State Stability and National Reconstruction: An Exploratory Review of Nigeria Federal System

Transcription

1 State Stability and National Reconstruction: An Exploratory Review of Nigeria Federal System Hamza A. Yusuf Department of Public Administration, Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, Kaduna State, Nigeria Umar Mohammed Bello Department of Political Science, Federal University Dutse, Dutse, Jigawa State, Nigeria Abstract Political debates on Nigeria federal structure has centred largely on the distortions imposed by decades of military dictatorship and over centralization of power and resources. Federalism, both as a principle and form of governance, provides an ideal platform for countries divided by race, ethnicity and religion. However, the impending challenge for national stability is the dynamics of global economy and democratization. The prevailing democratization processes and the evolving characters, especially the civil society groups, are redefining and redesigning the federal structure within the context of constitutionalism and fundamental human rights than ethnicism; promoting diversity, all inclusive governance and legitimacy as basis for addressing regional grievances. The Nigeria state class characters of the past are the obstacles to the realization of democracy and true federalism. The main objective of this paper is to explore literature on the philosophy, principle and practice of federalism, and especially within the Nigeria nation-state. Empirical researches, publications and discourse on Nigeria federal construct were explored, reviewed and conclusion made to determination of federalism as panacea for socio-political stability and survival of Nigeria nation-state. The paper found and concluded that Nigeria must face the challenge of adjusting her federal structure with the emerging realities of units agitation for resource control, political participation and all inclusive governance. The federal construction, if it must meet the challenges of governance and management in Nigeria, must understand and appreciate a federal culture built on a spirit of dialogue, trade-off, negotiation and consensus building. Where these are lacking, the survival of the nation-state through federal construct becomes an impossible enterprise. Thus, for federalism to be more effective in Nigeria, there must be commitment to ideals and values of its principle; and the institutional mechanism must be proactive to addressing the entrenched poverty and incidence of underdevelopment that characterized the regions or units (states and local governments). However, what the principle of federalism cannot supply are such human values as fairness, justice, tolerance and accommodation; this is a function of leadership political will. Key Words: Federal Construct, Nigeria, Stability, Nation-State, Regionalism, Development Introduction The compelling issues determining appropriate political construct for social stability, since the end of the cold war, include the emergence of neo-liberal global ideological hegemony and, indeed, the rapidly evolving and encompassing democratic changes characterizing most nations of the world. This has also informed the need to address the fundamental question of the appropriate and enduring form of political system. This challenge is more profound in a heterogeneous, multi-cultural, ethnoreligious and group diverse society. That is the welding of the diverse ethnic groups interests under a form of constitutional government, characterized by the rule of law and by equal participatory democratic politics. The interest to attain nationhood, where the various social group aggregates transfer their primordial loyalties to state formation, is informed by the desire for development, democracy and justice. However, the preoccupation of the elites for group interests and survival precipitated the erosion of political landscape in most African states with the consequent abandonment of the social contract Journal of Social and Management Sciences Vol. 3 No 1 June 2017 Page 1

2 philosophy. Thus the emergence of one-party rule, personified life presidents and military dictators, and supported by multi-corporations, was a minus to nation-statehood. The incidence of state collapse in Africa (i.e. Sudan, Ethiopia, etc.), is informed by the poor management of diversity and plurality of competing ethnics, and ignoring the enduring issue of African political economy. The neo-colonial economies are anchored on narrow frameworks of accumulation: heavy foreign domination, absence of a coherent and well-conceived industrialization strategies and exportation of agriculture as well as extracted minerals.this create social alienation, deprivation and dejection. Further to this is the absence of popular participation, exclusion of opposition and the continued subjugation of minority groups in governance; and compounded by what is being described as the State trust deficit, in the face of its incapacity to provide social needs as well as the glaring bureaucratic inefficiency. The inappropriate political frameworks and arrangements for managing social diversities led to political tensions and contradictions, which undermined the nation-state project (Gana and Egwu, 2003). The evidences across Africa provide indications regarding the