Nigeria’s stunted development following the 1966 coup and the subsequent Nigeria-Biafra Civil War can be attributed to significant constitutional anomalies that have constricted its progress.
The exclusive legislative list encompasses all the powers that should typically be exercised by the various constituent tiers of government, particularly the control over natural resources
This centralisation has effectively eliminated fiscal autonomy – the essential element that supports the functioning of federalism. As a result, Nigeria, as a federation, has been struggling to thrive on multiple fronts. The concept of federalism has long been a subject of scholarly discourse. A renowned political scientist, Wheare Kenneth Clinton, defined it as “the method of dividing powers so that the general and regional governments are each, within a sphere, coordinate and independent” (Wheare, 1963).
At the heart of true federalism lie the principles of shared sovereignty, decentralised decision-making, and the equitable distribution of power and resources between the central government and constituent states or regions.
The fundamental ideals of true federalism include autonomy, where constituent states or regions possess a significant degree of autonomy in policymaking and governance within their jurisdictions. The next is fiscal decentralisation, where subnational governments have the authority to generate revenue and allocate resources to address local needs and priorities. Another fundamental ideal of true federalism, cooperative governance whereby the central and subnational governments work in a spirit of collaboration and mutual respect to achieve national objectives. Yet another basic principle in true federalism is diversity and inclusion in which the federal structure accommodates the diverse cultural, linguistic, and economic realities of the country, ensuring no region is left behind. The adoption of true federalism has yielded significant economic and social benefits for countries around the world. In India, for example, the shift towards greater fiscal decentralisation and state autonomy has led to increased innovation, competition, and tailored policy solutions that have driven rapid economic growth and development (Rao, 2007). Similarly, in the United States, the federal system has fostered an environment of entrepreneurship, technological advancement, and regional specialisation, contributing to the country’s economic prowess (Oates, 1999).
Unfortunately, Nigeria, despite its constitutional designation as a federal republic, has struggled to fully implement the principles of true federalism. The country’s history has been marked by a persistent centralisation of power and resources, with the federal government wielding disproportionate control over key economic and political decisions. This has led to a range of challenges, including uneven development, where the concentration of resources and decision-making in Abuja has resulted in stark disparities in economic and social development across Nigeria’s regions, with some states lagging far behind others; weak subnational governments, where the limited autonomy and fiscal capacity of state and local governments have undermined their ability to address the unique needs and aspirations of their constituents, leading to inefficient resource allocation, where the top-down approach to resource distribution has often failed to align with the actual needs and priorities of local communities. This has led to suboptimal utilisation of public funds, and stifled innovation, where the lack of subnational policy experimentation and competition have hindered the emergence of innovative solutions to Nigeria’s complex socioeconomic challenges.
