UNITARY VERSUS FEDERAL SYSTEM OF ADMINISTRATION - Copy

UNDER UNITARY ADMINISTRATION:•The country is administered as a

unit.•There is one central authority

over the whole country.•Sovereignty is indivisible. •It is not shared between the

centre and the regions.

Complete claim of jurisdiction over the whole territory is given to the centre.

The centre and the regions are not co-equal.

The centre is superior to the regions. Any form of decentralization is for administrative convenience only.

Its divisions or organs can be extended, multiplied, reduced or abolished by the centre.

Countries with a unitary system of administration often have:

A flexible constitution whose provisions can be altered through periodic reviews.

A single appointing authority for all major administrative and political positions.

A single cabinet for the whole country.

A single legislature for the whole country.

A single judicial system and uniform laws for the whole country.

A two tier structure where:(i) Local government is created by the(ii) Central government.

The Minister of Local Government can, using a specific law, establish, suspend, or abolish any local council.

The centre can plan uniform development for the whole country.

With divisions much fewer than those found under federalism, the unitary system tends to be less expensive to administer.

Fewer divisions reduce vertical or horizontal administrative levels which tend to improve administrative coordination and communication.

The unitary system is convenient for small countries with a small population, for example, Zambia, Kenya, Uganda, Ghana Malawi, and Tanzania. There are190 unitary states in the world to day.

Countries that are culturally homogeneous, such as China, can also be very well administered under the unitary system.

It fosters national unity and acts as a check against secession.

The unitary system gives too much power and authority to the centre and, hence, does not encourage administrative democracy.

It reduces levels of inputs into the policy making process and, therefore, encourages elitist governance and administration.

Geographically large countries tend not to be easy to administer efficiently from the centre, for instance, Egypt or the Democratic Republic of the Congo etc.

While the unitary system emphasises administering a country as a single unit, the federal system stresses administration based on multiple units.

In a federal system, unlike in the unitary system, sovereignty is divisible and shared between the centre, the federal government, and the peripheries, the states.

There are three major levels of division: The centre, the states, and local councils. Local councils are creatures of the states, not of the central government as in a unitary state. The centre and associate states are co-equal.

The way or manner in which sovereignty is shared between the centre and peripheries is explained and enshrined in the constitution.

Foreign affairs is often the function of the central government. There is only one minister of foreign affairs for the whole country.

International treaties are signed by the central authorities.

Currency or coinage falls under the central government. There is only one currency, the Dollar, for example, for the United States.

Defence also falls under the jurisdiction of the central government.

No separate defence for associate states.

The federal administrative system, based on a more pluralist structure, is considered to be more democratic.

It allows more inclusion, participation and consultation than the unitary system.

While the unitary system is anchored on more centralism, elitist type of governance, the federal system is predicated on more decentralized, plural approach.

It has been found to be more convenient for countries with very large territories and populations, not easy to administer from the centre.

The federal system has allowed, in polyglot countries like the United States, cultural diversity to flourish unhindered under pluralism.

The United States, for instance, claims to enjoy great strength in diversity.

Federal constitutions often have safe guards not be changed easily and simply to entrench central despotic power and authority.

Multiple administrative units based on the federal structure makes the system more expensive to run.

More financial, material, and human resources are required for the federal system than in a unitary system.

The federal system is not very convenient for small countries. It can lead to fragmentation of very small, unviable units, not strong economically, politically or socially to stand alone.

Federalism can encourage some associate states to demand complete secession.

This is because sovereignty is shared between the central government and associate states.

It can lead to uneven development for the whole country since economic planning is permitted to be done in separate states.

Separate judicial systems may lead to difficulties in co-ordinating penalties or verdicts on convicted persons, unless extradition arrangements are put in place.