Time to fix this broken federal system

Agitation over marginalisation by different units of the federation are too familiar and now persistent, a clear sign that Nigeria remains a perpetual case of work in progress. Sadly, progress is not in sight. It is now a matter of a convention for whoever secures the reins to manage the commonwealth to do so to the maximum advantage of narrower interests than for the greater good envisaged at the start of the union.

It is common to have family and clan interests elevated without disguise while bystanders are told to wait for their turn. It is called winners-take-all, hardly the right way to grow a country.

Senator Enyinnaya Abaribe’s recent interview on Channels Television provides the context for this perspective on the inequalities inherent in Nigeria’s federal system. Many citizens from the South-east and elsewhere have decried the unfairness and systematic marginalisation of segments of the country.

It appears that every group in the country is marginalised, depending on time and season. It hits differently when a respected federal lawmaker goes on a popular channel to offer his viewpoint, especially from a politician who is not self-seeking, one who talks straight and is never frivolous.

The founding fathers of the Nigerian Union worked hard to deliver a system where no group could easily acquire the monopoly to dominate others, especially the hundreds of minority tribes tucked in-between the larger groups in the North and South.

The 1963 Constitution embodied provisions that encouraged a system of equity; it provided for a federal structure, with clear division of powers between the centre and the regions; there was a significant amount of autonomy to the regions, in the management of their internal affairs, including growth at their own pace. Importantly, the 1963 Constitution recognised minority groups and sought their protection and participation in government.

Even though no system is fool-proof, the First Republic regional governments conveyed a sense that substantial equity could be served in a diverse society such as ours, provided that politicians agreed not to misuse the immense opportunities. In the end, that was what happened.
Politicians misused the possibilities and upended the delicate balancing of the tripod nation; and calamity was invented. The civil war was fought, lives were destroyed and the polity was broken. It has not recovered.

Traces of the broken system are seen in today’s mutual distrust and unhealthy rivalry among descendants of the old regions, despite assurances of reconciliation, rehabilitation and reconstruction. What was the core of the Eastern Region (now South-east), came out of the civil war short changed and fragmented, with a substantial part of its former territory now rebranded and ceded to South-south, a separate political jurisdiction.

Subsequent creation of states gave 19 to the old North, six to the old Western Region (South-west), six to the South-south, carved from Mid-west and Eastern regions; and five to the South-east. At the time the fragmentation began, it seemed to be a deft war-time move to contain and weaken the South-east.

Elder statesman and former Head of State, General Yakubu Gowon (retd), explained last week that his government (1966-75) created 12 states to douse tension and remove fear of northern domination by other federating parts. He suggested to his visitors, who are members of the League of Northern Democrats (LND), that they needed to prioritise the entire country in their advocacies and policies. According to him, that is needed to foster national unity.

The reason Gowon gave for creating states cannot be the same as those of subsequent military regimes. At a time, states were awarded on the basis of who you know in government and not so much with a desire for equity. But those who got states remained forever happy because it brought development closer, so it seemed.

That process of states creation also left the South-east shortchanged, apparently. And there hasn’t been any sustainable federal action to acknowledge South-east and to ensure that the zone has fairer chances to make progress post-war, and to gain lost ground.

That didn’t happen until now that every zone has a development commission. It remains to be seen what is contained in the masterplan of the South-east Development Commission, and others as well, with a view to addressing decades-long policies of deprivation and exclusion.

The 1999 Constitution provides that there should be equity in appointments at the federal and states. It is called Federal Character. At Section 14, the Constitutions pronounced that the Federal Republic of Nigeria shall be a State run on the principles of democracy and social justice.

At Section 14-(3), it says: “The composition of the Government of the Federation or any of its agencies and the conduct of its affairs shall be carried out in such a manner as to reflect the federal character of Nigeria and the need to promote national unity, and also to command national loyalty, thereby ensuring that there shall be no predominance of persons from a few States or from a few ethnic or other sectional groups in that Government or in any of its agencies.”

