Why Restructuring is Inevitable

Nigeria’s current structure is not working and needs reform, argues Chris Ngwodo

Recently, the presidency and the All Progressives Congress (APC) declared that restructuring Nigeria’s federal architecture is not a priority because of more urgent chores like fighting corruption and fixing the economy. These statements have been grossly disappointing to federalists – and also lengthen the list of campaign promises that the government has reneged on or deferred. There is a broad consensus that Nigeria’s current structure is not working and needs reform. Significantly, as far back as 2011, President Muhammadu Buhari himself called for restructuring.

Cynics might conclude that politicians chant “restructuring” when in opposition and abandon it when in office. But this equivocation owes more to the temptation of power. What is at issue is “federal might” – the absolute control of economic, administrative, law enforcement, military and security institutions vested in the federal government and particularly, the presidency. Restructuring our federal architecture today would end federal might as we know it – by devolving more responsibilities to states and municipalities and allowing greater political and economic autonomy at the grassroots.

Federal might is by design inherently alienating, manifestly exclusive rather than inclusive, arbitrary rather than systematic, and autocratic rather than democratic. Its directive instincts are authoritarian, even more centralising and, consequently, inclined towards what would at best be a genteel totalitarianism. While Nigerian presidents can be blamed for the terrible things that happen on their watch, these ills derive not just from the character of the presidents but from the character of the presidency itself. It is the nature of the beast. Where power is absolute, its abuse is inevitable.

The present concentration of power in the federal government permits no other expression of presidential authority save that which, though occasionally benevolent, is fundamentally and habitually repressive. Restructuring would strip the presidency of its extraordinarily broad discretionary latitude over economic and coercive resources. Few politicians are willing to sacrifice federal might on the altar of progressive federalism by embracing such self-abnegation and surrendering the properties that make public office so powerful.

Ironically, none of the chores which the administration highlights as priorities – fighting corruption and growing the economy – will be truly successful without restructuring. A successful anti-corruption campaign, for instance, requires the administration to fulfill its campaign promise to grant autonomy to anti-corruption agencies. The perception of these agencies as presidential attack dogs undermines their credibility. More importantly, police reform is absolutely vital. To start with, we must repeal Section 9 of the Police Act which grants the president operational control of the police. An independent police force is indispensable to a functional law and order regime.

On the economic front, the policy imperatives – diversification, decentralisation and devolution are all inextricably linked. We cannot create enough jobs without diversifying the economy and we cannot diversify the economy without the decentralisation of governance and devolution of powers to states. This requires an amendment of the exclusive legislative list which places so many tasks under federal jurisdiction that it is effectively a charter of economic and administrative tyranny.

Devolution should aim to place mineral rights, value added tax and property tax under state jurisdiction and enact a phased increment of the derivation ratio by 10 per cent for five years until it reaches the 50 per cent mark which obtained under the 1963 Republican Constitution. States and municipalities rather than the federal government are the primary drivers of economic growth and they need to be unshackled from federal apron strings so that they can fulfill this role.

Restructuring is also a national security imperative. Consider our energy and power supply sector. The ease with which terrorists and non-state actors have sabotaged our critical infrastructure highlights the utter vulnerability of highly centralised systems. Nigeria does not need a centralised national grid to cater for 160 million people, when she can liberalise the sector and allow for small and medium scale solutions to our utilities crisis.

Economic and administrative logic tells us that we cannot remotely and unitarily manage the aspirations of over 160 million people – half of whom are young, hungry for economic opportunity, self-actualisation and social mobility – from Abuja. “Restructuring” often suffers from clichéd and imprecise usage by its proponents, incomprehension by the uninitiated, and intentional misunderstanding by the rent-seeking beneficiaries of the status quo. However, restructuring is already happening. Nigeria is already renegotiating itself. Beneath the histrionics of our most febrile national conversations about issues like grazing reserves and the Niger Delta lie themes of states’ rights, municipal rights, subsidiarity and subnational law enforcement authority.

The state no longer has a monopoly of violence and the balance of terror is tilting ever more in favour of non-state actors. Vast swathes of the country are actually ungoverned or ungovernable spaces. Elsewhere, communities are turning to self-help through militias and vigilante groups to fill the vacuum created by an inadequate and over-centralised law enforcement apparatus. These developments stem from the state’s failure to intelligently manage dissent as well as its inability to impose order on chaos. But they are also manifestations of the organic processes of state formation and reformation.

Nation-states are not cast in stone and must constantly renew and reinvent themselves. Restructuring is the next phase of our democratic evolution. The challenge is for governing elites to moderate these processes with reason and smart policies rather than resort to brute force. The latter approach will only further radicalise discontent, and cede the conversation to extremists, with apocalyptic consequences. Where pessimism perceives anarchy, creative optimism discerns opportunity. The hope is that the Buhari administration’s management of these issues will be led by creative optimists.

––

Restructuring is the next phase of our democratic evolution. The challenge is for governing elites to moderate these processes with reason and smart policies rather than resort to brute force. The latter approach will only further radicalise discontent, and cede the conversation to extremists, with apocalyptic consequences