Abstract
Frequent
agitation for state creation has been recurring phenomenon in the political
history of Nigeria. This has raised a lot of controversy during national debate.
Four research questions guided the study. They included what steps has been
made by the people towards the creation of Adada state? what are the obstacles
inhibiting the creation of Adada State? how can the creation of Adada state
bring about national development in Nigeria? What are the recommendations for
the achievement of the creation of Adada state?. Four Specific objectives
guided the study which includes; to discover the various steps that has been
made by the people towards the creation of Adada state, to find out the
obstacles inhibiting the creation of
Adada State, to forecast if the
creation of Adada state will bring about national development in Nigeria, to find
out recommendations that can lead towards the achievement of the creation of Adada state. Interview was used
as the major source of data collection for this study, while content analysis
was used as the method of data analysis. The theory of decentralization was
used as the theoretical framework for this study. The findings of the study
showed that due process has been followed in the request for the creation of
Adada state and the creation of Adada state will bring about national
development in Nigeria. Notwithstanding, some recommendations were made.
TABLE OF CONTENT
Title
Page………………………………………………………….………………i
Certification ………………………………………………………………………ii
Dedication ………………………………………………………………………..iii
Acknowledgement ………………………………………………………………..iv
Abstract ……………………………………………………………………………v
Table
of Contents ………………………………………………………………vi-vii
Chapter One: INTRODUCTION
- Background to the Study……………….. ………………………………..1
- Statement of the Problem………………..……….. .8
- Objectives of the study………………………… ………….10
- The Significance of the Study…………………. ….. …………. 11
- Scope and Limitation of the Study………………………..12
Chapter Two: LITERATURE REVIEW AND RESEARCH
PROCEDURE
2.1History Background of State Creation Exercises in Nigeria………….13
2.1. 2 Contending Views in Nigeria Federalism: Implications to National Unity………………………………………….………………17
2.1.3 Empirical Causes of Inequality in Nigeria………………………27
2.1.4 The Implication of Inequality…………………… …………………………30
2.1.5 Gap in Literature…………………………………………………………………..32
2.2 Hypotheses………………………………………………………………………….32
2.3 Operationalization of Key Concepts………………………………………33
2.4 Research Procedure………………………………………………………………….34
2.4.1Research
Design……………………………………………………………………34
2.4.2 Population of the study…………………………….……………..……34
2.4.3 Sample Size………………………………………………………………….35
2.4.4 The Main Instrument of Data collection…………………35
2.4.5 Sampling
Technique…..…………………………………………………………..35
2.4.6 Method of
Analyses………………..……………………………………………..35
2.5 Theoretical
Framework…………………………………………………………….35
Chapter Three:
BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON THE STUDY AREA
3.1 The request for the creation of Adada State……………….38
3.2 Legal Enablement to State Creation………….…………44
3.3 Resolution by the Enugu State House of Assembly Dated2th June 2008……..……47
3.4 An Annexure to the Memo for Request for the Creation of Adada
State…………..49
Chapter
Four: DATA PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS
4.1
Data Presentation and analysis ……………………………………………56
Chapter Five Summary, Conclusion and
Recommendation
5.1
Summary…………………………………………………………………65
5.
2 Recommendations ………………………………………………………66
5.3 Conclusion ……………………………………………………………67
Bibliography
Appendix
CHAPTER
ONE: INTRODUCTION
-
Background to the Study
The
military has been involved in Nigerian politics for almost three decades, indeed,
since the coup d’état of January 1966 that ousted the civilian administration;
the military has played a dominant role in the affairs of the nation. Except
for the four-year civil administration of Shagari, that is, 1979-1983, Nigeria
from 1966 to the present has been administered entirely by the military
although democratic structures were experimented at the state level between
1992 and 1993.
One
of the issues which the military has paid attention to in Nigeria is the
question of creation of states which has continued to be a topical issue in the
country Both the civilian and the military administrations had been involved in
the politics of state creation, and both had employed the vehicle of state
creation for political engineering, although the military more than any
civilian administration had always used the issue of state creation to
stabilize their administrations. The first involvement of the military in
creation of states took place a year after they took over the country.
Since
the civilian rule in 1999 the issue of state creation has also been an issue of
national debate, which has created controversy anomg the elites. This as will
be shown later was dictated by the need to weaken the secession threat of the
Eastern Region. Without doubt, states are important variables in a federation,
and thus a pre-requisite for its existence (Noser : 1975 : 170). Nevertheless,
creation of states by the military in Nigeria has so far not succeeded in
satisfying all interest groups in the country. However, it is important to
stress that the creation of states by the military has been one of the most
important achievements of military administration in Nigeria.
It
is against this background that this study examines the issues and challenges
and prospects of states creation in Nigeria and Adada state in particular. It
analyses the important factors which the various military regimes took into
consideration in the creation of states. The chapter submits that the military
in Nigeria has over the years used creation of states not only to attempt even
development but also to stabilize their administrations.
Demands and agitations
for creation of new states in Nigeria have been a recurrent feature since the
London Constitutional Conference of 1957. The fundamental reason for the demand
has always been cultural affinity or pluralism or differences in agreeing on
issues of governance, leading to the marginalization of one sector or people.
This has led to the perennial problem of “minority groups” within administrative
units, thinking objectively or otherwise that they are at a disadvantage. The Willink
Commission that was set up by the British colonial government in 1857 did not
make any recommendation that would break-up the three regions.
