This document discusses the challenges of federalism in Nigeria and proposes ways to achieve true federalism. It argues that Nigeria's federal system has become too centralized, concentrating power in the central government instead of having coordinate independent regional governments. It recommends restructuring through inclusive dialogue to establish a balanced federation with self-governing regions of equal size and control over their resources. Adopting the principles of fiscal federalism, power sharing, and self-determination could help transform Nigeria's federalism into a more democratic system that respects diversity and regional autonomy.

1. TRUE FEDERALSIM AND RESTRUCTURING IN NIGERIA: CHALLENGES AND
THE WAY FORWARD
BY ALUU VINCENT OGBONNIA MBA, (MSC IN VIEW) DEPARTMENT OF
POLITICAL SCIENCE, P.O.BOX, 4262 UNIVERSITY OF UYO E.mail-
nellyvingroup@gmail.com 08036688375, 08089753734
Abstract
The basic minimal structures required for a country to lay claims to the practice of federalism
include a political system in which there is power sharing under a written constitution with a
government consisting of at least two orders: a central or federal government and the
governments of the constituent units. Each order of government receives an allocation of
financial resources tailored to their specific requirements. Nigeria has been a federal state
since 1954, yet even this basic requirement of federalism has not been attained in the
Nigerian federalism especially in line with the postulations of Professor KC Wheare.. This
paper discusses the attributes of federalism and the practice of federalism in Nigeria in
comparison with the practice in other federal states. It is observed that there are a lot of issues
in the practice of federalism in Nigeria, which make the practice far removed from the
practice of true federalism. Constitutional amendment as the need arises is part of the typical
dynamism of constitutional order to meet the aspirations of a federation. Nigeria is presently
going through a constitutional amendment process, which it is hoped will deal with some of
the issues in the structure of the Nigerian federalism.
Introduction
Long before the arrival of British colonialists, the area now known as Nigeria was inhabited
by people belonging to different empires, kingdoms and societies operating different forms of
government. While the Hausa-Fulani operated a centralized form of government vested in the
Emir, the Yorubas had a quasi-federal system with powers vested in the Obas and
Kingmakers and the Ibos were acephalous (republican) with powers not vested in a single
authority (Udokang, 2006:134).
Pre-colonial Nigeria and its people engaged actively in state formation, dissolution and
reformation where accountability and representation were features of governance with leaders
being held accountable and judged based on performance while decisions were based on
deliberations, consultations and consensus, (Uya (1988 in Udeh (2007:78). The above
changed due to the invasion and conquest by the British imperialists in the 19th
century who

2. changed the style of governance of a once self-accounting political system of the people,
(Lucky and Olarewaju (2014).
Between 1922 and 1963, different constitutions were put in place to help shape the political
and administrative future of Nigeria. The 1946 Richard’s constitution introduced landmark
changes for federalism by dividing the nation into the North, West and East. As observed by
Dode (2015:123), “While the 1946 constitution laid foundations for federalism, the 1951,
1954, 1960 and 1963 constitutions expanded and provided for full implementation. Each
region enjoyed full autonomy and freedom from central control. The regions developed at
their pace and adopted administrative models that fitted their areas. While the regions had
residual powers, the central and regional governments shared concurrent powers”. The
above assertion tallies with Wheare’s postulation that, “By federalism I mean a method of
dividing powers so that the federal and regional governments are each, within a sphere,
coordinate and independent. I have implied to the extent that any system that does not
conform to this criterion, has no claim to call itself federal” (Wheare 1963:1). The
intervention by the Military on January 15, 1966 into the political life of Nigeria changed
governance structure into a unitary one thus compromising the independence of the
federating units with the federal government controlling major aspects of the nation.
The Problem with Nigeria’s Federalism
There is in general, a national consensus that the type of federalism intended by the founding
fathers of Nigeria has not been worked out. The long years of Military rule reinforced
centralizing tendencies at the expense of the regional/ethnic autonomy. The argument here is
that the Military by the way and manner it administered Nigeria for more than 40 years
virtually annihilated federalism and operated it as a unitary state in consonance with its
centralized command and authority structure, (Ekwueme 2016:34) By this, every institution
created by the military as well as the constitutions defining the Nigeria state have followed
the aforementioned pattern. The nation as is currently managed has become a major
impediment to administrative, economic and political development.
Adebayo (2001:98) contends that true federalism appeared only between 1954 and 1966
though the structure was lopsided as the Northern region was twice bigger than the East and
the West put together. The product was the seed of political rancor and bitterness that nearly
tore the nation apart which was one of the direct causes of the 1967-1970 civil war. Adebayo
(2001:200) queried the rationale behind the federal government’s exclusive right on 68 items
contained in the exclusive legislative list and concurrent powers on 24 others as contained in

