On February 6, 2025, Nigeria’s Federal House of Representatives, in what was presented as an exercise in constitutional amendment, received a proposal, an amazing and amusing one for that matter, for the creation of 31 states in addition to the current 36.  If accepted, that will bring the number of states in Nigeria to 67.

At independence in 1960, Nigeria was a federation of three regions.  In 1963, three years after independence, the Mid-Western Region was created out of the old Western Region.  On May 27, 1967, in what looked like an attempt to preempt the declaration of the Eastern Region as Republic of Biafra, the Yakubu Gowon-led military junta increased the number from 4 regions to 12 states.  On February 3, 1976, in his last broadcast to Nigerians before he was killed in an abortive coup on February 13, 1976, Murtala Muhammed and his colleagues in arms increased the number of states to 19.  On September 23, 1987, the Ibrahim Babangida-led military junta created two more states.  Katsina State was created out of the northern part of Kaduna State, and Akwa Ibom State was created out of Cross River State.  That brought the number of states to 21.  Then, on August 27, 1991, on the 6th anniversary of the coup that overthrew Muhammadu Buhari and brought Babangida into power, the latter and his fellow combatants increased the number of states to 30.

The reader would have observed that, since 1987, when Katsina and Akwa Ibom States were created, the number of states has been perfectly divisible by three.  The reason behind that is the belief in some quarters that having a number of states perfectly divisible by three would save Nigeria the embarrassment of finding two-thirds of the number of states in which a candidate must score at least 25% of votes cast in a presidential election before he could be declared winner.  Those who are familiar with the history of presidential elections in Nigeria will recall the argument over what constitutes two-thirds of 19 states in the 1979 presidential election.

The current number of 36 states is what Nigeria has had since October 1, 1996 when the Sani Abacha-led junta announced the creation of twelve more states.  However, agitation for more states has not ceased.  There was a proposal by a “national conference” to increase the number to 48.  And now, the most recent proposal is to take the number of states from the current 36 to 67.

It is important to identify some issues at stake in the fissiparous “federalism” that has remained a feature of Nigeria’s political history.

The first issue is that Nigeria has remained an amalgam, not a nation.  This amalgam of diverse nationalities has repeatedly had its diversity deliberately manipulated and mismanaged by the political elite to the advantage of the same political elite, especially at every campaign season, but to the detriment of the peoples living within the geographical territory over which the amalgam spreads.  The Nigerian becomes an alien once he steps of his place of ancestral origin.  His or her rights are abbreviated or totally denied.  Agitation for more states will continue until Nigerians decide to take concrete steps that will lead to the transmutation of Nigeria from an amalgam held together by Abuja-might to a veritable nation, that is, to an association of peoples who identify their shared core values, an association founded and built on and regulated by these identified shared core values.

Nigeria is a land where every ethnic, regional and religious community cries of marginalization, and, quite often, the victim and the victimized look like identical twins.  Even within the same state, within the same local government area, and within the same ethnic community there are real and contrived cleavages.  It is such that if every ethnic community in Nigeria were to be made into a separate nation, there would still be internecine altercation.

A second issue related to the issue of state creation in Nigeria is that of relationship between the states and the government at the centre.  Nigeria’s constitution has created an overbearing government at the centre.  The government at the centre stifles government in the states, and governments in the states stifle local governments.  This is an issue that needs to be addressed by way of a serious and sincere effort to amend the constitution decreed into existence by the military, first in 1979, then in 1999.  It is simply untrue to say what we have now is a federal constitution. A constitution whose exclusive legislative list is three times lengthier than its concurrent legislative list is anything but federal.

A third issue is viability of the states so far created.  Virtually all of them rely on allocation from Abuja, which, in fact, is allocation from the oil wealth of impoverished Niger Delta. It is an issue to be addressed before any talk of creation of more states.  If virtually all of the current 36 states face the challenge of economic viability, will the new states being proposed fare better?  Should it not be made a condition for creating a state?  

A fourth issue is related to the third, and that is, cost of governance.  These new states will have their governors, executive councils, senators, national and state assembly members, special advisers, senior special advisers, to mention but these.  Each of their functionaries will have a fleet of vehicles assigned to them, and other perks of office.  Where will the funds for running these offices come from if not from the Niger Delta through Abuja?  Should governors and functionaries of states be paid from those funds or from what the states produce? 

Finally, there is need for us in Nigeria to ask ourselves: whom has creation of states ultimately benefitted?  Has it benefitted the people or the political elite?  The answer to that question is to be found in the answer to a more fundamental question, and that is, whom does government benefit in Nigeria, the people or those in and around of corridors of power?

Nigeria runs a system where government is more powerful than the people, a system where government is set up to disable the people.  One argument that has been used to justify agitation for more states is that it will bring government closer to the people.  However, if truth be told, distance between the government and the people has continued to widen, and a big but distant government has become a burden on the people.  

Creation of more states has not been to the advantage of the Nigerian because of the way the constitution sets up the relationship between the people and the government.  It has only been to the benefit of the political elite.  From among this elite will emerge governors, commissioners, legislators and others who will be paid from the purse of the people, and whose style of leadership will continue to be unaccountable to the people.  While creation of states will expand the circle of political office holders, it will shrink the quality of life of the people they govern.

Here then is an issue that any serious and sincere exercise in constitutional amendment ought to address: that, for now, being in government is incredibly lucrative.  That is why getting into government is attractive.  That is why a chaotic electoral process is imposed on Nigerians and the political elite has so far manifested no serious intention to fix it.

Father Anthony Akinwale, OP