Clamour for new states: The burden and viability
By CHINELO OBOGO
Monday, April 23, 2012
• Tambuwal
In this new legislative year, the creation of new states has once again become one of the major issues that the National Assembly has to tackle as it considers a review of the 1999 constitution. CHINELO OBOGO writes on the clamour for new states, its merits and demerits.
How the journey began
What used to be an area of many heterogeneous societies was conquered by the rampaging British. After the conquest, the people and its land which formed the Northern Protectorate, Southern Protectorate and the Colony of Lagos that was later collapsed into the Southern Protectorate in 1906 were amalgamated by Lord Lugard of Britain in 1914 obviously for easy rule.
Before and after Nigeria’s independence from British rule in 1960, the country was a federation of three regions; the Northern, Western and Eastern regions. By 1963, during the administration of Tafawa Balewa, two provinces were detached from the Western Region to form the Mid-Western region. By 1967, when Gen. Yakubu Gowon assumed power as military Head of State, the regions were dissolved and replaced with 12 states.
In 1976, Murtala Mohammed, who by now had become president of the country, created seven more states to bring the number of states to 19. By 1987, two new states were created by Gen Ibrahim Babangida, who had assumed power as the military Head of State and another nine followed in 1991, bringing the total to 30. The last change was in 1996 during the late Gen. Sani Abacha’s regime, which brought the number of states to 36.
With the gradual creation of many states, the regions into which the country was structured which made it a federating unit gradually metamorphosed into six zones, which are currently made up of the North West zone with seven states, North East (six states), North-central (six states), South-west (six states), South-south (six states) and South-east (five states). Of the 36 states in the country, the distribution of local governments in each zone has the North-west having 187 local governments, the North-east, 111, North-central 118, South-west 137, South -south 120 and South-east 95, excluding six area councils of the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja.
The agitation
This obvious imbalance in the distribution of states and local governments in the country may have necessitated the agitation for more states to be created to correct the imbalance in the present structure. Some of the reasons given for the need to create more states include the need for speedy development in areas which are still mainly rural, the fear of domination of minority ethnic groups in some areas, the search for equity as well as quest for influence by members of the ruling class.
Former governor of Anamrba State, Chinwoke Mbadinuju, had in a telephone interview with Daily Sun emphasised the need for a balance in the distribution of states. According to him: “One of the issues that the late Ikemba of Nnewi, Odumegwu-Ojukwu was agitating for before his demise was the creation of one more state and more local governments for the South-east zone. The structure that we have presently is highly defective and has caused a section of the country to look marginalised.
The South-east is not the least in population compared to other zones. In fact, if a proper and unbiased census is taken, you will see that the zone is densely populated. From the present structure that we have, the whole of the South-east zone has just half of the local government that the North-west has, besides the fact that it has the least number of states in the country. So, if there should be any creation of a new state, this zone should be given utmost consideration for the sake of equity and fairness.”
Supporting this view, the former military administrator of Lagos State, Admiral Ndubuisi Kanu (retd.) told Daily Sun in an interview that if the country had decided to continue with its present unitary government instead of reverting to a federating unit, it was only fair that every geo-political zone has an equal number of states and local governments. According to him: “I still subscribe to the notion of going back to the federating units we used to have. But in a situation where we still practise a unitary system of governance, it is only right that each zone in the country should have equal number of states.
If you give the North-east zone seven states, it follows logically that the South-east should have seven states as well because we are densely populated. If every zone should have six states, I do not see why the South-east should have five states. One or two more states should be created for the sake of fairness and balance.’
Speaking at different fora, the Senate President, Senator David Mark, had assured Nigerians that among other issues like devolution of powers, local government administration, structural imbalances, state police, among others, the creation of states is one major issue that would be tackled in the new constitution amendment that the legislature will commence.
Alarming and ridiculous as it may sound, as at the last count, the Senate had received 45 requests from different ethnic groups across the geopolitical zones for the creation of new states. Among them are requests from the South-east for Aba State, which will be carved out of Abia; Orashi State, to be carved out of Imo and Anambra; Ugwuaku State, from Imo,Abia and Anambra; Adada State from Enugu; Etiti State to be carved out of Imo, Abia and Anambra; Equity State to be carved out of Abia, Anambra, Enugu, Imo and Ebonyi; Njaba State to be carved out of Imo and Orimili State to be carved out of Anambra, Imo and Delta.
From the South-south zone, the names of the proposed states are Urhobo State to be carved out of Delta; Minji-Se State to be carved out of Rivers; Ado State to be carved out of Delta; Confluence State to be carved out of Edo, Kogi and Nasarawa; Bori State to be carved out of Rivers; Anioma State to be carved out of Delta; Ahoada State to be carved out of Rivers; Toru-Ebe State to be carved out of Delta, Edo and Ondo; Ogoja State to be carved out of Cross River; Oil Rivers from Akwa Ibom and Rivers; Warri State to be carved from Delta; New Delta State from Delta and and Ethiope State also from Delta.
From the South-west, the proposed states are New Oyo State to be carved out of Oyo; Remo-Ijebu State to be carved out of Ogun; Ijesha State to be carved out of Osun; Oduduwa State to be carved out of Osun; Ijebu State to be carved out of Ogun State; Ibadan State to be carved out of Oyo; Yewa State to be carved out of Ogun; Ose State to be carved out of Ondo; Lagoon State to be carved out of Lagos and Oluwa State to be carved out of Ondo.
The North-east has Katagun State to be carved from Bauchi; Amana State to be carved from Adamawa and New Borno State to be carved from Borno. For the North-west, the proposed states are Karaduwa State to be carved from Katsina; Gurara State to be carved from Kaduna; New Kaduna State to be carved from Kaduna; Tiga State to be carved from Kano; Ghari and Biyajida States to be carved from Katsin.
North-central has Kainji State to be carved from Niger; Edu State to be carved from Niger; Okura State to be carved from Kogi; Borgu and Okun States to be carved from Ekiti, Ondo, Kwara and Kogi.
How viable are the existing states?
Though the need for creation of new states may sound logical given the reason for development to come closer to the people, observers are of the opinion that many of the existing states are not viable and cannot stand on their own but depend mainly on the federation account for sustenance. Many states witnessed major crises between its governments and its workers because of the government’s inability to pay the N18, 000 minimum wage approved by the Federal Government for workers.
The reason some of the governors gave was that their states were poor and did not have the financial wherewithal to pay the amount demanded by the labour unions. Will the creation of more states not succeed in increasing the already huge cost of governance in the country?
In terms of fears of domination by minority groups, the burning question is if the creation of more states has allayed the fears and the feeling of marginalisation. In terms of the argument that creation of more states will bring development and governance closer to the people, observers are quick to ask how well has the over 740 local governments performed in terms of bringing government closer to the people.
In a recent event in Enugu, Senator Chris Ngige clearly stated that only few states in the country were viable enough to sustain themselves. He, therefore, advised that there was need for the country to revert to a federating units for the government and the country at large not to be held down by excessive cost of governance.
In his own reaction, former Chief Whip of the Senate, Senator Victor Kassim-Isa Oyofo stated that some of the existing states were finding it difficult to survive and warned against further creation of unviable states, which thrive only on revenue from the Federation Account. According to him: “In addressing the internal architecture of the federation, we must do what is obvious. This means consolidating our gains and formalising them into laws.
It is clear that states have to be viable. A situation where a state is created to rely on the revenue share from the Federal Government, which in turn gets 85 per cent from crude oil, is unviable and when deeply considered, a sin. It is a sin because it inhibits the ability of the citizens to develop its potentials, which lie in the talents God bestowed on each of us.”
