WALE AKINSELURE, examines the much talked about restructuring, tendency of its implementation and why some elements are kicking against the idea of creating a Nigeria that works.
Since 1999, there has been an elusive search for stability and development in Nigeria. Year in, year out, leaders, theorists, analysts, commentators, opinion moulders have proposed various paradigms they believe, if adopted, would bode well for the country. For every administration since 1999, the various solution propositions usually gain traction whenever the nation is faced with socioeconomic, political, security challenges. Since the outset of the fourth republic, several persons have described the problems of the nation as foundational. They particular identify the 1999 constitution as the foundation of the nation’s problems that must be fixed. Many ethnic nationalities and interest groups view the current constitution as a hindrance to the country’s progress in electricity, corruption, natural resource utilisation, infrastructure development, governance costs, and the rule of law.
There have been calls for a total scrap of the 1999 constitution for a new constitution, just as some have called for the adoption of either the 1960 constitution or 1963 constitution. The appreciation of the 1999 constitution as a fundamental problem is evidenced by the several amendments to the constitutions that have been carried out. In fact, every National Assembly, since 1999, has instituted a constitution amendment process. In fact, another amendment process has been started by the present 10th National Assembly.
Another loud proposition was the need for referendum on the principles upon which the nation was run. This birthed the 2014 Sovereign National Conference (CONFAB) under the Goodluck Jonathan administration which produced a report. There have persistent calls for the implementation of the Confab report as a document which houses all the solutions to the nation’s challenges. There is also the Steve Oronsaye report for civil service reform and more effective and efficient governance system and the Justice Mohammed Uwais report for a better electoral system in the country.
But, as the nation faced serious security challenges, secessionist agitations, there came the proposition of restructuring as real solution to the nation’s problems. Within the past decade, the calls for restructuring and true federalism have dominated the nation’s firmament. Individuals, groups, like never before, have reverberated the imperativeness of restructuring if the nation is to progress. Political parties, ethno-regional associations, blocs of the federating units (states), academia, civil society groups, politicians, and even religious leaders have all spoke about restructuring. At virtually any symposium, gathering, talk show to deliberate on the nation’s challenges, in the past years, the communiqué, consensus has always read that Nigeria must restructure or not progress.
The Afenifere has been one of the groups insistent on its call for restructuring of the nation, enactment of a new constitution and multi-level policing, particularly demanding that the 2014 Confab report should serve as template for the drafting of a new constitution. Apparently latching onto the restructuring vibe, political parties and their candidates have also campaigned for elective posts with a promise to restructure the country. Virtually all presidential candidates in the 2023 election had restructuring of the country as part of their manifesto. The All Progressives Congress (APC) under the President Muhammadu Buhari took the restructuring discourse further by setting up the Nasir El-Rufai committee on restructuring, which submitted its report before the end of the Buhari administration.
But, as loud as the calls for restructuring are, there seems to also be diverse meanings to restructuring, including how to restructure, what to restructure, when to restructure, who to restructure. Just as the nation has diverse ethnic groups, so does it seem that the meaning of restructuring is diverse. From all the six geo-political zones, demands for, or opposition to, restructuring have resurfaced and become more prominent. In the current state of play, keeping Nigeria one seems to work for the northern elites whilst calling for the country to either break up or be reconfigured along some regional basis with a weak centre works for the southern elites. No doubt, the current clamour for restructuring is due to the failure of the fourth republic but there continues to be lack of clarity, context and direction regarding restructuring. Is it political restructuring, administrative restructuring, geographical restructuring or economic restructuring? Nigerians are divided on whether it should be a wholesale abandonment of the existing political structure for another one or the use of incremental constitutional renewal. Amid the lack of clarity, there, however, is a consensus for many is that the approach to restructuring must be clear, people-oriented and driven by a desire for development and progress.
What manner of restructuring
Former President of the Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN), Reverend Supo Ayokunle regarded restructuring as so crucial in addressing several anomalies in our system. He stressed: “It is unfortunate that people that have been taking over governance have left restructuring attended to. Presently the constitution we are using is a dual constitution. How can we be operating democracy using decree No 24 as constitution? It is not a constitution that came out of a referendum or conference of the entire Nigerian regions. The constitution of a democracy should come from the yearnings of the people. Each region should be represented in a conference to negotiate what will be the future of their federation. The present constitution was drawn by a military ruler who handpicked people to form a constituent assembly.”
