard amalgamation and various

decolonisation policies, economic and diverse ethnic groups vying for control

and domination in Nigeria. The approach explains the multi-cultural and

people with different background and orientations that were forcefully

brought together under a centralised political system. The development has

turned the peaceful existing relationship into intense competition for state

resources among the dominant ethnic groups.

The theory emphasises the ever continuing aggressiveness and competition

among various cultural groups in the country (Ezera, 1964). This approach in

terms of political life better explain how African countries and Nigeria in

Particular organised by the desire of various ethnic groups to further and

protect their ethnic domain with selfish motive. Thus, the attitude of behavior

of people in power today is influenced by particularistic considerations. This

creates a tug- of- war in a political arena and the intensity of conflicts based

on particularistic claims ultimately leads to situation of instability

(Mackintosh, 1966). Arguably, this theory has been criticised for being static

and a historical yet; it has remained the best model to explain the past and

contemporary Nigerian‟s problems and African instability in general.

The term National question is a multiple of questions relating to the common

belief and political well being of Nigerian-state. According to Ajayi (1992:14)

“the National question is the perennial debate as to how to order the relations

between the different ethnic, linguistic and Cultural grouping, so that they

have the same privileges, access to power and equitable share of national

cake”. Thus, national question relates to the problem of integrating people

with different ethnic and cultural background that formed a federation to

accept value of consensus and harmonious relationship that are very

instrumental to the social economic well being In another view, National

Question involves “the challenges and dilemmas associated with

accommodating multiple identity communities with the framework of a single

integrated National political system” (Suberu, 2002).

National question in Nigeria arose from the inherent contradictions of

Nigerian federalism and by extension the failure of political class to evolve

effective mechanism for managing the national question which led to

unimaginable crises for decades. Admittedly, various past governments had

put in place various policies aimed at tackling the worst manifestation of



National question since the end of the civil war but Nigerians particularly the

elites have failed to act in the spirit of those policies. National question is

about justice and the rule of law and absence of these two fundamental facts

will resort to high degree of impunity, unrest and development of ethnic

nationalism. These had been the situation since Nigeria returned to democratic

rule in 1999. The crises had been from sharia crisis, resource control to

economic recession and insurgency. There is no doubt that the current

challenges facing the nation today were due to inability of the past leaders to

tackle the fundamental issues inherent in national question. This day,

everyone is now conscious about primordial ethnic groups before thinking of

Nigeria as a Nation. The resultant effect was the emergence of militant and

ethnic groups like Arewa, Afenifere and Ohaneze indigbo/ to promote their

sectional and ethnic ideology.

Evolution of Nigerian Federalism and the Emergence of National question

The birth of Nigeria was coincided with the beginning of legitimate trade

towards end of the nineteenth century. The 1884 /85 Berlin conference where

African were partition among Europeans power set the stage for colonisation

of the area known as Nigeria. After series of pacification, conquest and

subjugations, the British imperialist firmly entrenched their control over the

inland river valleys and surrounding areas with the charter of the Royal Niger

Company in 1899-1900. Thus, in 1900, Britain formally took over the control

of the three protectorates; the colony of Lagos, the Niger coast protectorate

and the Royal Niger Company‟s territories. Moreover, “these areas continued

to be administered differently and separately by Britain until 1906 when they

were redrawn into Northern and Southern protectorate” Uzoigwe (1961:1).

The amalgamation has remained a contentious issue in the political history of

Nigeria as both the Northern and the Southern regions manifested the

attributes of two cities. This was the beginning of country‟s challenges.

Arguing this position, Joshua (2000:76) posited; Institutionally,

administratively, traditionally, cultural and Developmental Nigeria remained

fragmented; the amalgamation debacle seems to be starting for a hardening of

north/south perception. The perceptions often Prejudice of Northern British

administrators, were to evolve in the year Independence into ethnic

chauvinism and allow the politics of ethnicity to dominate the creation and

formative years of independent Nigeria.

Notwithstanding, the obvious flaws of the amalgamation, Nigeria officially

came into existence on January 1, 1914. The unification of these two entities

was not for unity purpose but to ensured increase efficiency and uniformity in

the administrative process. In fact, the antagonistic duality and divisibility

which arose as result of the unholy alliance were deeply rooted in Nigeria



system that chief Awolowo “saw the two parts as divergently and almost

irreconcilably oriented” (Awolowo, 1968).