Instead, it held the
view that the only meaningful way of allaying the fears of minorities was to
encourage democratic government within the regions. After independence in 1960,
only the Mid-West region was created out of the old Western Region in 1964,
leaving the East and North intact. The Military Regime under Gowon tried to
solve the problem of minorities by breaking up the regions into twelve states
in 1967. The euphoria did not last as demands for more states continued.
Minorities within the “1967 new states” started agitating. This project work
examines the nature and structure as well as causes of this sustained and
incessant agitation in the context of the present demands for the creation of
Adada State out of the present Enugu State of the South East Region.
The topic “State Creation
and Political Unity in Nigeria: A case of the request for creation of Adada
State” is at this time really appealing, and demands in-depth discussion. This
is because, for almost half a century after Nigeria independence, the nation is
yet to resolve the problem of nation building. Political disunity
understandably, within this period, has been on the ascendancy. The centrifugal
forces of division, violence, crises and indeed disunity have continuously played
on the North and South in the North/South struggle for dominance and control of
the political forces and of the common-wealth.
Justification for this
study lies in the fact that unity and peace are the key ingredients of development.
Hardly can any society give in their best when in chaos. The study, is promising
in content, it can provide answer to political disunity and marginalization in
Nigeria, it is for this reason that I am
moved to carry out this study.
The
history of political disunity in Nigeria is a chequered one. The British, prior
to independence, forcefully without consultation, and consideration of the
incompatibility status of Northern and Southern Nigeria, amalgamated the North
and South to become a federation. Either borne out of the British imperialistic
or commercial interest, or for reasons of convenience in administration or as
the only way thought out at the time to be able to govern the vast, diverse and
disparate Nigeria society, the 1914 episode of amalgamation and the subsequent
incorporation of the federal system by the Lytteton constitution of 1954
facilitated the further division of the country and its unequal regions making
the Northern Region larger than the remaining parts put together. This ‘adopted
federalism’ which in all intents, runs outside the full consonance of the basic
principles that should underline federal practices, introduced uneven structure
and imbalances that led to the continued centralization and concentration of
power at the centre with the attendant consequences of depriving the federating
units, the needed nationalities; self actualization and determinism. Conceded,
the Lyttetton constitution was an offshoot of the crises generated by the
Macpherson constitution, especially the motion of self government, and the Kano
riots of 1953. These events convinced the colonial government that considerable
regional autonomy must be granted to the regional governments and that only
federalism could hold the Nigerian peoples together.1 Nigerian
Federalism became consolidated at independence. Since then, it has been
operating in both political and fiscal contexts. Historically, Nigeria’s
federal system has oscillated between the excessive regionalism that marked the
First Republic (1960-1966) and the excessive centralization of the military,
and relatively, the post military era. From the initial three region structure
at independence to a four region structure
by 1964, to a twelve states and
to the present thirty six states
structure including seven hundred and seventy four local governments. These creations
were ostensibly made to promote political stability and to establish a
convenient administrative system. It was meant to bring the masses nearer to
government. It was made ostensibly to ginger development and psychologically
kick-start the process of self determination of the federating units. It was
ostensibly made to correct the observed structural and administrative
imbalances in the country and minimize future political friction. It was made
to provide a much needed political cohesion and unity. It was made to ginger
political unity and reduce tension in the polity.
But, as Gowon puts it: “The main
obstacle to the future stability of this country is the present structural
imbalance in the Nigerian federalism. Even Decree No. 8 or Confederation or
loose association will never survive if anyone section of the country is in
a position to hold others to ransom”. It therefore means that no matter how
novel a system of government is, once there is an imbalance, the society is
bound to fail.
The
idea of state creation which ordinarily would have reduced political disunity
within Nigeria, and amongst the North and the South, unfortunately became a keg
of gun-powder. By this indiscrete division, without adherence to the norms, the
states as created polarized the North and the South. First, the exercise was
decided and implemented-without deep considerations. Some strange bed-fellows
were grouped into the same state and the Boundary Adjustment Committees usually
set up in such cases fail to provide any enduring solution to the problems that
follow. The state creation initiative which is a good reform to-equalize the
society and bring equilibrium rather became a destabilizing force. As was
clearly seen, the failure was seen, as it was the decision to create Nigeria
into 12 states that sparked off the attempted secession of the Eastern Region.
Despite
this, minority agitations and state creation questions had since then been
prevalent in Nigeria. In a nutshell, subsequent state creation exercises aimed
at curbing-political disunity within the polity had been carried out in 1976,
1987, 1991, and 1995.
Dominant interest group had captured the state and managed its attendant wealth thereby facilitating the emergence of violent ethnic militias, distrust, disharmony and crises. The bothering issues of resource control, power sharing, equal rights and accountability, which are offshoot of a veritable state creation, became improperly engaged, leading to increasing political disunity, internal crises, and anarchy of unprecedented dimensions. Out of the 36 states and local government structure, while the North has 20 “states”, the South has 17 states. A closer look at the share of the 774 local governments will also show the North having almost 70% against the South’s 30%. The imbalance is quite apparent. Genuine considerations that would enable creation viewed as a reformation policy for balancing, equity and peace are avoided. This is the quagmire of the Nigerian federalism.
THE REQUEST FOR THE CREATION OF ADADA STATE: PROBLEMS AND PROSPECTS.