A longtime advocate of restructuring, Afe Babalola, an elder statesman, said: “Without restructuring, the deep-rooted mistrust, fuelled by a sense of historical injustice, suppression and oppression by the diverse constituent members will continue to heat up the nation, making it to remain a ‘pressure cooker’ of insecurity, terrorism, and extremism that the country has fast become.”
A former Head of Service of the Federation, Professor Oladapo Afolabi asks for clarity about what exactly the nation wants to restructure. Is it the mode of governance, the constitution, the structure of governance, the present allocation of powers? “For Nigeria, we are always treating the symptoms. The real issue to be tackled is what mode of governance do we want? How do we want to relate to bring out the best in us? In the past, there were regions that really went along the line of healthy rivalry, positive competition. Whatever happened in the East, the West will look at it if it was beneficial, study it and do better. The North will look at it too and do better. This was the way we got the best from our people. But we are under a so-called federal government that is really unitary in practice and not federal. If you look at the constitution, a lot of issues on the exclusive list should have been in the hands of the states. So, we must look at how best we can govern and have the best of delivery from our people. What you have is treating the symptoms, the fundamentals must be revisited,” Afolabi said.
According to national restructuring studies by the Nigerian Institute of Social and Economic Research (NISER), from year 2018 to 2023, one of the reasons Nigerians call for restructuring is the hyper-central nature of power and many responsibilities of the federal government compared to those of the subnationals thereby militating against the nation’s development.
Prominent in the national restructuring discourse are deliberations on the appropriate political structure, political/economic system, and framework of governance that could facilitate sustainable national development.
Some call for a cautious rather than disruptive approach, asking if there is a form of restructuring that could deliver the greatest good for the greatest number within the current configuration. They prescribe that the status quo be maintained in terms of resource control, administration, revenue sharing and management as well as returns to the centre. They simply advocate a cosmetic approach entailing some amendments to the 1999 Constitution to vest more powers in the states including a review of the revenue-sharing formula. The argument is that minor incremental amendments to the 1999 Constitution will provide a better arrangement compared to the current situation.
With minor constitutional amendments allowing for devolution of powers, it is believed that there would be more financially independent states would exist alongside a less dominant federal government thereby there would be more economically viable subnational entities that are not dependent on the federal grants from the centre for their survival.
Subnationals, especially Southern governors have been quite vocal in calling for restructuring. Their call for restructuring have revolved round demand for state policing, fiscal decentralisation, autonomy on concurrent legislative lists which they say, if implemented, would translate to a better run system both at national and subnational levels.
Among other Southern governors, Oyo State Governor, Mr Seyi Makinde has consistently called for restructuring, true federalism, devolution of powers and state police.
Advocates for a return to the 1963 constitution promote that regionalism then enhanced competitive development of regions and would again work now if adopted. Accordingly, restructuring for regional autonomy will involve separate control of resources, revenue generation and management as well as fiscal responsibility allowing for self-paced development and less federal control.
Findings of five research reports conducted by NISER between 2018 and 2023, were NISER researchers: Dr Hakeem Tijani, Dr Abubakar Oladeji, Dr Omosefe Oyekanmi and external resource persons: Mr Bartholomew Fesse and Soji Apampa give the two restructuring options as extreme, hybrid. Extreme restructuring is in terms of confederation or secession that would lead to the rescaling of resource borders, the possibility of economic migration from low-resource states to high-resource states with the ability to provide employment. The Hybrid scenario acknowledges a new constitution that would be put together by ‘the people’ in the real sense of the expression, rather than amending the present constitution endlessly. The Extreme scenario proposes the worst case possible for the Nigerian state and that is confederation or secession.