Consequently, as Lord Lugard run the two protectorates separately, he also

ensured that each province enjoys separate measure of identity and autonomy.

According to Tarka (1996) “when the legislative council allowed for native

Nigerian participation in 1922, the North was not represented on it”. It‟s not

contestable that the amalgamation policy marked a turning point in the

evolution of Nigerian- state as monumental crises facing Nigeria today were

as a result of the bad legacies inherited from colonial master .This was

coupled with the division of Southern Province (East and West) by Sir

Bernard Boundillon in 1939 which eventually marked the beginning of

structural imperfection in Nigerian federal system. The aftermath of regional

structure in 1946 gave Nigeria a federation status in 1954 after her adoption of

federal constitution. Invariably, it was turned to federation that was continued

“to be hunted by the twin forces of regional imbalance and the quest for

sectional security,” (Crowder, 1996). The emergence of regionalism opens the

gateway for sectional sentiments and loyalty. This according to Osaghae

(1989:443) was “built on the bogus theory of regionalism, that is one should

be loyal to and protect the interest of one‟s region to exclusion of others”. In

effect, policy of regionalism according to Ogunjemite (1987:226) “created

disunity by reducing the country into a tri-national state”.

Nowadays, national question has taken a new dimension for controlling the

government at the centre as political elites have discover that political power

remain the best option to have access to nation‟s treasury. The multiplier

effect of this is subsidy scam, Dansukigate and unremitted billions of dollars

to the federation account and other fraudulent practices. It needs emphasis

that national question manifest itself during and after colonial rule and “in

terms of contradictions between Nigerian and imperialism; and between the

Northern and the Southern part of the country, and between the three major

ethnic Nationalities” (Mustapha, 1986).

Presently, dominant tribes and ethnic groups seem not satisfied with

accumulated resources at their disposal. Similarly, the political elites could

hardly trust each other as Nigerian state was confronted with series of

unimaginable crises. Nigerian Political classes are preoccupied with hostile

competition for resources among themselves. These problems were

compounded by military incursion to Nigerian polity in early years of

independent. The development marked a new dimension in the history of

Nigerian federalism as the intervention impacted negatively on Nigerian

federal structure. It is instructive to note that the decades of military rule and

its attendant consequences aggravated the challenges of post-colonial Nigeria

thereby worsening the crisis of national integration. Obviously and today, the



Nigerian federation violated and negated in totality all essential principles for

a successful federation as the structural imbalance of colonial days still remain

at large. Ethnic factor and effect of military rule in our national politics have

contributed to the deepening ethnic cleavages we have today in Nigeria. These

inherent contradictions in Nigerian federal structure and its attendant

consequences had propelled series of tinkering and panel biting to enforce

National unity in the face of obvious challenges.

The National Question

States creation

There is no doubt that national question has had a greater impact on the

structure of Nigerian federalism. One of the effects has been a constant

agitation for state creation. In fact, the first generation of military rulers in

Nigeria from 1966-1979 rose up to these challenges by transforming the

country‟s deeply flawed and ethno-regional federal structure into a relative

more relaxed federal system. Consequently, the „legitimacy crisis‟ that

surrounded Lt. later Gen.Yakubu Gowon emergence in July 1966 and

opposition to his Government by Lt Colonel Ojukwu, made it a matter of

urgency and necessity for the division of the country into twelve states in

1967.Thus, in October 1970, while reflecting on the twelve-state structures he

had created in 1967, Gowon said: “I am satisfied that the twelve states

structure has , in fact produced a basis for political stability in that the

structural imbalance of the first republic has been decisively corrected”

Gowon (New Nigerian, October2,1970). This was supported by Ayida

(1986:102) that „the most sensitive potential threat to the stability of the

Nigerian federation was a…North-South confrontation, and it was of strategic

importance that the number of “Northern” parts of the country should be seen

to be equal to the number of “Southern” states. However, Murtala/Obasanjo

states creation in 1976 after overthrown Gowon from power and the

subsequent creation of states in 1991 and 1996 by successive Military

administrations violated and betrayed the general understanding that equality

should be maintained between the North and the south.

