Federalism and the Problem of Minority Question 2007-2014
CHAPTER ONE
OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY
The following are the objectives of this study:
- To provide an overview of Nigeria federalism
- To examine the relationship between federalism and the problem of the minority question
- To identify the factors militating against true federalism in Nigeria.
CHAPTER TWO
THEORETICAL AND CONCEPTUAL PERSPECTIVE OF FEDERALISM
THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVE
For the purpose of this discourse, liberal political theory will be used as a framework in the analysis of minority question in nigeria’s governmental process. Anugwom (2005) argue that liberal paradigm as a tool of analysis is anchored on a view of citizenship as reflecting the legal membership of a nation-state. This means the individuals are perceived as having equal moral rights and worth in the affairs of state and therefore, any form of alienation or domination of one group by the other either at the level of social superiority or economic advantage is grossly antithetical to the provisions of the constitution. Thus, in the opening preamble of the
Nigerian Constitution 1999 (as amended), the legal document unequivocally stated that:
We the people of the Federal Republic of Nigeria: having firmly and solemnly resolved: to live in unity and harmony as one indivisible and indissoluble sovereign nation under God… and to provide for a Constitution for the purpose of promoting the good government and welfare of all persons in our country on the principles of freedom, equality and justice, and for the purpose of consolidating the unity of our people…
The excerpts above define the obligations of the Nigerian state to cater for all persons and groups irrespective of their socio-political and cultural affinities. Interestingly, the liberal school of thought underscores the importance of the existence of ethnic or sub-national groups who are themselves part and parcel of Nigerian state and are therefore supposed to derive maximum provision and protection from the machinery of the state (Awolalu, 2000; Ifeka, 2000; Ujomu, 2002). The liberal perspective logically gives fillip to the constitution as a legal document that has no peculiar obligation or loyalty to any sub-national group but rather national interest. Such constitution usually guarantees equal rights and opportunities for all citizens irrespective of social and cultural, geographic and ethnic backgrounds. In such a circumstance, the nation-state is conceived as the arena of citizenship formation and practices. Again, the state exists as the equal property of all; treats all citizens as equal and every citizen equally identifies with such a state. It goes without saying that on the premise of the above, the sub-national group becomes largely irrelevant while the nation-state becomes the bastion of solidarity for all persons and groups within the system. In this context, the governance question becomes a two way traffic as supports freely flows from the citizens into the system, thereby enhancing relative peace and mutual co-existence between government and the Nigerian people at large (Ekeh, 2004; Ujomu, 2002).
To buttress the aforementioned, chapter II of the Constitution 1999 (as amended) on the Fundamental Objectives and Directive Principles of State Policy stated inter alia that the conduct of the affairs of Nigerian state shall be done 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 over the other. It further stated that:
The state shall foster a sense of belonging and of involvement among the various peoples of the federation, to the end that loyalty to the nation shall override sectional loyalties (Cap 15 (4).
CHAPTER THREE
THE PRACTICE, ISSUES AND CHALLENGES OF FEDERALISM IN NIGERIA
INTRODUCTION
Writing on the Nigerian Federal experience, Ayoade states that Nigeria was put together giving the impression of an aggregative federation. (Ayoade, 1978). He noted that the Nigerian federation was a design error or it is an error by design. To him, the conditions of Nigerian federalism in practice squandered “common charismatic hopes of a federation.” (Ayoade, 1997).
Ayoade concluded:
Federalism is the building of an empire on an anti-imperial philosophy. That philosophical foundation encapsulates the goal of a federation. It is aimed at unity without uniformity and order without freedom.
In another work, Ayoade describes Federalism in Nigeria as the worship of an unknown God.
He discusses the viability of federalism under four headings:
- The Federal Instinct
- The Federal Ideology
- The Federal Character
- The Federal Dialectics.
The choice of federalism for Nigeria since 1954 when the country was still under colonial rule, subjugation and imperialism, has been described as automatic. But on each occasion it was clear that the choice was based on a wrong premise. Federalism was adopted as a form of territorial democracy. Nigeria represents a polity with a federal constitution to some extent but non-federal practice. This is perhaps the greatest bane of Nigerian federalism.
The British left a legacy of federalism in Nigeria not as an act of faith but as an act of convenience to a nation which Napoleon correctly dubbed a nation of shop-keepers (Ayoade, 2010). Since 1954 when the foundation of classical federation for Nigeria was laid, the system is still far from being problem-free. The story is one of both political and governmental instability. (Ake, 1988). To the consternation of observers, political scientists, historians and researchers, Nigeria’s federalism has remained fragile, almost impossible (Ojo, 2009; Ayoade, 1996, Onyeoziri, 2005); Mazrui, 1971; and Adebisi, 1989). It must be emphasized that if one is looking for a good example of federalism in practice, it is not sufficient to look at constitutions only. What matters just as much is the practice of government. It is no exaggeration to assert that the practice of federal government in Nigeria has precipitated many crises.