debilitating impact of the exploitation of these diversities by political elites and ethnic entrepreneurs whose interests are defined in contradiction of the nation-state idea. It is basic assumption that in culturally plural societies, competition for scarce resources takes place within a communal framework as informed by the ethnic content of the political process. Despite spirited efforts by the nationalists to establish an infrastructure for political competition, later political elites resort to cultural idioms in order to ensure grips on the political vacuum created by the colonial state. This development succeeded in derailing Nigerian nationalism only because the colonizers themselves engaged in a deliberate strategy of dividing the colonized in order to ensure their perpetual control and frustrate attempts to building a united states (Ischie, 1985 in Gana 2003). According to Nnoli (1980), ethnic subdivision evolved and persisted as a mechanism for imperialism or instrument of effective domination and exploitation of the colonized. It served the reactionary purpose of the system: the degradation of the African in order to better and more easily exploit him. Fundamentally, ethnicity is used by individuals seeking to advance their personal life chance in a competitive context in which their achievements do not entitle them; or used by members of the hegemonic ethnic blocs as short cut to success; or by citizens that resort to primordial criteria for advancement of often parochial interest. However, the modernization model categorized every citizen to belonging to one or the other ethnic group for survival. According to Nelson and Wolpe (1971), the struggle for power, as preceded by the military intervention and the consequent civil war, provided the empirical foundation for modernization and the politics of communalism. It is assumed by the modernists that the basis for Nigeria civil war was not social deprivation but the relationship between communal conflict and modernization. This is more so that on most economic and social indices Nigeria then showed signs of relatively rapid growth in comparison with other developing nations, considering ecological and historical conditions. However, the communal conflict organization most often than not has ethnic coloration, even if inevitably phenomenon of modernization, with potentiality to undermining nation-state. The problem of this paper is the implications of the unending calls for restructuring federal Nigeria, as expressed through sovereign national conference, regionalization of the force, radical review of fiscal federalism, Sharia law application for panel code, enshrining zoning principle in constitution, etc. All these are groups strategies calling for re-negotiation of basic agreements of the federal union albeit sometimes sporadically taking violent dimension. Perhaps never before in the history of postindependent Nigeria has ethno-nationalism reached a crescendo of militancy and ungovernability, marked by readiness to destroy on a large scale, than since enthronement of democratic process. These realities may inform expression of deep seated frustration of marginalization or are a fundamental question of the conceptualization of federalism, both its principles and practice in Nigeria (Anam-Ndu, 2003).

3 The paper used existing literature on the subject matter of federalism as submitted by social science scholars and freelancers on issues affecting Nigeria nation-state stability, assessing especially from the post-independent period. The objective is to understand and appreciate the dynamics critical to the stability of federal Nigeria nation. The paper assumed that the basis upon which Nigeria stability can be ensured is predicated on the acceptance and application of the federal principles to the letter. Evolutionary Trends, Conceptual Exploration and Justification By the beginning of 20 th century, there were nine formally constituted federal states in the world: Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, Germany, Mexico, Switzerland, the United States of America and Venezuela. At the end of the century, the number has grown to twenty, with Austria, Belgium, Comoros, India, Malaysia, Nigeria, Pakistan, Russia, Tanzania, United Arab Emirates and South Africa added to the list. Since these nations constitutes the largest and most populous in the world, it means more than half of the world s space and almost half of its population is governed by federalism (Hueglin, 2005). The Marxist perception to defending the right of nationalities for self-determination states that, it is only in the first transient stage in the evolution of the human community that the post-revolutionary status of nations and nationalism shall be characterized by such divisions as nation, have all ceased to exist in communist society, Bloom, 1967(in Gana, 2003) however insisted that the idea is not the complete disappearance of all natural distinctions whatever, but specifically the abolition of sharp economic and social difference, economic isolation, invidious distinction, political rivalries, wars and exploitation of one nation by another. These distinctions (real or artificial) obviously characterized the world, as now covertly perpetrated in the spirit of global economy, community and security. Contemporary