Thus, the effect of states creation and indeed the current thirty six states

structures in Nigeria has been hyper-centralisation of the intergovernmental

relation since “the greater the number of states the weaker and less viable

individual states will become with the direct consequences that the centre

would actually gather more power” Diamond (1987). Today, it is clearly

evident that state creation has not produce accelerated development but rather

another way of rewarding major ethnic groups in the country. In the view of

Editorial comment from Guardian “the states structure should be de-

emphasised especially by merging the existing ones to form regional blocks

(The Guardian 24 February, 1994). State creation and reorganisation has

admittedly corrected the structural imbalance of post independence. But



arguably, it has not completely and irrevocably assaulted the so called

“Northern domination, since the pattern of horizontal cooperation and

collaboration among the states and their government remains largely rooted in

ethnicity” (Akindele, 1996).

Over centralisation of power and resources in the central government

Over centralisation of power and resources in the central government

Centralisation of resources in the central government has remained a debate

among various scholars over the continued retention of the largest share of

nation‟s resources by the central government. The frequent take-over of

government by the military in the past years had worsened the problem. The

heavy concentration of fiscal power and resources in the central government

was partly responsible for unhealthy inter-ethnic, states and Regional tension

in the country. The grants-in-aids and other special allocation like bail-out

from the federal to states government has turned states to appendages of the

central Government. This in effect had ensured malfunctioning of the units of

Government, corruption and abuse of office in high places.

The raging crisis in the Niger Delta is one of the effects of over centralisation

of power which was occasioned by failure to adhere strictly to true federalism.

It was on this development that Akinyele (1996: 90) lamented; “the federal

control of the lion share of the national resources had also encouraged extra

budgetary spending which promote corruption and inefficiency in the

services”. Similarly, this centralising trend had equally produced intensive

conflicts and contradiction in various forms. These includes fiscal hegemony

of the central government in relation to subordinates unit, seizure and

unnecessary withholding of allocation by the federal government, limited

compensation for environmental pollution in oil producing community of

Niger Delta which had in effect produced unwarranted crises .Ironically, the

various successive governments have failed in their constitutional

responsibility to effect the needed fundamental changes to fiscal federalism in

Nigeria.

Corruption and its impact on economy

This is daunting problem facing Nigeria today. Corruption is one of the

obstacles confronting the growth and economic development of Nigeria. The

recent agitation from Igbo youths in Eastern part of the country for autonomy,

Boko-Haram crisis in North-Eastern part of the country and renewed

militancy in South-South region of oil rich Niger Delta are consequences of

bad leadership, corruption, high rate of unemployment and economic

meltdown. The country‟s economy is currently facing severe strain which

require drastic measure to save it from its steady deterioration. Virtually all

aspect of Nigerian- State has been badly hit by the harsh economy. The

looting, stealing and all forms of business vandalism that currently pervade



the country have worsened the economy. The country‟s democracy is now

confronted with institutionalised form of corruption and other social vices.

According to Ibrahim (2001: 83) Nigerian state has been transformed into a

patrimonial and one in which those who are in control of state power and

strategic bureaucratic offices use their positions for private appropriation.

However, the ongoing trials of some high profile cases in the country for

corruption had attested to the fact that Nigerian state has become a weak

edifice eroded in corruption (Lame, 2001). Basically, the current leadership of

President Buhari has taken up the fight to attacking and curtails the spread of

corruption with the reformation of Economic and Financial Crimes

Commission (E.F.C.C) and Independent Corrupt Practices and other Related

Offences (ICPC) in conjunction with other security agencies. But it‟s yet to be

seen how far the administration would go because of the lukewarm attitude of

the political class and some political elites who see the fight against corruption

as political persecution and vendetta.

National Security

This is another major issue thrown up by national question crisis in Nigerian

federalism. The National insecurity in Nigeria has manifested in various forms

in the past, these ranges from political killings, religious violence, armed

robbery and kidnapping. Presently, the threat declaration for Biafra autonomy

by Indigbo youths in the eastern region, militancy in the Niger Delta,

insurgency in the North-Eastern Nigeria and rampage Fulani headsmen attack

all remain National threat.

Nevertheless, economic crises, Fulani headsmen crises and Boko-Haram

(meaning that western education is forbidden) are now daunting security

problems confronting the nation. The group was formed in 2002 with Yusuf

Mohammed as the leader. Their initial aim was to propagate Islamic teaching

and opposed western ideology but later intensify to establish Islamic Caliphate

in the North- Eastern axis of the country. Consequently, the group changed

violently in 2009 when its leader was executed. As a result of this, many lives

have been lost. Report by the “Amnesty International shows that over 17,000

mostly civilians had been killed since 2009 while at least 2,000 women and

girls have been abducted since the start of 2014” Okobi (Tell November 2,

2015:24).

