As President Bola Tinubu prepares to receive a bill proposing a return to regional government, Nigeria grapples once more with a contentious issue.
Opinions remain sharply divided, reflecting the country’s complex ethnic and political landscape.
The leaked proposal sparked a flurry of heated debate. Analysts predict weeks of media frenzy, rife with harsh rhetoric and little room for compromise.
In the North, the proposal faces strong opposition. Leaders fear a return to a system they perceive as favoring the South’s economic might. Some worry about marginalization within proposed regions, while others hold historical grievances regarding past regional dominance.
Southern voices, however, see regionalism as a long-awaited path to unlocking economic potential. Proponents advocate for resource control and greater autonomy, arguing these will fuel regional growth and address longstanding calls for fiscal federalism.
Regionalism in retrospect
Nigeria opted for a regional structure at independence in 1960, acknowledging its diverse makeup. For six years, the system fostered rapid development. Fueled by healthy competition and a sense of national pride, each region carved a niche for itself. The infrastructure boom in the southwest, for example, is often attributed to this period. National development indices across the board reflected this positive trajectory.
However, the 1966 military coup shattered this progress, setting Nigeria back significantly.
The Proposed Model
The draft bill, authored by Akin Fapohunda of the Yoruba socio-cultural group Afenifere, proposes a division into eight regions with approximate boundaries.
The regions include the southern region, southeastern region, western region, mid-western region, western middle belt region, eastern middle belt region, western middle belt, and northwestern region. “In the quest for re-configuration and downsizing, an option to consider might be to retain the present boundaries of the 36 states, as would have been adjusted, but to downgrade the paraphernalia of political administrations creatively,” Akin Fapounda asserted.
Exploring Alternatives
While regionalism sparks significant debate, experts suggest that it’s crucial to consider other avenues for addressing Nigeria’s development challenges.
One of the proposals on the cards is a reformed federal system, with greater devolution of power to states, which is capable of achieving similar goals.
Enhancing resource control mechanisms and addressing issues of marginalization within the current structure could also be explored.
Challenges and Considerations
Implementing such a significant shift wouldn’t be without its difficulties. Logistical hurdles, political resistance, and the potential for renewed ethnic tensions must be carefully considered.
A clear roadmap for navigating the transition, with public engagement at every stage, would be paramount.
A nuanced discussion, acknowledging both the potential benefits and drawbacks of regionalism, is essential. While the historical picture of the first republic may seem idyllic, a balanced approach must acknowledge the ethnic tensions that ultimately led to its demise.
A thorough economic analysis is also crucial. Will regionalism truly lead to economic growth for all regions? The potential impact on national unity and the challenges of managing inter-regional disparities also need careful consideration.
‘True Federalism’ and Other Fallacies’
Columnist Simon Kolawole once remarked that the idea that there is a ‘true federalism’ is incorrect, positing that every federal system has its peculiarities and practices. Others contended that the country’s current structure did not address pertinent issues that have become the backbone of its secessionist struggles. They opined that, among other pressing issues, a proper devolution of power would play a critical role in stemming the raging tides of marginalization.
