The Politics Of Federalism In Nigeria

Nigerians embraced federalism as a way of managing the conflicts and suspicions among the various constituent nationalities that make up the Nigerian state. These fears and suspicions had led to the emergence of aggressive political and economic competitions along ethno-regional lines. Beginning from 1954, the unitary colonial state saw itself being gradually federalized as it had to contend with powerful ethno-regional pressures in the run-up to independence in 1960. Following the military coup of 1966, which ushered in a prolonged period of military rule, the various military regimes created a very centralized federal system while they ruled. By 1999 however, Nigerians had become disenchanted with the way the federal system was operated in the country, with echoes of the strident calls for a national conference to re-assess the system and the way it was operated reverberating throughout the entire length and breadth of the country.

Twenty essays by four generations of Nigerian scholars are included in this volume, the first to examine the historical, political, economic and comparative dimensions of attempts by the military to restructure the Nigerian federation. Evidence is accumulated in support of the book's central thesis that autocratic rule is antipathetic to the sustenance of genuine federal practice, and that federal restructuring initiated under the tight control of repressive governments cannot but lead to a situation in which federalism is assaulted, if not dismantled. It is argued that, in such a context, the vending of a federal doctrine becomes more or less an exercise in the propagation of false consciousness in the service of power - portraying a picture of divided power to hide the reality of undivided power.

This book uses the political economy approach to examine the relative failure of federalism in Nigeria. It shows the nexus between the political and the economic aspects of the country’s federalism. The central feature of Nigeria’s political economy is the relationship between oil resources and the state. The author argues that the inability of the federal government to distribute the oil wealth fairly amongst the component units contributes to the dysfunctional character of the federal system. This deficiency is rooted in the country’s unbalanced political economy, which promotes over-dependency on oil and consequently an over-centralised federal system. The book concludes that despite its complexities, federalism has become the basis for the country’s stability. Therefore, ethno-regional demands for ‘true federalism’ will continue until the political elite reform the ailing federal system.

Nigeria as a federal Republic is made up of thirty six States. Although, the practice of federalism has been called into question by critics who believed that the federal government is imposing her free-will over the component states with disregard to their sovereignty despite the framers intent in providing the country with a constitution that promulgated shared responsibilities to each levels of government that are embedded with power sharing, revenue allocation, maintenance of public order, and fiscal federalism. However, the attitude and involvement of ruling political powers with ties to the Central or State Governments influences policies decision making which may be contradictory to the system of Nigeria Federalism. This book focused on the historical philosophy of Nigeria and her problems, prospects of the Nigerian federalism, the politics of ethnicity and diversity as a framework of the British Colonialists and the Framers visions for a Unified Federalized State. The military model of governance was largely ignored in this book to strictly focus its intent on the democratic intergovernmental federalism in Nigeria as intended by the framers in drafting a true democracy for Nigeria. Nigerian Federalism is a system of government that is democratic to its core. The framers believed that leadership is always the way forward and in drafting the constitution they placed the impact and quality of leadership (integrity, honesty, commitment, and competency) as the criterion for a strong and innovative Nation.