Related to this was the abduction of secondary school girls who were between

16 and 17 years old in Chibok, Bornu-State on April 14, 2014 by this militant

group. From January 2017 to date, hundreds of lives have been lost including

Security agents while thousands are still being camped in various internal

displaced centers (IDC) across Yobe, Bornu-state and its environs. Though,

security forces had weakened their strength and recovered lost territories but



still pose serious threat to peace and national security. National security is a

global concern, as it can be a threat from neighboring countries. In Nigeria

today, poverty, diseases, hunger, insecurity, frustration, unemployment,

infrastructural decay and above all, corruptions and economic melt-down are

non-conventional threats which have become part of National security.

Problems of Ethnic Minorities

Minority problems remain one of the recurring issues in the country national

question. The current travails of ethnic minorities have been shaped by

happenings in the country‟s recent and distant past. This is coupled with the

changes in the internal territorial configuration of the Country.

Fundamentally, the root cause of minority problems could be traced to the

“transformation of the three culturally and ethnically artificial administrative

regions of west, East and North in 1939 into fully autonomous units of a

federal polity in 1954” (Saro-Wiwa, 1992). The Willink commission set up in

1959 and other subsequent panelist to look into their fears and allayed it could

not mitigate their challenges. In fact, “the magnitude of Nigeria‟s ethnic

diversity has been presented by numerous scholars” (Sand, 1979). To

Onuwejeogwu; Nigerian is suffering from “hyper ethnic instability

syndrome”. And has moved further with observable data analysis for different

Nationalities to showcase his argument that:

Russia has about 27 ethnic groups and Indian have more than

40; France about eight; Germany about 15.The only place in the

World that has over 300 ethnic groups is Nigeria. This

uniqueness Create unique problems unknown to the experience

of other peoples Of the World. No western or eastern civilisation

has ever evolved a Political system that can cope with ethnic

instability syndrome (Onwuejeogwu, 1987).

Moreover, the military interregnum in 1966 and the overall effect of states

creation exercise by the military administration from 1967 to 1996 was

according to Baker (1994:16) “had an enormous impact on the federal

structure leaving a legacy of unprecedented dependence from which the states

have not yet recover”. This was also corroborated by Ken Saro-Wiwa

(1992:37) “that homogenous majority have been sub-divided into several

federally found states while many of the minorities have been corralled into

unitary…multi- ethnic states”. Today, many of the ethnic minorities states

have become theatre of inter ethnic clashes and communal strife. Similarly,

today the activities of rampaging Fulani herdsmen have changed the

dimension of the challenges confronting ethnic minorities in Nigerian

federation. The crises between Fulani herdsmen and their host states in

various parts of the country particularly Agatu massacre by Fulani herdsmen

in Benue state and now Southern Kaduna carnage better explain the problems

of ethnic minorities. Similarly, the failure of the successive governments to



give priority to ethnic minorities‟ problems particularly the Ogonis in the

Niger Delta area has been code-named as “Minority Question”. This had

resulted to militancy and constant destruction of oil pipelines.

In the past years, the initial peaceful protest and which later snowballed to

violent protest by the Ogonis against environmental annihilation and

degradation by the oil companies were resisted by the then military junta (late

Abacha). The aftermath was the hanging of Ken Saro-Wiwa and his associate

in 1995.The gruesome murder was widely condemned locally and

internationally. Suberu (1996:82) lamented; „the Ogonis execution

underscored the tragic limitations and contradictions of the contemporary

Nigerian practices of federalism‟. This day, major tribes and minorities

perceived Nigerian federation to be oppressive and illegitimate political

association that needs to be restructured. It‟s argued, if the aggrieved tribes

including (minorities) have had the choice, they would have opted for

confederation or better still dissolution rather than continuing with the bogus

and defective federal system.

National Conference and Sovereign National Conference

The former presidents, Obasanjo and Jonathan administration had set up

National Conferences (NC) in the past with no end result while agitation for

Sovereign National Conference (SNC) was indeed more pronounced during

Abacha military dictator. The aims of these two conferences are to address

fundamental issues confronting Nigerian federation. It was of the view that

declined of democracy, the rise of ethnic Nationalities and collapse of the

economy are all germane issues that once again question Nigerian post-civil

war federal unity. It was retrogressive, after fifty-six years of political

independence; the country is without a constitution drafted by the people.

