Intergovernmental Relations and the Practice of Federalism in Nigeria
Chapter One
OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY
This study is intended to critically investigate into the root causes of the uncordial Intergovernmental relations between the different tiers of government that have led to the power tussles between ethnical groups within the Nigerian nation.
- To identify the major course of dispute between the federal and state government.
- To examine the extent to which federal government control on state government militates against its development.
- To ascertain if the revenue allocation formular is justifiable.
- To proffer solutions to the causes of uncordial Intergovernmental relations between different tiers of government.
- To compare the policies of the militants and civilians administration and Intergovernmental relations and indentify the difference between the two (2).
6. The revenue allocation formula a major problem of Nigeria Intergovernmental relations
CHAPTER TWO
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
2.1 concepts of intergovernmental relations
The term “intergovernmental relations” is commonly used to refer to relations between central, regional and local governments, as well as governments between any one sphere (level) , that facilitate the attainment of common goals through co-operation (Opeskin, 1988). Used in this sense, mechanisms for intergovernmental relations may be seen as employing consensual tools for the mutual benefit of the constituent units of the state. For Van der Waldt and Du Toit (1997) intergovernmental relations refer to the mutual relations and interactions between government institutions at horizontal and vertical levels. This is in line with Thornhill’s (2002) definition that “intergovernmental relations consist of all the actions and transactions of politicians and officials in national, sub-national units of government and organs of the state”. The foregoing are in line with Adamolekun’s (1999) position that it deals with the relationships between government and sub-national units, hence Adamolekun (1986) defines intergovernmental relations as the interactions that take place among the levels of government within a state. Crucial to this relation amongst spheres of government are statutory bodies (legislative backing) and non-statutory bodies (constituted by government for a specific task) as this can promote intergovernmental relations in the form of committees, boards or a range of other bodies (Kuye, Thornhill and Fourie, 2002:45). Wright (1988) defines intergovernmental relations as an interacting network of institutions at national, provincial and local levels, created and refined to enable the various parts of government to cooperate in a manner which is appropriate to its institutional arrangements. In his own view, Obi (2004) sees intergovernmental relations to mean the complex patterns of interactions, co-operations and inter-dependence between two or more levels of government. It is further described as a plethora of formal and informal relationships and transactions that develop among levels of government within a nation-state. In Nigeria for instance, it refers to the interactions that exist among the Federal (Central or National) states and local governments, state and state interactions, state and local interactions or local and local interactions. All these put together refer to the pattern of intergovernmental relations. An intergovernmental relations system therefore, consists of facilitative systems and relationships that enable the units of government to participate effectively and carry out mandate so that governmental goals are achieved. This includes executive mechanisms, coordinating mechanisms, cooperative agreements, judicial and legislative mechanisms that all facilitate delivery by government machinery. Intergovernmental relations can thus be defined as the ‘glue’ that holds them together. In other words, it is the interactions, relationships and the conduct of officials between governmental activities. It seeks the achievement of common goals through mutual relationships between and across vertical and horizontal governmental arrangements, alignment and cohesion across all spheres of government. The aim of governmental relations therefore, is to enable governmental activities (primarily service delivery), through synergy, effectiveness and efficiency in delivering services, to sustain democracy and strengthen delivery capacity across all spheres of government for the common good (Isioma, 2010:53). Flowing from the above, intergovernmental relations can be described as the interactions that take place among the different levels of government within a state. Usually, the concept is associated with states having a federal administrative system. This, however, does not in any way suggest that intergovernmental relations do not take place in a unitary system. In a federal system however, where the relationships between the Federal, Central or National Government and the major sub-national units (province, region or state) are formally spelt out in the constitution, any re-arrangement must be through a constitutional amendment involving all the levels of government. Although, the emphasis in the analysis of intergovernmental relations is on Federal-State relations in a federal system, a comprehensive analysis of such relations shows diverse relations. With respect to a federal state therefore, nine types of relations are discernible. These are: Federal-state, Federal-local, FederalCivic groups, state-state, state-local, state-civic groups, local-local, local-civic groups and inter-civic groups (Adamolekun, 1983; Olopade, 1984; Nwatu and Okafor, 2004). In a unitary state, intergovernmental relations would be referred to as the interactions between the national government and the sub-national governments. However, the constitutional allocation of governmental functions between Federal and regional governments in a Federal system is absent. It is the Central government that determined which functions it allocated to the sub-national governments.