CHAPTER FOUR
THE ISSUE OF NATIONAL INTEGRATION AND THE MINORITY QUESTION
INTRODUCTION
Ali Mazrui (1972) identified five interrelated aspects of national integration thus:
1) The fusion of norms and cultures (including the sharing of values, mode of expression, life and a common language);
2) The promotion of economic interdependence;
3) The narrowing of the gap between the elites and the masses, the urban and the rural areas, rich and poor, etc. social integration;
4) The resolution of emergent conflicts; and
5) The sharing of mutual experiences so that people can discover that they have undergone some important experiences together.
National integration is a positive aspect. It reduces socio-cultural and economic differences or inequalities and strengthens national unity and solidarity, which is not imposed by any authority. People share ideas, values and emotional bonds. It is feeling of unity within diversity. National identify is supreme. Cultural unity, constitution territorial continuity, common economic problems, arts, literature, national festivals, national flag, national anthem and national emblem etc. promote national integration. National integration is a very broad statement. To achieve national integration, the country has to pool resources, viz human, cultural, religious, scientific, natural etc to achieve oneness in all spheres of life of the citizens of the country, so that progress can be achieved. With the progress, the citizens can enjoy fruits of prosperity and happiness, living in harmony irrespective of the politics, creed, language, religion, ethnicity and cultural leanings professed by each one for them as individuals. National integration is the awareness of a common identify amongst the citizens of a country. It means that though we belong to different political parties, religions and regions, ethnic groups and speak different languages, we recognize the fact that we are all one. This kind of integration is very important in the building of a strong and prosperous nation in Nigeria.
CHAPTER FIVE
FINDINGS, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
FINDINGS
The root cause of disunity, conflict and instability in Nigeria Federalism can be traced to certain colonial government evolved a piecemeal constitutional framework for the Northern and Southern segments of the country which were eventually amalgamated in 1914, with the introduction of the Clifford constitution in 1922 and the establishment of the legislative council for Lagos with the exclusion of the North. Southerners were incrementally brought into participate in the legislative affairs of their region ahead of the northern counterparts. This disparate constitutional and administrative arrangement went on until 1947 when the north and south were brought together, under single legislative authority for the first time.
Richard constitution broke the country into three regions, the North, the East and the West. Each of these regions consisted of groups with the Hausa – Fulani dominant in the North, the Yoruba in the West and Igbo in the East, each of which was mutually distrustful of the other. The emergency of the regions came sectional loyalties which according to Osaghae 1989 were built on the bogus theory of regionalism, that is one should be loyal to and protect the interest of one’s region to the exclusive of others. Thus the North was for the Northerners, the East for the Easterners and the west for the westerners. Thus the policy of regionalism created disunity by reducing the country into a tri-national state.
The Macpherson’s constitution of 1951 introduced the federal system of government which was finally adopted by the 1954 constitution. Consolidate the regions gave the autonomy and effective power and made regional power attractive. The fourth region, the mid-west regions was carved out of the then western region. But one insignificant feature of the country was its unbalanced nature where the northern region alone had more than half of the country’s population and was larger than the other regions put together. The North too counting on its size and numerical strength won fifty percent representative in the federal legislative and used its controlling position to wield power and appropriate the gains incidental there of.
Also the political parties formed then to contest for power had ethnic/regional base. Each was formed in response to the perceived threat of domination by the other. As a result the NCNC led by Nnamdi Azikiwe, an Igbo though it had nationalist orientation, nevertheless had an Igbo ethnic perspective. The Action Group (AG) led by Obafemi Awolowo was formed to counter the perceived threat of Igbo domination. The Northern People Congress (NPC) was formed, in response to the fear of southern domination. Thus while these region political leaders were united in the nationalist cause of security independence, this sense of fear and the rivalry implicit in it, engendered severe political contradictions. The situation became very volatile after independence as Federal Government exercised ascendant control over the regions as well the allocation of centrally collected resources. The instability of the Nigeria nation state is due to fractional struggle and lack of unity within the Nigeria ruling class.
The government of General Gowon broke up the country into twelve states to redressing the structural imbalance in the federation and accommodating the demand of minorities in the regions of self realisation and self-assertion and equalizing access to the means of development and political power.
