By Habib Korede
Restructuring has been a topic on Nigeria’s news headlines for decades, and as the 2023 general election approaches, ‘restructuring’ is one optics for political campaigns. However, the unification of Nigeria, which has continually stirred this debate, results from the colonials’ avarice but has fortunately been a blessing.
Before the colonials, Nigeria was home to over 300 ethnic groups, with Hausa in the North, Igbo in the South-East, and Yoruba in the South-West, as the three dominant ethnic groups. These ethnic groups operate under various separate entities such as ethno-religious, geo-regional, and political nationalities under caliphate, kingdoms, and empires,
The colonials amalgamated these entities through divide and rule policy on 1 January 1914, following Frederick Lugard’s recommendation. The colonials take full advantage of their exploration of the country by sternly concentrating power at the centre to favour their political and imperial interests instead of laying a good foundation for nation-building. This has become a puzzle for Nigeria in the post-colonial era.
Struggles for inclusion at the centre and resource allocation have resulted in many heated controversies, distrust, compromise, and violent conflicts. These include the crisis that emanated in the 1959 and 1964 federal elections, the January and July 1966 coups, the three years civil war of 1967–1970 when the Igbo region wanted to secede into Biafra, followed by several bloody coups and counter-coups.
The unity of Nigeria has also been threatened by various ethno-religious conflicts resulting from bad governance, such as the Kaduna State Zangon-Kataf crisis in 1987, 12 June 1993, Moshood Abiola’s presidential election annulment crisis, and return to the military junta in November 1993.
The return to the democratic system of government under the leadership of Gen. Abdulsalami Abubakar, which gave birth to the presidency of Obasanjo in May 1999, led to a rapid paradigm shift in Nigerian political history.
Deterioration in the governance of the country sparked several protests. Protests like the 2012 fuel subsidy removal and the 2020 #EndSARS that resulted in the death of protesters are only a few examples.
From 1999 to date, every region of the country has shown dissatisfaction with the status quo. This dissatisfaction has led to several agitations and overheating of the country’s polity, which metamorphosed to ethno-religious and inter-communal crises, such as the year 2000 Kaduna crisis, the 7–13 Sep. 2001 Jos crisis, and so on.
These crises triggered the formation of several ethno-militia groups such as the Oodua Peoples Congress, Indigenous People of Biafra, Movement for the Emancipation of the Niger Delta, Niger Delta Avengers, the Boko Haram insurgency, banditry and the coordinated Fulani/Herdsmen-Farmers conflict. These militias are agent provocateurs that simultaneously unleash terror in the country to disrupt governance, leading to several national conversations, such as restructuring, decentralisation, creation of state police, and separation.
The rising agitation for a restructured Nigeria results from perceived marginalisation, discouraging national leadership, identity crisis, ethno-religious intolerance, the concentration of power at the centre, and lack of patriotism.
However, different scholars have interpreted the word ‘restructuring’ differently, and both the antagonists and protagonists for a restructured Nigeria dissent on its meaning. Though, I see restructuring as ‘using an efficient medium to restore a collapsing building to save everyone in the building.’
From 1914 to 2014, eleven constitutional conferences were held to strategise the most favourable federal system and resource sharing policy to keep the regions satisfied and united. However, the 2014 national conference confirmed inequality in the demand of all the country’s parts. Each region demands a policy for their vested interest even when it disfavours the unity and progress of the country.
The Southern region suggests the country should revert to the regionalism of the 1963 constitution. Still, this suggestion was frayed by the fear of dominance and marginalisation of the minorities from future governance of the majority in these regions.
Besides, the founding fathers of Nigeria were more selfless and patriotic than the current group of leaders, and the country’s population is higher than it was; these will make regional governance in contemporary Nigeria impracticable.
Decentralisation of power and the emergence of state police, as suggested by many, will aid in the production of a pool of authoritarian state governors whose misuse of power will decline the country’s democracy. But, as mentioned by the former president of Nigeria, Goodluck Jonathan, ‘the stronger the boat of (democracy), the more it is able to meet the challenges of its voyage and deliver on its promise to citizens.’
