Since 1967, Nigeria’s federating units have been known as states—a transformation that followed the creation of 12 states by General Yakubu Gowon. Before that historic change, Nigeria was divided into regions, a system that emerged with the Richards Constitution of 1946 and was later modified in 1963 when the Mid-Western region was carved out of the Western Region. In the era of regionalism, minority ethnic nationalities frequently agitated for separate administrative entities, arguing that they were being marginalized by the dominant big three ethnic groups: the Hausa in the Northern Region, the Igbo in the Eastern Region, and the Yoruba in the Western Region. Even as early as 1957, concerns over minority fears led to the establishment of the Henry Willink Commission, which was tasked with investigating these apprehensions and proposing remedies. Although the commission ultimately did not recommend state creation for the minorities, various movements soon emerged. Agitations such as the Calabar-Ogoja-River State Movement in the East, the Benin and Delta Movements in the West, and the Middle Belt Movement in the North underscored a persistent demand for separate political spheres.
The evolution of Nigeria’s federal structure did not stop with the 12 states. Over the years, the federation expanded significantly; by March 1976 there were 19 states, which later increased to 21 by 1987 with the addition of a new federal capital territory in Abuja. The number further rose to 30 by August 1991 and ultimately reached 36 by 1996. These structural changes occurred during pivotal moments in Nigeria’s history—in 1963, 1967, 1976, 1987, 1991, and 1996—and were largely driven by successive military governments, with the only exception being the creation of the Mid-West region in 1963 during the civilian era. It is important to recognize that while genuine calls for state creation existed on many fronts, the restructuring of Nigeria’s federation also served the interests of powerful leaders. For instance, the creation of the original 12 states under Gowon was partly a strategic maneuver aimed at limiting the secessionist ambitions of Colonel Odumegwu Ojukwu and his Eastern movement.
In more recent times, legislative efforts have been made to create additional states, with proposals seeking to establish Ijebu, Oke-Ogun, and Ife-Ijesa states, as well as new entities such as Etiti, Orlu, and Anioma states. These proposals have elicited mixed reactions from various quarters. Proponents argue that creating new states is long overdue and holds significant developmental potential, as it would bring government closer to the people and allow for more tailored policies to address local needs. Critics, however, including prominent voices such as Dr. Olisa Agbakoba (SAN), contend that state creation is a misplaced priority and that it may simply serve elite interests rather than genuinely improving the lives of ordinary citizens.
Analysts have identified several reasons underpinning the historical and ongoing process of state creation in Nigeria. Diversity is one of the major factors that led to the creation of states in Nigeria. Nigeria is home to a vast array of religions, ethnicities, languages, and cultural practices. This diversity necessitates a form of governance that can compartmentalize and coordinate varying aspirations and traditions. The first Head of State, General Aguiyi-Ironsi, attempted to impose a unification decree that was deeply unpopular, leading to his eventual downfall, while General Gowon’s reversal back to a state-based system was intended to restore balance. Another key factor is the fear among minority groups of being dominated by the larger ethnic groups. At independence, Nigeria’s federal structure was essentially built around the big three ethnic groups, leaving smaller groups feeling sidelined. The demands for separate political entities were driven by both real and perceived fears of marginalization.
Federalism itself forms an integral framework for state creation. A true federal system requires clearly defined, relatively autonomous units that can operate within their own spheres while remaining coordinated with the central government. Even when Nigeria’s subnational units were known as regions, they functioned similarly to states in many respects. The creation of states has also been linked to the need for more even and need-sensitive development. Historical data from Nigeria’s first republic reveal stark disparities in infrastructure and income between regions—for example, the significant difference in road mileage and per capita income between the North and Lagos. New states were seen as a way to bridge these gaps by allowing local governments to be more responsive to regional developmental challenges.
Moreover, the process of state creation has often been manipulated by elites for their own socioeconomic and political gain. Scholars have noted that state creation can be a tool for dividing opposition, securing political patronage, and ensuring that regional power balances favor certain groups. The northern oligarchy, for instance, has been accused of using state creation to maintain its ascendancy over other regions. The creation of more states also expands political participation by increasing the number of seats in the National Assembly, thereby giving more people the opportunity to engage in national politics.
Lastly, state creation has been employed as a conflict management strategy. Nigeria, a product of British colonial rule, has long struggled with ethnic tensions and conflicts. The creation of states has been one method of attempting to manage these conflicts by providing distinct political and administrative spaces for different groups. However, while this approach has sometimes helped to contain conflicts, it has also, at times, sown the seeds for new disputes over resource allocation and political power.
In sum, the evolution of Nigeria’s states reflects a complex interplay of historical, sociopolitical, and economic factors. Scholars explain that state creation has been a response to the challenges posed by immense diversity, minority fears, federalism requirements, uneven development, elite interests, political participation dynamics, and conflict management needs. Despite the ongoing debates and occasional controversies surrounding the creation of new states, the process continues to shape Nigeria’s federal landscape and its prospects for development.
Comments
Post a Comment