Rebuilding Nigeria Through Devolution and Decentralisation, by Dr. Joe Abah
By Dr. Joe Abah, OON
As Nigeria marks another Independence Day, the question of how to rebuild the nation remains urgent. Despite decades of constitutional reforms, the country continues to grapple with inefficiencies, insecurity, and a lack of innovation. At the heart of these challenges lies a fundamental issue: over-centralisation of power. To move forward, Nigeria must return to a decentralised structure that empowers its regions and restores accountability.
A Look Back: The 1963 Republican Constitution
Nigeria’s journey began with a parliamentary system modeled after the British government. The 1963 Republican Constitution gave substantial autonomy to the regions, allowing them to manage critical sectors such as health, education, and local government. Each region had its own constitution and operated with a high degree of independence.
The federal government was responsible for 45 items on the Exclusive Legislative List, including defence, foreign affairs, currency, and major economic policies. Meanwhile, regions shared concurrent responsibilities in areas like policing, internal security, census, and higher education.
Importantly, the revenue allocation formula favoured the regions: 80% of national revenue went to the regions, while the federal government received just 20%. This structure encouraged regional competition, innovation, and accountability.
The 1979 Constitution: A Shift in Power
The 1979 Constitution marked a significant departure from regional autonomy. Nigeria adopted an American-style presidential system, and the number of states increased from 12 to 19. Abuja was designated as the new Federal Capital Territory, and for the first time, Local Government Areas (LGAs) were named in the Constitution.
The Exclusive Legislative List expanded from 45 to 66 items, giving the federal government more control. Revenue allocation also shifted dramatically: 55% went to the federal government, 26.5% to states, 10% to LGAs, and 8.5% to special funds.
Several key responsibilities were moved from the Concurrent List to the Exclusive List, including policing, higher education, arms and ammunition, prisons, labour, census, and professional regulation. This shift reduced the capacity of states to manage their affairs and increased dependence on the federal government.
The 1999 Constitution: Entrenching Centralisation
The 1999 Constitution continued the presidential system and expanded the number of states to 36, with 774 LGAs. The Exclusive Legislative List grew to 68 items, further consolidating federal control.
Revenue allocation was adjusted again: 52.68% for the federal government, 26.72% for states, and 20.60% for LGAs. Electoral laws, which were previously shared responsibilities between federal and state governments, became the exclusive domain of the federal government. Electricity regulation was also centralised, although recent amendments now allow states to regulate electricity within their territories.
The Cost of Over-Centralisation
The consequences of centralisation have been severe. A generation of young Nigerians has grown up without experiencing a functional country. The focus on sharing resources has led to uniform mediocrity, where performance is not rewarded and innovation is stifled.
States and LGAs often escape accountability, as blame is concentrated on the federal government. The unitary police force is widely seen as corrupt, ineffective, and disconnected from the people. Subnational governments are expected to maintain security but lack the authority to effectively do so.
The federal government controls so many resources that wasteful spending has become routine. For instance, the number of federal agencies have trebled since 2012 when the Oronsaye Report was submitted with the aim of reducing the number of federal agencies! Local governments have been emasculated, and the private sector relies heavily on federal patronage. Legislators award to themselves some of the highest salaries in the world, simply because they have the power of appropriation.
Ethnic tensions and calls for secession persist, fuelled by feelings of marginalisation. Citizens feel powerless, leading to a dangerous “Messiah Complex” where they wait for a single leader to fix everything. Elections are of course vitally important in a democracy, and the choice of the politicians that emerge to lead us has a profound effect on all our lives. Free, fair and credible elections are the very bedrock of our freedom as a society. However, as the French Philosopher Jean Jacques Rosseau said, ““Before examining the act by which a nation elects a king, it would be proper to examine the act by which a nation becomes a nation; for this act, being necessarily anterior to the other, is the real foundation of the society.”
Rethinking Nationhood
As James Madison, the 4th United States president, once said, ““The aim of every political Constitution, is or ought to be, first to obtain for rulers, men who possess most wisdom to discern, and most virtue to pursue, the common good of society; and in the next place, to take the most effectual precautions for keeping them virtuous whilst they continue to hold their public trust.”
Before a nation can elect a leader, it must first define itself. The structure of governance must reflect the realities and aspirations of its people. Nigeria’s current constitutional framework does not do this. It is time to rewrite the script.
A New Path Forward
To rebuild Nigeria, we must take bold steps:
- Return to a decentralised structure with strong regional governments and a lean federal center. This will allow regions to manage their affairs more effectively and foster healthy competition.
- Revise the revenue sharing formula so that the federal government receives only 20–30% of national revenue, while regions receive 70–80%. This will empower regions to invest in development and infrastructure.
- Enact a new Constitution modelled on the 1963 arrangement but adapted to Nigeria’s six geo-political zones. Each zone should have its own constitution and control over key functions such as policing and census.
- Allow each zone to determine its own number of local governments, based on its unique needs and population dynamics.
Conclusion
Even the best actor cannot turn a tragedy into a comedy. Nigeria’s current constitutional “script” is the problem. To change the narrative, we must rewrite the script—starting with devolution and decentralisation.
