Federalism, as a system of governance, divides power between a central authority and various constituent regions or states. In Nigeria, federalism plays a critical role in managing the complex diversity of ethnic groups, languages, and cultures. However, the balance of power between the federal government and the 36 states remains a significant point of discussion and, at times, contention. This article examines the evolution, challenges, and potential reforms within Nigeria’s federal system to understand the balance of power between federal and state governments.
The Evolution of Federalism in Nigeria
Nigeria’s federalism has been shaped by its colonial history, regional diversity, and periods of military rule. The federal structure was formally adopted in 1954 through the Lyttleton Constitution, which divided the country into regions with varying levels of autonomy. When Nigeria gained independence in 1960, the federal system was meant to unite diverse ethnic groups and regions under one national government. However, the quest for greater regional control and power sharing between the federal and state governments quickly emerged as one of Nigeria’s central political issues.
With Nigeria’s transition to democracy in 1999 after years of military rule, federalism was reinstated with a structure that recognized 36 states and the Federal Capital Territory (FCT). The 1999 Constitution reinforced the federal system but left many areas of governance centralized under the federal government, leading to a continuous struggle for states to gain greater autonomy and control over local resources and policies.
The Division of Powers in the Nigerian Federal System
Under the current constitution, powers are divided into three main lists:
1.Exclusive Legislative List: This list enumerates powers solely under the jurisdiction of the federal government. These include areas such as defense, foreign affairs, customs, immigration, and currency regulation. States cannot legislate on these issues, giving the federal government significant control over matters seen as critical to national unity and security.
2.Concurrent Legislative List: Both federal and state governments can legislate on areas within this list, which includes health, education, and infrastructure development. However, in case of a conflict between federal and state laws on these matters, federal law takes precedence. This often leads to tensions when states wish to implement policies tailored to their specific needs.
3.Residual Powers: These powers are neither on the Exclusive nor Concurrent lists and thus fall within the domain of the state governments. These include local governance and certain aspects of cultural and social services. Residual powers provide states with some control over local affairs but are limited in scope and funding compared to federal responsibilities.
Major Issues in Federal-State Relations
1.Revenue Allocation and Resource Control: One of the most contentious issues in Nigerian federalism is the allocation of revenue from natural resources, particularly oil. Nigeria’s oil-producing states in the Niger Delta region have long demanded a greater share of revenue generated from oil, arguing that they bear the environmental costs of extraction. The federal government, however, retains significant control over revenue allocation, which many argue perpetuates dependency and inequality among states.
2.Security and Policing: In recent years, rising insecurity in various regions has led to calls for state police forces. Currently, Nigeria operates a centralized police force, controlled by the federal government. Proponents of state policing argue that states understand their unique security challenges better and could respond more effectively with local law enforcement. However, concerns remain about the potential misuse of state police by local politicians.
3.Education and Health: While both education and health are under the Concurrent List, the federal government has substantial influence in these sectors, particularly in policy formulation and funding allocation. State governments often struggle with limited resources, impacting their ability to meet local needs. Efforts by states to innovate in these areas can be hindered by overlapping regulations and funding dependencies on the federal government.
4.Judicial Independence and Autonomy: While Nigeria’s judiciary is an independent branch of government, federalism’s impact on judicial autonomy remains complex. States have their own high courts, but appeals go to the federal-level Court of Appeal and ultimately to the Supreme Court. Disparities in the funding and resources available to state and federal courts have raised concerns over judicial effectiveness and independence at the state level.
The Prospects for Reform
The need for constitutional reform to address imbalances in Nigeria’s federal structure has been widely recognized. Some key areas of reform include:
1.Fiscal Federalism: Fiscal federalism seeks to empower states by giving them greater control over resources generated within their borders. By reforming revenue allocation policies, states could better address their developmental needs and reduce dependency on federal allocations. Proposals for fiscal federalism include allowing states to retain a higher percentage of revenue from natural resources and taxation.
2.State Autonomy in Security Matters: Allowing states to establish their own police forces, with federal oversight to prevent abuse, could improve security across Nigeria. This would enable quicker responses to localized threats and reduce the strain on the federal police force.
3.Education and Healthcare Reforms: Granting states more authority over educational and health policies, along with increased financial support, could enable states to innovate and address region-specific challenges. Decentralization in these sectors could improve outcomes by tailoring services to meet the unique needs of different states.
4.Strengthening Judicial Independence: Ensuring adequate funding for state courts and simplifying judicial processes could enhance justice delivery and uphold the independence of state-level judiciaries. This would help to balance the federal influence over the judiciary and improve legal recourse within states.
Conclusion
Federalism in Nigeria remains a work in progress, with both benefits and challenges in balancing power between the federal and state governments. While federalism has helped maintain Nigeria’s unity in diversity, imbalances in resource control, security, and administrative authority highlight the need for ongoing reforms. Strengthening state autonomy, enhancing fiscal responsibility, and enabling localized governance can help Nigeria achieve a more balanced and effective federal system, ultimately benefiting all Nigerians by aligning governance more closely with local needs and aspirations.