The drafters of the Constitution must have noted that the brazen sharing formular instituted by the military cannot be allowed in a democracy. Where the military had the powers of coercion to compel loyalty, a civilian government does not have such powers. In fact, a civilian government has no powers of its own apart from the sovereignty it derives from the people.

However, for eight years, former President Muhammadu Buhari is on record to have elevated nepotism as a state policy and he wasn’t embarrassed. He even decreed that constituents were to be compensated according to votes they gave to him and his party, All Progressives Congress (APC).

Despite taking the Oath of Office and swearing by the Constitution, Buhari’s government had no bearings with the provisions of the Constitution. Apparently, he never read that document, which was meant to guide his actions as a president.

Unfortunately, the APC, supposedly progressive and ideologically leftist party that should shape the actions of government had lost control of the man once he was ensconced and locked away in Aso Villa. The party has remained disconnected from its philosophy and mission statement: to promote and foster national unity, political stability and national consciousness.

But by the time Buhari left office on May 29, 2023, the country was fragmented into restive territories. In the end, despite the campaign promises of 2015, of a super performer, Buhari could not rally the diverse population to deliver growth in Africa’s biggest country.

The South-east became a theatre for angry youths who were disconnected from the centre. The Federal Government failed to apply Section 14-(3) of the Constitution across board and lost the loyalty it was supposed to command of citizens.

Senator Abaribe said if Buhari’s era was nepotistic, President Tinubu has deepened and instituted the malaise. The audacious manner it is done under Tinubu, Abaribe queried, is like after all the other person did it, so why not. He said unequal treatment done to different segments of the polity fuels agitation.

On the situation in the South-east, the Senator lamented the low representation of the zone at the Federal Executive Council (FEC), with the zone having five ministers whereas one state in the South-west, Ogun has four. He demanded inclusion, a deliberate policy of government that is devoid of oppression, just as the Constitution stipulates.

Abaribe gave credit to the regimes of former President Obasanjo and Goodluck Jonathan, when they promoted inclusion in appointments.

Prominent leaders in the North are also not happy with the Tinubu administration over his style of appointments and harsh economic policies. The general impression is that the South-west (Yoruba) have cornered a chunk of the country’s sensitive appointments without applying the principles of equity and fairness.

A recent communique issued by the Northern Elders Forum (NEF), to reject Tinubu’s tax reform policy reads like this: “The Board-in-session, comprising diverse groups of eminent leaders, seasoned technocrats and prominent entrepreneurs, exhaustively x-rayed and analysed the disturbing socio-economic trends enveloping the region, catalysed by the introduction of dangerous, discriminatory and anti-northern governance approaches, calculated to stunt the growth, prosperity and stability of the region…”

Very harsh position there. Ordinarily, if the people have faith in the federal system and in the capacity of their representatives in the National Assembly to represent them well, they might as well just take the back seat. But they don’t trust the system. Even when Buhari was in office for eight years, the vast population of the North didn’t feel his presence.

The North was poorer when Buhari was in office, but there were no harsh words from the elders. What is again clear here is that the current federal system appears far from the constituent units, whether in the north or South-east. Even the South-west that is thought to be the major beneficiary of federal appointments is not rewarded with a higher standard of living. It is the same high cost of living citizens are grappling with everywhere.

Some apologists of the Tinubu administration try to join issues with those who say Emilokan has conferred the South-west with undue advantage. In their justification, some seek solace in the Buhari example; after all, Buhari did it. Too cheap.

Others could even tell you that those who are poorly served by this administration get what they deserve; after all they did not vote for Tinubu in the South-east, just like Buhari’s theory of reward for votes. Shameful.

Others, well respected are stuck in history and the Nigerian Dilemma. They tell you that South-west (Western Region) had its fair share of bad times, of being sidelined, denied and underserved by a treacherous federal system.

The system is broken and this is the time to fix it. And it’s not just about administering harsh economic reforms to make more tax available for governments to share. The present system does not serve the majority of citizens; it’s a fiction.