The quota system introduced and practised from around 1958. The measure was intended to ensure equitable representation of the various groups in the country. This system was meant to give opportunities in education appointment and employed disadvantaged groups and areas to enable them to complete and catch up with the more advanced areas and sections of the nation.
CONCLUSION
It has been argued here that the Nigerian Federal System, just like many other nation-states, has suffered serious setback over the years arising from the multiple cases of minority agitations. The bottom line of agitation however, reinforces itself through ethnicity which further translates to the politics of resource control.
Nigeria being a mono-cultural economy with Oil as the backbone of all activities including national revenue, therefore presents oil as the epicenter of this mutual conflict because every activity within the Nigerian nation state has come to be defined in terms of oil.
The exploration of oil mineral and the exploitation of the same, either by the oil prospecting multinationals and their domestic elite collaborators, have all contributed to bolstering agitations by minority groups who feel short-changed in the socio-political and economic affairs of state. It is the position of this paper that minority agitations in Nigeria has come to stay, and it is pretty difficult to divorce this monster from the socio-political fabric of the Nigerian state. Several other agitations recently by groups in the Nigerian system allude to this. The agitations for more states, competition for space, terrorism, arson, high level of crime, corruption, moral decadence, injustice, violence either before, during or after elections, religious sentiments, and religious war, etc. All these are pointer to the fact that the need to create a virile federal structure that recognizes the interests of adjoining minor groupings is still a far cry.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Despite the obvious shortcoming and the controversies surrounding the notion and application of federal character, there seems to be a general acceptance of the principle as a normative expression of the equal right of all Nigerians to participate in the politically administrative and economic affairs of the country. One significant fact has emerged that as long as Nigeria remains a federation, the need and the clamour to balance the diverse interest in the country will always be there. The federal character has been employed to take care of this diverse and sometimes conflicting interest. And by all indications the formula has come to stay. It is necessary to seek for ways and means to make it less rancorous and problematic and to channel it in such a way as to ensure the overall progress of the country.
It has been noted that when state were first created in 1967, there were twelve of them. However, the state-creation exercise should be carried out with caution. This is to ensured the viability of the states and their ability to discharge their statutory and other functions for the common good of all and orderly development of the country. Moreover despite the present multiplicity of states and local governments, it is still not possible or feasible to give each ethnic group in Nigeria a state. the interest of the minorities in the present states and local governments who could not be given new states or local governments can be taken care of in other ways.
Efforts should be made through appropriate legislation to remove the indigene syndrome engendered the federal character principle and regulations which legalise its operation. It is an aberration of nation building and national integration to see fellow Nigerians, whom were born and may have lived in a place all their lives, being thrown out of jobs and discriminated against because they are not indigenes of the area. To this end the government have to see that every citizen of Nigeria who settles in any part of the country are treated as an indigene of the place and endowed with residency rights as it the case in the united state of America.
Federal character principles should be applied with less stringency but with fairness among ethnic groups, states and local governments that are homogenous, to avoid creating clearance cleavages and divisions where none, may have strictly speaking, existed. This will sane such societies from undue polarisation.
The view expressed by a former head of states, General Olusegun Obasanjo, that the principle of merit should not be completely sacrificed on the altar of federal character. The appointment of persons to various positions should be made from the best available in any group or section in the country. Moreover recruitment to posts which require specialist training such as those of medical practitioners, pilots, architects and engineers, should be essentially based on merit. Efforts should be made to give equal access to education to all Nigerians to bridge the educational disparities and to give opportunities for further training and education to serving staff.
The present application of the federal character principle is all bourgeous – oriented and does very little to relieve the plight of the masses of this country. For example, the indigenisation policy which put capital in the hands of a few Nigerians did not benefit the masses. The latter needed to be given equal opportunities for employment, equitable share in the distribution of the resources and benefits of the state in term of education, access to goods and services provided by government and improved condition of life. The political system should arrest the exploitation of the masses and redress their feeling of insecurity. It is by tackling these crucial of national identity, transcending parochial loyalties of ethnicity, religion, language and region.
REFERENCES
- Aaron, T.G. and Egwu, S.G. 2003. Federalism in Africa: The Imperative of Democratic Development. Trenton: Africa World Press.
- Abacha, S. 1994. Text of Address at the Inauguration of the National Constitutional Conference. Abuja, June.
- Agbese, P.2003. Federalism and the Minority Question in Nigeria, in Gana, A.T. et al (eds),
- Federalism in Africa: The Imperative of Democratic Development. Trenton: Africa World Press.
- Aguirre, Adalberto. & Turner, J.H. (1995) American Ethnicity: The dynamics and consequences of discrimination. U.S.A, Mcgraw-Hill, inc.
