Restructuring in Nigeria: Different strokes for different folks
By Tony Nwakaegho
Nigeria recently commemorated sixty years of nationhood where all and sundry threw banters while examining how the country has grown economically, politically, socially and security wise, among others.
However, many Nigerians have reportedly vented their frustration on the government and have been clamouring for the restructuring of the country as a panacea for equity, fairness and justice.
It would be recalled that Nigeria was constitutionally founded on a federal structure which became more entrenched with the Lyttleton Constitution of 1954. At independence, the country had a three-regional government before it was restructured as a unitary system by military fiat in January 1966. What was to follow these was the creation of more states in 1967 by the regime of General Yakubu Gowon to ensure that no region was able to impose its will on others. This led to the creation of 12 new states out of the three existing regions in 1967, which was increased to 19 states in 1976; 21 states in 1987; 30 states in 1991, after which six states were added in 1996 to make the current 36-state structure in Nigeria. Many still envisioned it as being marginalized by these state creation exercises.
Again the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (CFRN), 1999 (as amended), which dwelt on welfarism and make it incumbent on the government to provide infrastructure, industries, jobs for the citizens has been described as defective as the Ohanaeze Ndigbo, Igbo socio political group, Afenifere, Yoruba sociopolitical group and the Arewa Consultative Forum, have been saying that there is an urgent need to restructure Nigeria.
However, the conceptualizations of the word are as diverse as the peoples agitating for it. Interestingly however, the definition of that singular word “restructuring” appears to have gained a relative outlook in Nigeria as some opposition politicians and ethnic groups use the word to get the attention of the citizenry.
Some consider restructuring to amount to the implementation of the 2014 national political conference, absolute control of the resources at the disposal of each region or state, abandonment of the presidential system of government for regionalism or the parliamentary system of government as well as the failure of successive administrations to deliver good governance to the generality of the people.
Nigeria is currently engulfed in multiple crises such as insurgency, kidnapping, banditry, ethnic crisis, unemployment, herdsmen’s menace and agitation to break away from the country, among others, which has led to the agitation for creation of state policing.
A pro-democracy activist and former president of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), Olisa Agbakoba, SAN, once opined that restructuring is conceptually wrong without reviewing why it is needed, stressing that restructuring will not work in the context of a military democracy and political elite conspiracy because most politicians advocating restructuring today will abandon it when they get to power.
Former Vice-President Atiku Abubakar described the current system of government as “an ad hoc temporary solution to a challenge that emerged after the January 15, 1966 coup decapitated the central and most regional governments.
“Nigeria needs to restructure to avoid the various failed state prophecies, first advanced by an American think-tank against Nigeria in 2006. Most recently regurgitated by the Financial Times of London, about a month ago. To be forewarned is to be forearmed,” Atiku said.
The Vice President, Yemi Osinbajo, however took on Atiku Abubakar, accusing him of championing a cause he once opposed.
Osinbajo, who spoke at the 9th Public Lecture of Sigma Club at the International Conference Centre, University of Ibadan, said some of those clamouring for it were those who opposed his and others efforts on restructuring years back when they were in government.
“Let me explain my position clearly. I am not just an advocate of restructuring, there is no other government in Nigeria that has actively pursued restructuring such as we did when I was Attorney General in Lagos State,” Osinbajo said.
The vice president narrated how he pursued issues of restructuring to the Supreme Court when he was the Attorney General in Lagos State starting with fiscal restructuring, which is more of resource control.
“The states that argued in favour of autonomy for states to control their resources were the oil producing states in the country and Lagos State, while some others argued on the other side because they want to share oil money,” Osinbajo said.
Former Secretary-General of Commonwealth, Chief Emeka Anyaoku has also criticised the present structure of federalism “where virtually all the component states are not self-sustaining and are dependent on hand-outs from the Federal Government, because they are unable to pay the salaries of their civil servants and the agreed minimum wage.”
Legal luminary, Malam Yusuf Ali (SAN), said that restructuring meant different things to different ethnic groups or zones.
Ali said that the Yoruba definition of restructuring is regionalism and fiscal federalism and that the perception of Igbos on restructuring is confederation, while the South South is gunning for economic self-determination through restructuring.
A political scientist, Dr Friday Ibok, argued that without restructuring, there will be no peace, stressing that the 2014 National Conference has set the template for restructuring and that its resolutions, if implemented, will douse the various agitations that are threatening the peace and unity of the country.
He lamented, however, that the conference failed to address the issue of derivation and resource control, which is one of the issues fuelling the agitation for restructuring.
Vocal northern politician Dr Junaid Muhammed said eminent citizens pushing for restructuring are trying to blackmail Nigerians into an unclear and bogus system of government, adding that none of those calling for the restructuring of Nigeria had been able to give a clear cut definition of what they meant.
Until recently, the state governors rejected the local government financial autonomy and were operating joint accounts with local governments, thereby relegating the local government to the background without funds for development, until President Buhari spearheaded the fight that gave back financial autonomy to the local governments.
There is no State in Nigeria that has no mineral resources but the Constitution has put such resources under the exclusive list of the federal government. State governments before now cannot fix dilapidated federal roads across their states. They have to seek permission from the Federal government to do so before refund of the work done could be made to the state.
Appointment into key government positions is skewed in favour of a particular ethnic group in power especially in the armed forces.
Although, President Muhammadu Buhari (PMB) deserves an accolade for his enormous political will which has shrunk the spate of primitive looting and fraud, yet the legislatures have special budget and this is part of the agitation for restructuring to correct this fiscal imbalance.
It will be recalled that in 2018, President Muhammadu Buhari in an interactive session with Nigerians based in France, said there should be a proper definition of what Nigerians want before the government can delve into restructuring as people are “talking loosely about restructuring”.
It is the view of analysts that every geo-political zone has its own interpretation of restructuring. However, Gentechnews gathered that restructuring entails constitutional amendments, country wide consultations among the numerous ethnic conglomerates that constitute Nigeria and not what a president or anyone could do with fiat.
Thus, like the saying goes, different strokes for different folks are exactly what the concept of restructuring appears to be in Nigeria.
