Nigeria’s persistent debate over restructuring and “true federalism” has continued to dominate political discourse. To many Nigerians, restructuring is seen as the cure for insecurity, unemployment, corruption, economic stagnation and the fierce struggle for political power at the centre. Yet, while the idea appears attractive in theory, the realities on ground suggest that its actual implementation may be far more difficult than its advocates admit.
Federalism is traditionally designed to accommodate societies with deep ethnic, cultural or religious differences. Countries such as the United States, Canada, India and Switzerland have adopted federal systems to allow component units enjoy autonomy while remaining under one central authority. Nigeria followed this path during the colonial era when the British recognized the country’s diversity and structured it along regional lines.
The federal arrangement that emerged in the First Republic gave substantial autonomy to the regions. Each region controlled its economy and pursued developmental programmes independently. The Western Region under Chief Obafemi Awolowo successfully implemented free education and healthcare and established the first television station in Africa. The Northern Region thrived on groundnut production, the Eastern Region on palm produce, while the Midwest relied heavily on rubber. These regions were economically viable and politically influential.
However, the situation changed dramatically after years of military rule and the oil boom of the 1970s. The military introduced a centralized command structure into governance, while increased oil revenue shifted financial power to the federal government. Over time, states became heavily dependent on monthly allocations from Abuja, thereby weakening their autonomy.
Today, many proponents of restructuring advocate a return to a system where states control their resources and remit taxes or royalties to the centre, similar to the United States model. But this comparison overlooks key structural realities.
Unlike the United States, Nigeria’s repeated state creation exercises have fragmented the federation into largely unviable units. Since independence, Nigeria has expanded from four regions to 36 states, many of which depend almost entirely on federal allocations for survival. In several states, salaries alone consume most of the monthly revenue, leaving little for development projects. This has reduced many states to what critics describe as mere “salary-paying institutions.”
Geography and economic capacity also present major limitations. The United States is more than ten times larger than Nigeria in landmass, with many states possessing economic capacities comparable to sovereign nations. Nigeria’s states, by contrast, are much smaller and often lack the resources required for meaningful economic independence.
There are constitutional obstacles as well. Any major constitutional amendment requires approval by at least two-thirds of state assemblies. States that fear losing federal advantages under a restructured arrangement are unlikely to support such reforms. This political reality has repeatedly frustrated efforts at constitutional restructuring.
Successive governments have also failed to make meaningful progress despite grand promises. The 2014 National Conference under President Goodluck Jonathan, the 2005 National Political Reform Conference under President Olusegun Obasanjo, and earlier constitutional conferences all discussed restructuring extensively without achieving implementation. Ironically, many of these conferences focused more on creating additional states rather than reducing the number of federating units or strengthening regional autonomy — a contradiction that weakened the restructuring agenda itself.
Similarly, the Muhammadu Buhari administration rode to power partly on restructuring promises, yet little was achieved in that regard. Committees set up to examine the issue produced no practical roadmap capable of overcoming Nigeria’s political and constitutional complexities.
This reality explains why restructuring remains more of an aspiration than an achievable political project. While the idea may continue to inspire intellectual debates and political campaigns, the structural, economic and constitutional barriers standing against it are enormous.
Nigeria today remains a federation of 36 states with competing interests and growing demands for even more states. Under such circumstances, the dream of returning to the old regional arrangement or achieving “true federalism” appears increasingly unrealistic.
Restructuring may sound appealing, but unless Nigerians are prepared to confront the hard political and economic realities involved, it may remain what it has largely become — a political ideal sustained more by emotion than by practical possibility.
By Akido Agenro, Coordinator Democratic Orientation Movement, 45 Ike-Oluwa Street Iju-Ishaga Lagos. 09066999967.