Generally, symposiums on restructuring call for a conservative approach aimed at maintaining the status quo by simply asking the federal government to shed off some of its exclusive powers or radical approach which calls for fundamental devolution of powers to the states as federating units and a lean federal government with few exclusive powers over external relations. The two options are in agreement that there are fundamental defects in the system because of the over-centralisation of the federal system following decades of military rule with its central command structure, hence the need to restructure the polity.
Foremost lawyer, Olisa Agbakoba, in another dimension, argues that there is difference between devolution of powers and redistribution of powers. He said, the relevant concept for restructuring is redistribution not devolution of powers. “Redistribution is when power is rearranged between the federal and regional governments, devolution relates to powers given up by the unitary government to the regions,” Agbakoba said.
Restructuring, generally, preaches competition for productive activities, policy experimentation and diffusion of innovation among the constituent states. This would be achieved by letting each of the six zones focus its energy and development resources in its area of comparative/competitive advantage based on the development of the resources – political, economic and cultural, available in such area that can yield economic dividends and prestige in today’s world. Parallel economic activities to the available resources, including industries, can then be harnessed for development in the geo-economic zones.
In the restructured Nigeria, there is an inherent incentive to compete and therefore to ensure the accomplishment of tasks, with the reinforcing feedback loop of accumulation playing a big role in growing the economy.
However, studies show that opinions differ regarding restructuring from one geopolitical zone. While the Southern regions of South-South and Southwest more disposed to regionalism and the Southeast to secession. The North contrasts the Southern positions on preferred restructuring models.
Joining the restructuring conversation, nobel laureate, Professor Wole Soyinka expresses reservation for the term, restructuring, rather calling for reconfiguration and decentralization as necessary steps towards national progress.
“I don’t like the word restructuring. I prefer expressions like reconfiguration, decentralization of the country. Those ruling us recognized the necessity, the importance and almost invariability until they get into office. Reconfiguration and decentralisation are not slogans, and it’s time we stopped the pretence conferences, which have proved to be mere distractions, especially by those who have different agenda in mind. It is not new that nothing of value has come out of some of the conferences we have had in the past. So, it is about time that leaders stop taking this nation for a ride.”
Who should lead restructuring?
There has been back and forth, shifting of responsibility on who should lead some kind of restructuring. Some hold that that the president must lead the charge while others argue that it is the responsibility of the National Assembly. It would be recalled that former president Muhammadu Buhari delegated the responsibility to restructure Nigeria to the National Assembly and National Council of State. However, can such responsibility be delegated? Moreover, section 5 of the constitution vests the president with executive powers of the federation and this includes the power to restructure Nigeria. There remains the argument that the president should initiate restructuring and this can be implemented by executive and administrative orders and presenting the 2014 national conference report to the National Assembly. But, bearing in mind that restructuring must have a national outlook, analysts posit that constituent parts must be carried along. On fiscal federalism, one of the questions is, how can we create a balance between the federal and federating units in revenue sharing? Should the subnationals be allowed to determine what should work out what they mean by restructuring.
A foremost lawyer and pioneer Secretary General of Ohanaeze Ndigbo worldwide, Professor Ben Nwabueze is of the view that political restructuring is not enough otherwise the inefficiencies at the centre will simply be transferred to the new regions. Restructuring must address other issues like the bloated size of the public service. “Why should 80 percent of the national budget be used to service three percent of the population? The Oronsaye Committee reviewed 263 statutory agencies of government and asked government to scrap 102 agencies,” Nwabueze asked.
Professor Ben Nwabueze said that the way forward for Nigeria is for the people to make, through a referendum, a new constitution, constituting a new political order.
An economist, Tope Fasua describes the call for a return to regional system as tricky. He wonders: “Will the National Assembly obliterate itself; will states want to be subsumed under one regional head?” Rather Fasua demands constitutional amendments of items that make no sense to be kept at the federal level, such as power generation, rail systems, prison systems. Fasua adds: “We should also be looking at part-time legislature, then inverting our revenue allocation formula to favour the local government system. Revenue sharing is also a major contention. How much does a state get as derivation benefits for natural resources obtained in its territory? How much does the federal government get compared with others? Are local governments entitled to anything at all or should the states exercise absolute control at that level – in the name of ‘true federalism’ (a concept which does not exist)?”