CHAPTER THREE
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
INTRODUCTION
In this chapter, we described the research procedure for this study. A research methodology is a research process adopted or employed to systematically and scientifically present the results of a study to the research audience viz. a vis, the study beneficiaries.
RESEARCH DESIGN
Research designs are perceived to be an overall strategy adopted by the researcher whereby different components of the study are integrated in a logical manner to effectively address a research problem. In this study, the researcher employed the survey research design. This is due to the nature of the study whereby the opinion and views of people are sampled. According to Singleton & Straits, (2009), Survey research can use quantitative research strategies (e.g., using questionnaires with numerically rated items), qualitative research strategies (e.g., using open-ended questions), or both strategies (i.e., mixed methods). As it is often used to describe and explore human behaviour, surveys are therefore frequently used in social and psychological research.
POPULATION OF THE STUDY
According to Udoyen (2019), a study population is a group of elements or individuals as the case may be, who share similar characteristics. These similar features can include location, gender, age, sex or specific interest. The emphasis on study population is that it constitutes of individuals or elements that are homogeneous in description.
This study was carried to examine intergovernmental relations and the practice of federalism in Nigeria. Selected political parties form the population of the study.
SAMPLE SIZE DETERMINATION
A study sample is simply a systematic selected part of a population that infers its result on the population. In essence, it is that part of a whole that represents the whole and its members share characteristics in like similitude (Udoyen, 2019). In this study, the researcher adopted the convenient sampling method to determine the sample size.
CHAPTER FOUR
DATA PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS
INTRODUCTION
This chapter presents the analysis of data derived through the questionnaire and key informant interview administered on the respondents in the study area. The analysis and interpretation were derived from the findings of the study. The data analysis depicts the simple frequency and percentage of the respondents as well as interpretation of the information gathered. A total of eighty (80) questionnaires were administered to respondents of which only seventy-seven (77) were returned and validated. This was due to irregular, incomplete and inappropriate responses to some questionnaire. For this study a total of 77 was validated for the analysis.
CHAPTER FIVE
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
Introduction
It is important to ascertain that the objective of this study was to ascertain intergovernmental relations and the practice of federalism in Nigeria. In the preceding chapter, the relevant data collected for this study were presented, critically analyzed and appropriate interpretation given. In this chapter, certain recommendations made which in the opinion of the researcher will be of benefits in addressing the challenges of intergovernmental relations and the practice of federalism in Nigeria
Summary
This study was on intergovernmental relations and the practice of federalism in Nigeria. Three objectives were raised which included: To identify the major course of dispute between the federal and state government, to examine the extent to which federal government control on state government militates against its development, to ascertain if the revenue allocation formula is justifiable, to proffer solutions to the causes of uncordial Intergovernmental relations between different tiers of government, to compare the policies of the militants and civilians administration and Intergovernmental relations and indentify the difference between the two (2) and the revenue allocation formula a major problem of Nigeria Intergovernmental relations. A total of 77 responses were received and validated from the enrolled participants where all respondents were drawn from selected political parties. Hypothesis was tested using Chi-Square statistical tool (SPSS).
Conclusion
Intergovernmental relation is a very sensitive area in all political systems, especially as it is conditioned by transient factors. Even in federal states, the situation is virtually the same. The system of government applicable in a country has a bearing on decentralization of authority, powers and functions. In theory, countries with a unitary system of government usually centralize power and authority in the national government, whilst nations with a federal system of government usually decentralize power and authority in the lower levels of government. This, however, is not always the case in practice. The situation is dependent on whether a country is a developed or developing country. For example, Britain and Nigeria where the former has a unitary system of government, yet more powers and authority has been decentralized to local governments than Nigeria which has a federal system of government. Admittedly, there is an obvious division of powers and functions between the three levels of government in Nigeria’s federal structure. However, the statutory provision which states that the Governor or the House of Assembly may assign any function to the local government without difference to this statutory provision some how subordinates local government to the state government. Expectedly, both the federal and state governments have fallen on this provision to allocate/assign local governments with all sorts of centrally controlled functions. Essentially, this was manifested in the directives from above for local governments to take on some responsibilities for the ‘Better Life for Rural Women Programmed’ and subsequently the ‘Family Support Programmed’ (FSP) of the Federal Government and those of the erstwhile Directorate of Food, Roads and Rural Infrastructures (DFRRI), National Directorate of Employment (NDE), National Electoral Commission of Nigeria (NECON), National Population Commission (NPC) and Mass Mobilization for Social Justice, Economic Recovery and Self Reliance (MAMSER) which has been succeeded by the National Orientation Agency (NOA). Experience has shown all over the world that where there is corruption on a large scale, manpower deficiency, poor communication system, multi-partism and multi-ethnicity, centralization is always preferred to decentralization with the implication of the lower tiers, becoming agents and not partners in the structural arrangement. Yet, the basis on which intergovernmental elations should be predicated is that, where there are purely local and beneficial services, Local Governments should have unfettered local discretion to raise and spend money on them, while for services which are macro in nature, the centre must intervened for uniformity. Thus the processes of intervention and control between centre and periphery are inevitable but should be self critical and follow agreed paths.