reality of divisions in human society is as devastating and destabilizing as its undermining and incapacitating State sovereignty and self-development. States are now being reinvented, reconstructed and redefined by globalization phenomena, State trust deficit and resource scarcity; and this, indeed, question nation-state or federal concept. The theoretical perspective suggest real, true or functional federalism where there should not be any one federating unit of the state becoming more powerful than the rest as to be capable of vying in strength with many of them combined. If there be such a one, and only one, it will insist on being master of the joint deliberations, (Mill, 1948) Friedrich (1963) defined federalism as A union of group selves, united by one or more common objectives but retaining their distinctive group being for other purposes. Federation is, on the inter-group level, what association is on the inter-personal level. It unites without destroying the selves that are uniting, and it is meant to strengthening the subunits that seems poised to consume the selves in nihilistic plutocracy for self-determination. Considering Deutsch (1966), stages of nation building (transition from tribe to nation) and Wheare (1964) outcome of federal formula, Nigeria nation should be at integrative stage, where people actively support and comply, in most situations and circumstances, without supervision. This stage is where regional, ethnic and religious divisions are not considered for any action or inaction; as Nigerians collectively expressed in June 12, 1993 election. However, if nation-building in federal setting is a process of political socialization, responsiveness, loyalty and patriotism then these are illusive concepts in present day Nigeria. If nation building in a federal system is a process of associative relationship transform into communality with social actions then Nigeria is pushed off that track. Gana (2003) note that the plausible reasons a state may desire federalism is if there are socialcultural conditions which make a unitary system unacceptable and independent existence unviable. Thus making federalism residual means for harmonizing similarities and accommodating differences does not seem to be the precondition informing the Nigeria political elites to accepting federalism. According to Wheare (1966), the conventional conditions for federating include: A sense of military insecurity and of the consequent need for common defense Journal of Social and Management Sciences Vol. 3 No 1 June 2017 Page 3

4 A desire for independence of foreign powers A realization that only through union could independence be secured A hope of economic advantage for the union Some prior political association A similarity of political institutions and A geographic contiguity. Not much of the aforementioned has informed the basis for conceptualizing Nigeria federalism. Wheare (1961) conceptualized federalism as a system of dividing powers so that general and regional or unit governments are each, within a sphere or place, coordinate and independent. According to Hueglin (2005), federalism had todo with the break-down of colonial empires and formation of a multitude of newly independent States after 1945; most were multicultural in nature because of their arbitrary composition, as assembled by the colonial powers. Federalism seemed most promising to accommodating this incongruence of ethnicity or national identity in the colonial territory. However only few of these post-colonial federations endured, many ended in failure, some broke apart (United Arabs, West Indies, etc.) and others were transformed into unitary and often autocratic government (Libya, Indonesia, etc.). In modern time, Western industrialised democracies are moving towards federal order, as European states ceding powers to an emerging European federalism (EU). Criteria for understanding federalism entail categorization involving four basic models: American, German, British Colonial and South American; and these are further determined by three contextual variables: realities of the country size, the number of constituent units and their demographic or economic imbalances. In this case, the motivation for federalization isto building a strong union without giving up regional, cultural or ethnic autonomies. The rationale of cultural federalism is the establishment and maintenance of cultural peace. While this was the initial compromising reality, compromise between modernizers seeking economic advantages in national economy and the conservatives adamant about cultural autonomy, cultural differences have ceased to be the driving force of federalism. The fifty states of United States of America are culturally diverse but comparatively diversity is not a prime factor in American federalism. Australian like American federation has been constructed on the basis of territorial rather than cultural principles of autonomy; and the rationale is both democratic and pragmatic, as vertical separation of powers brings government closer and federalism is simply a fact of political life. However, the most profound rationale for Canadian federalism was cultural, with other serious regional issues and conflicts as economic policy and representation leading to more decentralization and province-building (Hueglin, 2005). Ethnic federalism in Africa is among the difficult system to sustain and least likely to survive due probably to underdevelopment; ethnicism is the most egocentric of all nationalism and most difficult basis to erecting a system of constitutionalized power-sharing, the essence of federalism (Elazer, 1993).Ethnic egocentric probably informed Ojukwu, in 1967 to suggest that it is better if we move slightly apart and survive (confederation?), it is much worse that we move closer and perish in the collision (Kirk-Green, 1971). Thus ethnic vanguards and underdevelopment are critical factors that can undermine the capacity of federalism to stabilizing nation-state. Federal system calls for nationalism on the basis of willing consent which allows for the division and sharing powers; but the Nigeria nation today, due to underdevelopment emphasize values that divide people tribalism, religion, sectionalism, myths, etc. The change from the unitary modus operandi of the colonial state to federal system was not informed by intrinsic qualities of federalism as a mode of exercising sovereignty nor by the nation sociological realities (complex ethnic and geographical diversity) but by the Wheare Model (1966) of true or real federalism a federal structure that fits the sociological realities confronting the nationalists. This model has prospect for fiscal self-sufficiency, juridical autonomy with a wide range of discretionary powers and functions for the regions. This is evidenced by the strongest proponent to this formula (East and West), whose revenue base increased between 1953 and 1960 with 214 percent and 247

5 percent respectively as against the north 94.4 percent and 74.4 percent central government (Dudley, 1973). The federal formula thus seems to be an expedient strategy for terminating British rule and ensuring self-governance with little or no concern for the challenges of managing the cleavages that characterize and complex Nigeria society. Before 1900, the Nigeria landmass existed only as convergence of independent and sometimes hostile native states with linguistic and cultural differences. According to Lord Lugard, 1922 (in Anyebe, 2014), Sir Hugh Clifford ( ), described Nigeria as a collection of independent native States separated from one another by great distances, by differences of history and traditions and by ethnological, racial, tribal, political, social and religious barriers. It must be noted that while the factors of history and geography determine constitutionalism, these did not shape the form of federation bequeathed by British to Nigeria. Instead, the British encouraged particularistic tendencies of the different ethnic groups by giving each region a large measure of political autonomy to create structural imperfections that shall bedeviled constructive inter-ethnic relations after independence. Thus Awolowo described the British-imposed federal structure as an abominable, disruptive and divisive heritage (Awa, 1955:87-88 in Anyebe, 2014). Further, Lord Lugard established a philosophy of education that ensure social and psychological division of the country; in the South, the Missionary organisations established schools and teacher training institutions, training people in the principles of Christian religion, using English language as medium of instructions and subject of study was almost wholly British orientation and emphasis on history of British Empire, and nothing of Nigeria history. Whilst in the North, education was in the hand of government, and teaching instructions was in Hausa and Arabic only and subject of study was adapted to the cultural environment of the Muslims. This educational policy helped to develop a dichotomy in the social and psychological orientation between the North and South, thus produced two Nigerians with different intellectual and cultural development and thus imperiled harmonious relationship and growth (Anyebe, 2014). The evolution of Nigeria federation can be traced back from the amalgamation period of 1914, the year Lord Lugard (then Governor General) decided to unite the administration of the hitherto two separately administered protectorates of the north and south. Also of important note is the 1939 imperial act for administrative expediency which splits the southern protectorate into two (East and West), to completing the process of constructing the tripod of a federal Nigeria. More fundamentally, the year 1954 remains a watershed in Nigeria s quest for statehood and indeed the acceptance of federalism as the ideal form of power sharing for the nation (as consensually agreed by both the colonial functionaries and the nationalists). However, while the agitators to ending British colonialism in Nigeria were facilitated by the strong desire for sovereign statehood, little did they realize the challenge of the dynamics of inter-ethnic competition for scarce State resources and coupled with the differences in socio-psychological orientation that could undermine the process of national integration (Gana, 2003). Overview of the Nigeria Federalism According to Anam-Ndu (2003), Nigeria had laid a solid geo-political structure for operating a federal system; however, appropriate institutional practices critical to national development were not reflective of our plural social setting and political experiences. The federal practices designed by our founding fathers were destroyed by military rule; and the evolving trends and circumstances of democratization (after prolong military rule) opened the flood gate of widespread demands and agitations by ethnic minority and majority groups. The outbursts are sufficient to liquidate the Nigeria federation and undermined the democratic governance, unless and until there is congruence between political practice and popular expectations. The various forms of distortions imposed on the practice of federalism appear to be key issue in Nigeria. The consensus among the civil societies, political class and even the military itself is that the Journal of Social and Management Sciences Vol. 3 No 1 June 2017 Page 5

