Why Nigeria Requires No More States

Follow

( 0 Followers )

X

Follow

E-mail : *

Follow Unfollow

Does Nigeria require more states at present? The answer to this poser, going by the existing socio-economic and political conditions of the country, is provided by Luke Onyekakeyah, a columnist in the Guardian Newspapers: ‘’If anything, the existing state structure has done more harm than good to the socio-economic and political development of the country. “We are worse off belonging to states rather than to Nigeria, as it was. It is a fact that most of the landmark developments found in different parts of the country were accomplished under the former regional governments. Agriculture, that thrived and placed the country on the world economic map, disappeared with the creation of states. Basic amenities like good roads, healthcare centres and schools that worked under the regional government disappeared with the creation of states. Besides, most of the states are destitute, depending practically on the monthly allocation shared from the Federation-Account. Without these allocations they will fizzle out on their own and would even seek to be re-merged with other viable states. Why then should the country be creating problems that are avoidable, when other countries of the world are making new strides in different spheres of human endeavour?

Onyekakeyah continues: Should we allow the greed and over-ambition of some individuals and groups to override the corporate interest of the country?

“As a matter of fact, if creating states is an experiment, we have tested it and found that it is anti-development and not working.

“The underdevelopment, virulent corruption, looting of treasury and hostility that have bedeviled Nigeria are attributable to state creation. A situation, where an Igbo man from outside Enugu State is regarded as non-indigene in Enugu; A Yoruba, who is not from Oyo State, has no say in Ibadan, and a Kanuri, who cannot walk tall in Kaduna, is dangerous for the country’s unity. We are already in a situation, where an Ekiti man has no say in Ondo and an Oron man cannot talk in Calabar, among others. Even within the same state, your zone and where the governor comes from determines who gets what.

“We are in a terrible situation and the federal government is pretending not to be aware of what is happening “. — Onyekakeya, Luke: published in the January 13, 2009, edition of Guardian Newspaper.

It would appear, those who drafted the Constitution knew of the insatiable appetite of Nigerians for the creation of states and local governments and therefore inserted cumbersome constitutional requirements and other procedures, which could serve as impediments to meeting the yearnings or agitations by politicians, ethnic and socio-cultural groups. Many of the agitations are based on sentiments. Absolutely, there should be no sentimentality in such issues. If states and local governments are created, as demanded, most of them would not be viable. Even now, majority of the states in Nigeria are not economically viable, thus relying on revenue from the Federation Accounts for their sustenance. Side by side with this strong factor is the issue of overhead and administrative expenses that would be incurred, if the proposals sail through.

Section 8 of the constitution guiding the creation of states stipulates that 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 two-thirds majority of members (representing the area demanding the creation of the new State), in each of the following, namely –
(i) Senate and the House of Representatives,
(ii) House of Assembly in respect of the area, and
(iii) Local Government Council in respect of the area is received by the National Assembly.
(b) A proposal for the creation of the State is therefore approved in a referendum by at least two-thirds of the people of the area where the demand for creation of the State originated.
(c) The result of the referendum is then approved by a simple majority of all the States of the
(d) Federation supported by a simple majority of members of the Houses of Assembly; and
(e) Proposal is approved by resolution by two-thirds majority of members of each House of the National Assembly.

It is evident that the arrangement which granted a considerable measure of autonomy to the Regions promoted healthy rivalry among the constituent parts of Nigeria. The North, West and East had greater say in the management of their own affairs than hitherto. The economies of the Regions supported their growth to the extent to which managers of resources could harness their human and financial potentials. It was apparent that Nigeria ran a loose Federation, which allowed for concentration of powers in the regions while the Federal Government handled issues such as Security, Defence and Foreign Affairs. It is highly imperative that all citizens demonstrate that they are socially responsible by regarding the above provisions of the Constitution as their guide and also respecting their provisions.

Admittedly, the form the constitution of any nation takes will depend upon the nature of the country being governed-its history, geographical position, social structure, economic development, religious beliefs and racial composition. But since the constitution exists primarily to protect the rights of citizens and to limit the powers of those entrusted with authority, it stands to reason therefore, that its character will ultimately be determined by what rights and powers are accepted by the community as being essential. In another vein, one also needs to point out that the success of a constitution very well depends on how far it can reconcile opposing interests. For a country like Nigeria with divisive influences like tribe, tongue, religious differences and low literacy level, it should naturally be expected that our attempts to fashion out an acceptable form of Government would have been affected by those ills which have plagued the nation since independence. It is a matter for regrets that these aforementioned ills are still part of our society today. The first step towards entrenching an enduring democratic culture appears to be a review of the constitution to take into account differences and modern-day realities. While no system is perfect, it is necessary for the nation to draw up a constitution that is totally relevant to the needs and aspirations of the people, leaves enough funds for the development of all sectors, and for the country’s overall steady advancement.

By Femi Adelegan