Recommendation
From the forgoing, the success of Nigeria’s federal system for effective governance depends largely on an appropriate division of responsibilities and fiscal federalism among the three tiers as well as the three organs of government. An institutional framework is quite important for good intergovernmental fiscal relations, but caution should be exercised to avoid over-burdening the economy through unnecessary duplication and proliferation of agencies.
References
- Adamolekun, L. (1983) Public Administration: A Nigeria and Comparative Perspective.Lagos: Longman Books. ____________(1999) Public Administration in Africa: Main Issues and Selected Country Cases. United Kingdom: Westview Press.
- Ayoade, J.A.A. (1980) Inter-Governmental Relations in Nigeria. Quarterly Journal of Administration, 16(2): 119-132.
- Abonyi, N.N (2005) Trends in Modern Public Administration. Enugun: John Jacob Classic-Publishers Limited.
- Bamgbose, J.A. (2008) Intergovernmental Relations and Political Opposition in-Nigeria’s Fourth Republic – (1999-2004). Ozean Journal of Social Sciences, 1(1): 75-89.3
- Bello-Imam, I.B. (1990) (Ed.) Local Government Finance in Nigeria. Ibadan:NISER. _____________ (1996) Local Government in Nigeria: Evolving a Third Tier of Government. Ibadan: Heinemmann Educational Books (Nigeria) PLC.
- Benovetz, J. (1980) Federalism and Intergovernmental Relations: The American-Experience, Quarterly Journal Administration, 14(3):141-156.
- Cameron, C.M. (1994) “Intergovernmental Fiscal Relations in South Africa: The Case of the Cape Town City Council”. In: Journal of Public Administration, 29(1): 31-47.
- Cameron, R. (1995) “The History of Devolution of Powers to Local Authorities in South Africa:The Shifting Sands of State Control”. In: Journal of Local Government Studies, 21(3): 21-38.
- Davies, A.E. (1998) The Search for a Stable Local Government System in Nigeria. Ilorin Journal of Business and Social Sciences, 5(1): 71-87.
- Dlakwa, H.D. (2004) ‘The Politics of Intergovernmental Relations in Nigeria: Perspectives of the North-East Geo-Political Zone’, In: Egwaikhide, E. and Kelechi, O. (Eds.) Inter-Governmental Relations in Nigeria, Ibadan: John Achers.
- Egomwan, J.A. (1984) Principles and Practice of Local Government in Nigeria: An Insight into the Problems of Public Policy Formulation and Implementation.Benin City: SMO Aka and Brothers Press.
- Elaigwu, I. (1980) ‘The Military and State Building: Federal-State Relations in Nigeria’sMilitary Federalism 1966-1976’. In: Akinyemi, A., Cole, P. and Ofonagoro, W. (Eds.) Readings on Federalism. Lagos:
- N.I.I.A. (1985) ‘The Military and Political Engineering in Nigeria (1966-1970): An Overview. In: Ajayi, A. and Bashir, I. (Eds.) Evolution of Political Culture in-Nigeria. Lagos: University Press Limited. (2007) Fiscal Federalism in Nigeria: Facing the Challenges of the Future. Jos: Aha-Publishing House.
- Ezeani, O. (2004) Local Government Administration. Enugun: Zik-Chuks Printing Press.
- Federal Republic of Nigeria (1979) The 1979 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. Lagos: Federal Government Press.
- Fatile, J.O., Fajonyomi, S.O., &Adejuwon, K.D. (2017). State-local government fiscal relations and grassroots development: An empirical review of selected local governments in Lagos state. Journal of Public Administration, Finance and Law, 12.