On who should lead restructuring, the Southern and Middle Belt Leaders Forum has urged President Bola Tinubu to lead efforts to restructure Nigeria to a true federal state. The group said, “The Federal Government should, as a matter of urgency, and priority, work towards the restructuring of the country and enthrone true federalism as was originally entrenched in the 1960 and 1963 constitutions. With Nigeria populated by over 250 major and minor ethnic nationalities, this is the realistic option.
“Therefore, Tinubu must urgently heed this counsel, by lending the influence of his office to efforts to mobilise the country to rearrange the country into a true federation. Urgently, the President and federal and state legislators should target the immediate devolution of policing, enthronement of fiscal federalism, and reduction in the immense powers conferred on the central government by the 1999 Constitution.”
However, renowned economist, Professor Pat Utomi decries the lip service by Nigerian politicians towards restructuring. “It is because politicians are looking at their narrow, short term interest. Someone canvassing for restructuring gets into power tomorrow and stops talking about it.”
Are states already restructuring?
Governors’ demand for restructuring has revolved round demand for state policing, fiscal decentralisation, autonomy on concurrent legislative lists, more control of resources, the national government not having exclusive powers on power generation, rail systems, prison systems. While many may look at the bigger picture of restructuring, there are evidences that the country might be restructuring in bits.
At the twilight of his administration, President Muhammadu Buhari signed into law 16 bills seeking to amend various parts of the 1999 Constitution. The bills assented to by the then President, in March 2023, included those devolving powers from the Federal Government to the states as some items were moved from the Exclusive Legislative List to the Concurrent List in the Constitution. The power devolution bills that passed legislative requirements include those on power, railway, airports and prisons as well as biometric and criminal records. While the President signed the bills seeking to grant state legislature and judiciary autonomy, majority of the state Houses of Assembly opposed independence for local governments. The amended constitution bills gave states power to generate, transmit and distribute power.
In the same vein, In June 2023, President Bola Tinubu signed the new Electricity Act into law, heeding the calls of Nigerians that the power sector be reformed and removed from the exclusive list. Though a state can regulate its electricity market by issuing licences to private investors who can operate mini-grids and power plants within the state, the act, however, says that until a state has passed its electricity market laws, the Nigerian Electricity Regulatory Commission will continue to regulate electricity businesses in such states. Minister of Power, Adebayo Adelabu, has appealed to governors to take advantage of the new Electricity Act to improve electricity supply in Nigeria.
Keying into the devolution of power, five states have signed electricity laws. They are Lagos, Edo, Kaduna, Enugu and Oyo. Governor Seyi Makinde of Oyo had in February joined the league of governors who have signed electricity laws, promising that the state will be the first to attain energy self-sufficiency in Nigeria. Abia State has taken a gigantic leap towards being energy self sufficient as it now boasts of 181 megawatts power plant in Aba. Toeing this line is Oyo State which is presently constructing an 11 megawatts Independent Power Plant.
Governors have also been quick to demand state police as crucial to manage security in their states and across the country. Taking the bull by the horn, several states boast of their own state security personnel, neighbourhood watch notable among which are Hisbah police in the North, Amotekun in the South West and Ebube Agu in the South East. In fact, more than ever, state police may become a reality as it is an issue for discussion at the next National Economic Council (NEC) meeting. 16 out of the 36 states hav already submitted their reports on the state policing initiative while the remaining 20 states are billed to submit their propositions at the next NEC meeting. Though there are fears of abuse by governors of state police, pointing to the abuse of the local government system, proponents of state police hold that security of Nigerians in their nooks and crannies is more paramount as the present centralized policing system is not effective as desired.
States also yearn for power to manage the resources, especially mining resources, in their domain contrary to the present practice where the federal government issues mining licenses. The constitution amendment bills also removed railway from the exclusive legislative list. Governors of the South West are said to be keen to key into this. According to the Director-General, Development Agenda for Western Nigeria (DAWN) Commission, it would midwife the unveiling of a roadmap towards the establishment of the Great Western Rail for the zone.
ALSO READ: New National ID card to be issued via banks — FG