6 Nigerian military poses a fundamental challenge to the survival of constitutional democracy. Beyond staying in power in most part of post-independent Nigeria years, the pervasive impact of its rule is manifested in the militarization of society and civic consciousness, the centralization of power and resources, and the erosion of the constitutional basis of Nigeria s federalism. Military rule informed the progressive weakening of the constitutional framework of Nigeria s federalism which historically evolved from a unitarist structure. The military oligarchy entrenched interests and pervasive influence are increasingly being translated using their economic power into political influence (Anam-Ndu, 2003Alli, 2003). Another challenge to federalism in Nigeria is the inter-governmental relations, especially that between federal government and the constituent units reconstitution and reconstruction within the federal setting. The pendulum of control has swung between the federal and state governments, with the former enjoying pre-eminence; the highest point of control being under the military dictatorship and the most manipulated being the local government. The contestations for the control of the local government will remain and, indeed, is a main feature of Nigeria s federal experience. There is need for constructive engagement between tiers and institutions of governance; and the cooperative relationship is even more imperative in federal system. The inevitability of functional overlaps and interdependence of federating powers generally requires different order and approach to treating each other as partners. This required extensive consultation, cooperation and coordination between and among governments of the federation, using the intergovernmental relations principles to addressing their intricate and complex relations (Elaigwu, 2005). Also the foreign policy domain is another contestations and contradictions between federal and other constituent units of the federation, especially in first and second republics. The Nigeria constitution made foreign policy exclusive domain of the federal government, this considerably attenuated the level of conflicts and contradictions witnessed between federal and regional governments especially in the First Republic, where regional hegemony and consciousness was more pronounced. This is the pointer to federalism in Nigeria, as the system is meant to effectively manage not eliminate conflicts and differences. However, despite the Nigeria challenges, federalism has avoided fragmentation and total state collapse as experienced in other parts of the world (except of course the continuous state and local governments creation, in the spirit of development). This makes the federal option as an effective instrument of national stability in developing countries simply by recognizing the rights and autonomy of the various ethnic nationalities that constitute the nation-state as well as addressing the undermining factor of underdevelopment. The federal arrangement is a mechanism designed to reduce effects of division and inequality without of course sacrificing strong attachments to primary or ethnic groups and identities. Indeed, the prevailing democratization processes and the evolving characters, especially the civil society groups, are redefining and redesigning the federal principles within the context of constitutionalism and fundamental human rights than ethnicism. The civil society groups are initiating a process and people oriented socio-political agenda by pushing for democratic and constitutional reforms to promoting diversity, all inclusive governance and legitimacy as basis for addressing and redressing ethnic and regional grievances. Moreso that the Nigeria state class characters of the past are the obstacles to the realization of democracy and true federalism; and group mobilization of the civil society have strived to contain them. According to Mohapatra, 1998 (in Gana, 2003), the federal construction, if it must meet the challenges of governance and management of pluralism, it must understand and appreciate a federal culture built on a spirit of dialogue, trade-off, negotiation and consensus building. Where these are lacking, the survival of the nation-state through federal construct becomes an impossible enterprise. Despite the fundamental differences in social, religion and cultural groupings, the Indian federation has weathered the storm through the enthronement of federal discourse which has become the basis of the country s dialogic democracy.