According to Ben Nwabueze (2001:24-25), deliberations on constitutional

conference would revolve around a consideration of three broad option

namely, a federal system greatly reduced power of the centre, a co federal

arrangement, completely breakup of the country.

The protagonist of Sovereign National Conference on the order hand viewed it

as the best hope of molding together people with different ethnic origins

cultures and languages, while antagonists view it a prelude to disintegration.

They argued that the established democratic structures put in place could still

accommodate any new innovation that might likely be introduced to country‟s

political arrangement. Today, the divergent views among stake holders have

made the implementation of National Conference difficult. Thus,

establishment of Sovereign National Conference is no longer realistic as

political classes are more committed to the spoils than to democratic ways of

political interaction. Nevertheless, the country has remained undivided since

the final collapsed of the Biafra Republic in 1970. However, true federalism



remains the best political arrangement for Nigeria. And better still rigorous

reviewing of 1999 constitution which was the renew version of the 1979

constitution.

Conclusion

The paper has explained some major issues which constituted the National

question. And again, it has also examined some measures put in place to

ensure “unity in diversity” and to foster national cohesion. In a plural society,

federalism is no doubt about equality and justice. However, it was observed

that the proffered solutions to the problems facing the country have failed to

address the fundamental issues. Thus, state creation exercise and other

integrative mechanism have not mitigated the tension and disharmony that has

been threatening to dismember the federation. The country political problems

according to report “are not inherent in federalism” or ethnic pluralism, but

have resulted from the departure to practice true federalism” especially under

the centralising Military governments, Suberu (News watch 17 April, 2000:

23).

Recommendations In the light of this, there should be power devolution and decentralisation to

states or zones of the federation, where each of the zones should have some

measure of independent and autonomy for effective and productive federal

system. This was supported by Gen. Alani Akinrinade (rtd) (1998:49) that

“the apparatus built to maintain a monolithic and centralised state must be

dismantled, anything short of this is an invitation to another civil war in the

future”. Scholars and opinion have suggested if possible, merging and

redesign the present states together to form zones as it happened in the first

Republic. Significantly, appointment of Governor General is essential for each

zone for adequate representation at the centre instead of thirty six (36) federal

executives‟ council members. This would not only ensure national cohesion at

the centre but would also reduce cost of governance.

Moreover, it is imperative to enact laws that will prohibit North-South

affiliation which was engendered by federal Character principle; ensure rule

of law to consolidating the country‟s democracy through enactment of

constitution drafted by the people. Similarly, all ethnic Nationalities, religious

and cultural groups must be given equal opportunities to manage the affairs of

the Nation, and no ethnic groups should hold on to power endlessly or

dominate others. Attitudinal and unpatriotic attitude of the elite which has

made federalism a barren system in Nigerian must be corrected and checked.

The paper also call for patriotism and discipline leadership with commitment

to people oriented values and who can forge a sense of national cohesion

based on constitutionalism.



In other words, total war on corruption must be intensify and embrace by all

in order to put an end to incessant mindless looting and mismanagement of

public fund. This was supported by Jeffery Herbst (1996:166) „unless the (rot)

of the economy is halted, there will no prospect for democracy in

Nigeria...and integrity of the nation-state‟. Fundamentally, for true federalism

to take root in Nigeria, each state or region must be given the constitutional

latitude to operate and develop at their own pace. This would foster and

strengthening the desired unity and national integration in Nigeria.

References

Aguda, A (2000). “The future of Nigeria: Cracks in the wall”. The Comet

(Lagos) 1 October (pg 26) Akinrinade,

Alani (1998). “Transition: What Transition?” The Guardian (Lagos), 15 Dec.

( pg 49)

Awolowo, O. (1968). The Peoples Republic Oxford University Press,

London.

Ayida, A. (1970). the transformation of Nigerian Politics New Nigeria

October2

Archers, J. (2002) Nigerian Civil War and its Aftermath, Archer‟s Publishers,

Ibadan.

Akindele, R.A. (1996). “Nigeria in the Global market of experiments” in J.

Isawa Elaigwu & Akindele (eds) in Foundations of Nigerian federalism

(1960-1995). Vol.1 Abuja, (NCIR) FCT, Nigeria

Ajayi, J. F. (1993). “The National Question in Historical perspective” The

Guardian Newspaper lecture, Lagos.

Ayida, A. (1986). The Biography of a Soldier statesman; West Books

publisher Ibadan.

