The question to ask here is, for a nation that is struggling and creaking under the sheer weight and crippling burden of fiscal indiscipline, corruption, mismanagement and wastefulness across all levels of government, should the thought, idea and proposal of new state creation be the priority of its leaders
On Monday, the National Assembly Joint Committee on Constitution Review approved the creation of six new states, one in each of Nigeria’s geopolitical zones. If ratified, the number of states in the country will rise from 36 to 42, with the North-west having eight, and the Northeast, North Central, South-west, and Southeast having seven each. Additionally, if ratified, it will mark the first time states have been created by a civilian government since the creation of the Midwest region in 1964 by the Tafawa Balewa-led government during the First Republic.
Before the Midwest was carved out from the then Western region, Nigeria had three regions which were created by Richard’s constitution of 1946. The constitution, named after the British Governor-General Sir Arthur Richards, marked the introduction of a federal system and regional government in the country. Only the creation of the four regions was done through the use of a constitutional policy framework. The current 36 states we have were created by successive military regimes that punctured the trajectory of the country at different points in time between 1966 and 1998.
The states were created for different reasons. As Nigeria hurtled towards what would later turn out to be a brutal and devastating civil that lasted for three years between 1967 and 1970, the then military head of state, General Yakubu Gowon, as part of his move to whittle down the power and check the influence of the his contemporary in the east, Odumegwu Ojukwu, who had announced the breakaway of the region from the rest of Nigeria following irreconcilable difference, broke the four regions into twelve states. The Murtala Mohammed/Olusegun Obasanjo junta, which overthrew the Gowon regime in 1975, added seven more states, taking the number of states to 19.
General Ibrahim Badamasi Babangida, who took over in 1985 after a coup, created 11 more states between 1985 and 1993, increasing the states in the country to 30. His predecessor, General Sani Abacha, added six states to the existing ones to bring the total number of states in the country to 36. However, since the military was sent packing from power 25 years ago and Nigeria returned to democratic rule, enjoying its longest and unbroken civilian dispensation since independence, every government has had to contend with conversations and debates about state creation which are guaranteed to dominate public discourse and the headlines at one point or another during their tenure.
Under previous governments, these debates and conversations about the creation of more states were seen as nothing more than perfunctory agitation and inconsequential public chatter with no real, conscious and deliberate effort and drive to ensure that the clamour for more states materialised. This is partly due to concern that the creation of more states will elicit a flurry of demands for more states across the country, which leads to a situation where the country is dotted with small states that further put a lot of burden on the lean resources of the nation. Also, the constitutional hurdles that must be jumped through to create the states made it feel like a nearly impossible task for many. It was easy for the military to create these states on a whim because they rule by fiat and are not restrained or bound by any democratic hindrance or constitutional impediments.
However, in the wake of Monday’s approval by the Joint Committee on Constitution Review for the creation of more states, concerns are being raised over the rationale behind the decision and whether it is truly what Nigeria needs at this point in time. It is instructive to point out that only a handful of the existing states, all of which were created by the military, were created with socio-economic growth and aggressive improvement in the human development index in mind. They were mostly created to massage the ego of some ethnic overlords who want to have their fiefdom. They were carved out as a form of compensation and quid pro quo between military officers and their civilian collaborators. State creation is also some sort of tool of power consolidation for the military. It has little or nothing to do with people.
The question to ask here is, for a nation that is struggling and creaking under the sheer weight and crippling burden of fiscal indiscipline, corruption, mismanagement and wastefulness across all levels of government, should the thought, idea and proposal of new state creation be the priority of its leaders or working assiduously to tackle these issues which is clearly inhibiting the economic viability of the existing states? Why do we need more states when many of the existing ones are barely surviving and will collapse if they don’t receive their monthly allocation from the federal government for a month or two?
Furthermore, seeing how productively and efficiently the regions and states were run during the first and second republics, should we not be looking at collapsing the 36 states we have now into a large but potent, effective, progress-driven and people-oriented number of subnationals of about nine or ten provinces or states that will have a considerable economic autonomy and be run by visionary, altruistic, selfless, and compassionate but firm and determined leaders who are capable of ushering in the kind swift monumental development and growth that we need while the federal government which is equally led by nationalistic, purposeful and altruistic leaders that brook no nonsense and aversive to corruption and mismanagement of public funds and resources.
It is along this line we should be thinking not this lazy, unimaginative, unreasonable and clearly selfish move to add six more state governors and numerous lawmakers that will fill the assemblies in the new states to the already existing motley crowd of inconsiderate charlatans, unscrupulous men and perverse elements managing the affairs of many of the states we have already. This will not only further strain the nation’s lean resources but also divert more of what little resources we’ve to politics and recurrent expenditure instead of critical areas of development and governance.
We don’t need more states, we need a system that prioritises the common man and not a system that’s hollowed out by a ruling and political class in order to cater to the needs and advance the interests of their kind.
Discussion about this post