7 Thus, for federalism to be more effective in Nigeria there must be commitment to ideals and values of the principle. As Diamond M (in Eleigwu, 2005) states that the survival of federalism is a function of how it is adopted and modified to dealing with contemporary problems, and requires what it is we want from federalism and what federalism by nature can supply. However, what the principle of federalism cannot supply are such human values as fairness, justice, tolerance and accommodation; this is a function of leadership political will. Conclusion Federalism, both as a principle and form of governance, provides an ideal platform for countries divided by race, ethnicity and religion; however, the impending challenge for national stability is the dynamics of global economy and democratization. Nations experiencing varying degrees of stresses and pressures among competing ethnicities and religious differences among the populations do have the options and choices of federalism. Nigeria must face the challenge of adjusting her federal arrangement with the emerging realities of units agitation for resource control, political participation and all inclusive governance. Political debate on Nigeria federal structure has centred largely on the distortions imposed by decades of military dictatorship and over centralization of power and resources. Therefore, the creative deployment of federal principles is inevitable instrument to managing the challenges of ethno-religious and cultural cleavages that characterized the Nigeria nation state. The emerging consensus on the attractiveness of federalism is its capacity, if logically applied, to effectively manage political pluralism as expressed in ethnic, religious, spatial and racial terms. Notwithstanding the disruptive potentials of political mobilization of these identities, it is imperative to recommend that group accommodation rather than oppression, inclusion rather than exclusion, acceptance rather than alienation, understanding and tolerance rather than denial and frustrating demands and aspirations are critical to effective federalism. That is ability to meeting the challenge of producing democratic leadership where all the component units of Nigeria can simultaneously participate and capacity of recreating democratic values unique to our plural setting. Further, the federal institutional mechanism must be effectively proactive, entrenched poverty must be address and incidence of underdevelopment must overcome through regions or units (states and local governments) development. These are the creative and pragmatic approach to addressing crisis of federal stability in the Nigeria nation-state. Journal of Social and Management Sciences Vol. 3 No 1 June 2017 Page 7

8 References Alli, W.O. (2003), the Development of Federalism in Nigeria: A Historical perspective Africa world press Inc Anyebe, A.A. (2014) Relevance of Federal Solution in Nigeria in Readings in Nigerian Government and Administration, Department of Public Administr.ation, ABU Press Zaria Anam-Ndu, E.A. (2003), Renewing the Federal paradigm in Nigeria: contending Issues and perspectives (in Gana, A.T. &Egwu, S.G. Federalism in Africa, Vol. one). Duetsch, K. (1966) Nationalism and Social Communication: An Inquiry into the Foundation of Federlism, Cambridge Mass, MIT Press. Dudley, B. (1973) Instability and Political Order. Ibadan: Ibadan University Press, Nigeria. Egwu, S.G. (1993) Ethnicity, Economic crisis and national development in Nigeria, CODESRIA, Dakar Elagen, D. (1979), Federalism & Political Integration, Ramat Gan, Turll-Done Publishing Eleigwa, J.J. (2005), Nigeria Yesterday, and Today for Tomorrow: Essays in Governance and Society. Aba Publishing, Jos. Friedrich, C.J. (1963), Federalism national and international, Oxford University press, London Gana, A.T.&Egwu, S.G (2003) Federalism in Africa: Framing the national questions, vol one, Africa world press Inc. Gana, A.T. (1987), Development of Ideology (in Olugbemi, S., 1987, Alternative political feature for original), Nigeria political source Association, Lagos. Gana A.T. (2003), Federalism & the national question in Nigeria: A Theoretical Exploration Gana, A.T, &Egwu, S.G. (federalism in Africa, vol. one) Hueglin, T.O. (2005), Comparative Federralism: A Critical Persprctive. Curtin University Press, Western Australia. Ibrahim, J. (2008), Ethno- Religious limits to the construction of Federalism in Africa, Asia work Press Isichie, E. (1985), A History of Nigeria, Longman London Kirk-Green, A.M.H (1971) crisis & conflicts in Nigeria: A Government source Book, Cambridge University press, London Mill, J.S. (1948) Representative Government, Everyman London. Nelson, A. and Wolpe, H. (1971), Urban Politics in Nigeria. Berkeley, University of California Press. Nnoli, O. (1980), Ethnic Politics in Nigeria. Fourth Dimension Publishers, Enugu

9 Ollman, B. (1976), Alternative Marxist Conception of Man in Capitalist Society, Cambridge University Press. Wheare, K.C. (1966), Federal Government. Oxford University Press New York Journal of Social and Management Sciences Vol. 3 No 1 June 2017 Page 9