Notwithstanding, the Northern region focused on creating additional states and power rotation among the six geo-political zones. Obviously, creating more states will further deteriorate the already weak economy because of the unnecessary administration cost.
It is noteworthy that the clamour for creating a new state is not for developmental reasons but political purposes. This will abet the emergence of unproductive parasitic state elites, lead to the agitation for creating additional states, and eventually actuate the aggressive Balkanisation of Nigeria. Like Yugoslavia, East Timor, the former Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, and South Sudan.
The systemic restructure of Nigeria will be insurmountable. The 1999 constitution stands as a considerable constraint to the systemic and resource restructuring because of the intricate processes involved in amending the constitution. This is one of the reasons the 2014 national conference ended in a stalemate; Nigerian leaders benefit from the current state of affairs in the country. They manipulate the system for their selfish interests. These leaders capitalise on the gullibility of the average Nigerian by using ‘restructuring’ as a campaign strategy to divide Nigerians, to amass votes at the polls after every four years.
Because Nigeria has remained an indivisible entity for over 100 years shows the unity of the country. The many challenges Nigeria is facing arises from the selfishness of the leaders and the mindset of the citizens. It is eminent that Nigerians should recognise the power in population and diversity before it is too late. Thomas Malthus explains that: ‘The power of population is indefinitely greater than the power on the Earth to produce subsistence for man’.
Nigerians yearn for a prosperous Nigeria, and Nigerians need to know that prosperity comes with unity, sacrifices, and patience. ‘The cost of disintegration (of Nigeria) is higher than the cost of being together. We have everything to gain by being united than disunited,’ as stated by the former President of Nigeria, Olusegun Obasanjo.
The perennial agitation for restructuring and separation ensues from bad governance, corruption, insecurity, nepotism, and ethnic intolerance.
Achieving two concurrent goals will solve these problems: the first will be to intensify the country’s social structure, which will aid in reconciling Nigerians and redefine the perception Nigerians perceive Nigeria. The second will be strengthening the central government by building robust institutions where no one is above the law and where meritocracy always supersedes mediocrity.
Social restructuring of Nigeria is achievable under different progressions: by prioritising civic education and history at the basic education level; refurbishment of unity primary and secondary school across the country; the national youth service corps should continue to aid the youths of the country to explore the diverse cultures and enhance pragmatic multicultural solutions to the country’s problem; there should be an effective orientation agency that will be responsible for sufficient enlightenment of the masses, particularly on peace and unity of the country; and investing in intercultural dialogue.
When there is an unarguable socially restructured Nigeria, patriotism will augment, and every other thing will fall into place.
Most of the 36 states governors are doing a lot of things wrong. Still, the centre always receives the blame because of the rising weakness in the capacity of the central government to sanction the misappropriation of resources and bad governance by the state government adequately. Building powerful autonomous institutions will strengthen the central government.
Powerful institutions will enhance check and balance in the activities of the other arm of the government, which will help filter the best candidate for the leadership position in the public sector, and will unquestionably prosecute the guilty ones.
Powerful institutions will promote democracy and credible leaders. In the words of Chinua Achebe, ‘Nigeria is what it is because its leaders are not what they should be.’
Nigeria, a country with the fastest growing economy in Africa, the highest GDP on the continent, and the sixth most populous country globally, has all the potential required to become the world superpower. Good governance will enhance an excellent economy, peace, stability, and prosperity.
According to Ibrahim Index of African Governance, good governance is ‘the provision of the political, social and economic goods that any citizen has the right to expect from his or her state, and that any state has the responsibility to deliver to its citizens’.
Therefore, when the citizens are getting all the social and economic values they are expecting from the government, no region will have the urge to clamour for restructuring or separation of the country. However, there cannot be good governance when there is no equity, equality, transparency, inclusiveness, accountability, justice and responsiveness in the country’s activities
Habib Korede is a BEng (Hons) Civil Engineering graduate and a writer. He authored Propelling Success, and The Kalahari Review has featured his work. He can be reached via habibkorede247@gmail.com.