3. the concurrent list. He also asked why government had overriding power to legislate for any
part of the federation for peace, order and good governance.
The crux of the matter lies in the fact that the federal government has too much power, plays
dominant role and overbearing influence which has been grossly abused thus leading to
intensified calls for restructuring coupled with suppressed frustrations and resentment during
the long years of military rule resulting in inter-communal violence now threatening the
peace and unity of Nigeria, (Aderonmu 2010). While the national question has taken the
center stage with sections of the country crying marginalization in terms of development and
occupation of strategic positions, there is the issue of resource control and the fact that the
federating units never had discussions or negotiations to become one, (Oladeji 2008). These
have heightened activities of various ethnic militant groups such as Odua Peoples’ Congress,
Arewa Peoples’ Congress, Niger Delta Militants, Independent People of Biafra, the Boko
Haram insurgency among others and generated conflicting views and interests on the
continuing existence of Nigeria as a federation, hence the call for true federalism and
restructuring, (Bakare 2016)
The Way Forward/Conclusions
For true federalism to be achieved, an all-embracing, all-encompassing and all-inclusive
dialogue of all ethnic nationalities needs to be convoked for opportunity to dialogue,
negotiate and ventilate views, aspirations, fears and challenges.
No federating unit should be larger or has advantage more than other units in terms of size
and population. The trend where the North is bigger than the East and West put together
portends grave danger and will engender strive, mutual fear and suspicion, acrimony and
conflicts.
The concept of coordinate and independent federating units as enunciated in Wheare’s
definition of federalism must replace the current superior-inferior and master-servant
relationship that currently plays out where there is ever-centralization of powers at the centre.
The principle of self-determination must be allowed to flourish creating more states to allow
for balanced federation, deepen democratic process and grassroots development.

4. Resource control by the owners of the resources is also a viable means of ensuring true federalism.
The present federal arrangement where the Federal government control and dominate the large share
of states resources has been a clog on a wheel on Nigerian federalism and this has to stop if Nigeria
really want to experience true federal system. The issue of fiscal federalism needs a critical overhaul
and bulk of the resources should go the federating units, (Lucky and Olarewajun 2014).
Nigeria needs true democratic federalism to ensure rapid and sustainable development,
national integration and handle the issue of diversity by respecting others cultural identity and
nationalities by making various ethnic communities the owner of the country’s system
building process.
There is need for transformational and selfless leadership as well as strong and stable
institutions to help entrench ideals of true federalism. Needed are leaders with skills in
effecting appropriate compromises and conflict resolution, collective sense of patience,
accommodation and tolerance and qualities such as justice, equity and fairness.
Finally, there is need to imbibe a political culture that protects the rights of ethnic
nationalities and that of the citizens and extract duties from them. There must be guarantee of
equality before the law and provision of opportunities for all citizens to have equal access to
the material resources that guarantee their basic livelihood. The essence of democracy is that
citizens must be able to ventilate their views through unrestrained debates from the lowest
level and smallest units; and that there should be active citizens’ participation in governance
as well as unrestricted communication between government and the governed.
Conclusion
The gains of true federalism and restructuring are enormous and are a desirable path to
effective compromise, protection of self-determination and identity. True federalism remains
a viable option to solving the myriads of challenges confronting Nigeria. The federating units
must sit to discuss the basis of its unity. The need to fashion out a more acceptable and home

5. grown form of government as was done in India, Ethiopia and Brazil cannot be over-
emphasized. A new practice of dialogue, negotiation inclusivity, mutual respect and tolerance
must be imbibed.
References
Adebayo,A (2001). “Principles and Practice of Public Administration in Nigeria” Ibadan:
Spectrum Books Limited
Aderonmu, J.A (2010). Federalism, National Question and Patterns of Power Sharing in
Nigeria: Kogi Journal of Politics. Kogi State University Anyingba, Vol 1. No 1 12-24
Bakare, T. (2016) “Unification Decree Destroyed Nigeria’s Federalism” New Telegraph
Daily Newspaper, January 6, 2016, Pg 12
Dode R.O (2015) “Elements of Comparative Federalism” Uyo: Nuclear Spin Publishers
Ekwueme, A. (2016) “Still in Search of True Federalism” Being Lecture Delivered at the 17th
Annual convention of Igbo youths Movement at Nike Lake Hotel Enugu
Ovwassa O Lucky and Idowu Olarewaju (2014) “Challenges and Prospects of Federalism in
Nigeria” in Ajayi R and Joseph F (eds) Understanding Government and Politics in
Nigeria. Ibadan: University of Ibadan Press
Oladeji A. (2008) “Federalism, Resource Control and the Future of Democracy in Nigeria” in
Orji, N. (2008) “Eat and Give to Your Brother: Politics of Office Distribution in Nigeria” in
In-Spire Journal of Law, Politics and Societies. Vol , No. 2 126-146
Udokang, M.E (2006). “Foundations to the study of Government and Politics” Lagos: Neutex
Venture Limited
Uya, E. (1988) in Udeh, G.N (2007). “Civil Society and Nigeria’s Democracy: Mboho
Mkparawa Ibibio Experience” Calabar: Clearlines Publications Limited
Wheare, K.C. (1963), “Federal Government 4th Edition” London Oxford University Press.