Anthony, I. N. (1996). “Unitary versus Federalism: A British Dilemma 1914-

1954” in J. Isawa Elaigwu &

Uzoigwe (eds) Foundations of Nigerian Federalism 1900-1960 Vol.2 Abuja,

NCIR.

Baker Pauline (1984) „the Economics of Nigerian Federalism‟ Human African

Research centers, Battelle Washington D.C



Bello, A. (1962). My life Cambridge, Cambridge University press, London.

Diamond Larry (1987). “Issues in the Constitutional designs of a third

Nigerian Republic” African Affairs, 86,343, 209, 22.

Dimo, C.O (2001). „‟Pluralism, Religion and Cultural identity in Nigeria” in

Odunmuyiwa (eds) Religion and Culture, NASR.

Ezera K, (1964). Constitutional Development in Nigeria, Cambridge

University press, USA.

Editorial comments (1994). State creation in Nigeria: the Will ink

Commission Report Retrospect The Guardian 24 February

Ibrahim J (2001). “Manifestation and impact of Corruption on Nigerian

society and Sustainable Democracy,” In Ibrahim & Odekunle (eds)

Fighting corruption and organised crime for the New Millennium.

Spectrum, press Ibadan

Lincoln, Joshua (2000). The effects of Federalism on Inter-group Relations in

Multi-ethnic State: Evidence from Nigeria and Ethiopia” An

Unpublished PhD Thesis Submitted to the Fletcher School of Law

and Diplomacy Medford, Tuft University U.S.

Lame, I. (2001). Fighting Corruption and Organised Crime in Nigeria:

Challenges for the new millennium Spectrum publisher, Ibadan.

Kapour A.C. (2011). Principle of Political Science: 7361, Ram Nagar,

110055, Chand and Company Ltd, New Delhi.

Herbist, Jeffery (1996). „is Nigeria a viable state?‟ Washington

Quarterly19,2”151-172.

Livingston, W.S (1952). A note on the nature of federalism. Political Science

Quarterly vol. Lxvii

Mustapha, R.A. (1986). „The National Question and the Radical politics in

Nigeria‟ in Review of African Political Economy, No37.

Makintosh J.P (1966). Nigerian Government and Politics Oxford University

press, London

May hood, p (1984). “The politics of Survival: Federal States in the Third

World”. International Political Science Review S.4



Ogunjemite, L.O (1987). Federal character as an integrative mechanism: The

Nigerian experience at the International Building‟ in Stephen,o

Olugbemi (Eds) Alternative future for Nigeria, Lagos, Political Science

Associations.

Okobi U.J (2015)‟ the many casualties of terrorism war‟ Tell November 23

Osaghea, Egbosa, E (1989) Federal character past, present and future in p.p,

Ekeh and E.E Osaghea (eds), Federal character and federalism in

Nigeria, Heinemann Educational Books Limited, Ibadan

Suberu,R.T (2002).The civil war and the Reconstruction of Nigerian

federalism‟ in John Archers (eds) “ in Nigerian Civil War and its

aftermath Archer publisher, Ibadan.

Saro-wiwa, K (1992). “Genocide in Nigeria: the Ogoni tragedy “London

series International Publishers.

Suberu, T. (1996). Ethnic Minority Conflicts and Governance in Nigeria

spectrum Books publisher, Ibadan

Sandra, A.O (1979). “Ethnic interest and Political Fragmentation in Nigeria:

1950-1976” Nigeria Behavioral Sciences Journal, 2(1&2):53-68.

Suberu ,R T (2000). Can the Nigerian Federation Survive? News watch

April17:23

UNICED (1992). Report on Achieving Sustainable Development in Nigeria”

Rio de Janeiro, Brazil,1-2 June.

Uzoigwe, G.N. (1996). Evolution of the Nigerian State 1900-1914 in J I

Elaigwu and Uzoigwe G, N (eds) Foundation of Nigerian Federalism

1900-1960. Vol.2 Abuja, NCIR

Wheare, K.C (1963). Federal Government 4th

edition in Wheare, k.c (eds) the

impact of military in Nigerian federalism New York: Oxford University

Press, London.

FEDERALISM AND NATIONAL QUESTION IN NIGERIA · 2017-07-16 · Federalism and National Question in Nigeria Sahel Analyst: ISSN 1117- 4668 Page 137 Conceptual analysis The term federalism

Documents