FELIX NWANERI writes on the fresh demand for states creation before the National Assembly despite the fact that the current 36-state structure is becoming increasingly difficult to sustain due to dwindling revenue
At independence in 1960, Nigeria had three regions – Northern Region, Eastern Region and Western Region. A fourth region, Midwest, was later created in 1963. However, creation of states would begin in 1967 under General Yakubu Gowon’s regime. He dissolved the regions and created 12 states out of them.
They are North-Western State, North-Eastern State, Kano State, North-Central State, Benue-Plateau State, Kwara State, Western State, Lagos State, MidWestern State, Rivers State, SouthEastern State and East-Central State. The number of states jumped to 19 in 1976, when the then Head of State, General Murtala Mohammed, carved out seven new states from the existing 12.
They are Niger and Sokoto from North-Western State; Bauchi, Gongola and Borno from North Eastern State; Plateau and Benue from Benue-Plateau State; Ondo, Ogun and Oyo from Western State; Imo and Anambra from East Central State. Eleven years after (1987), the regime of General Ibrahim Babangida created two more new states – Akwa Ibom and Katsina – to bring the number of states to 21. Akwa Ibom was carved out of Cross River State, while Kastina was carved out of Kaduna State. Babangida created additional nine states in 1991 to take the number of states to 30.
The states are Adamawa and Taraba from Gongola; Enugu from Anambra, Edo and Delta from the then Bendel, Yobe from Borno, Jigawa from Kano, Kebbi from Sokoto and Osun from Oyo. The General Sani Abacha, regime which acted on the recommendations of the National Constitutional Conference (NCC) on the need for more states, created six additional states on October 1, 1996. That brought the number of states in Nigeria to 36. The states are Ebonyi that was created from Abia and Enugu; Bayelsa from Rivers, Nasarawa from Plateau, Zamfara from Sokoto, Gombe from Bauch and Ekiti from Ondo.
Steps for state creation
Creation of new states in Nigeria is a tall order as procedures to be adopted by the National Assembly according to section 8 (i) of the 1999 Constitution, states: “An Act of the National Assembly for the purpose of creating a new state shall only be passed if (a) A request, supported by at least two-thirds majority of members (representing the area demanding the creation of the new state) in each of the following, namely (i) the Senate and the House of Representatives, (ii) The House of Assembly in respect of the area, and (iii) The local government councils in respect of the area, is received by the National Assembly.”
The section further states that“(b) A proposal for the creation of the state is thereafter approved in a referendum by at least twothirds majority of the people of the area where the demand for creation of the state originated; (c) The result of the referendum is then approved by a simple majority of all the states of the federation supported by a simple majority of members of the Houses of Assembly; and (d) The proposal is approved by a resolution passed by two-thirds majority of members of each House of the National Assembly.”
Beyond the feeling of marginalisation is a desire to have the dividends of democracy felt at the grassroots… and the instrument of state creation, for some people, is what will be used as a tool to achieve that
Despite these legislative hurdles and the belief that the current 36 state-structure has become increasingly difficult to sustain due to dwindling revenue, it has been unending demand for creation of new states since the last exercise by the Abacha regime 28 years ago. Interestingly, the demand, which usually crops up whenever the National Assembly embarks on constitutional amendment, explains why it is in the font burner as the 10th National Assembly embarks on another review of the constitution. Among the reasons that have been persistently advanced by proponents of new states are marginalization and imbalance in the federal structure.
10th Reps receives 31 proposals
Perhaps, it is against the backdrop of previous demands and recent developments that House of Representatives Committee on Constitution Review has been flooded with 31 state creation requests in the ongoing constitution amendment process. The proposal for new states was contained in a letter read during Thursday’s plenary session by the Deputy Speaker, Benjamin Kalu, who presided over the session in the absence of the Speaker, Tajudeen Abbas.
Kalu, who is the chairperson of the House Committee on Constitution Review, said the committee, in line with section 8 of the 1999 Constitution, will proceed with the process for requests that meet the constitutional threshold. According to the list, there are seven requests from the North Central. They are Okun State, Okura State and Confluence State from the present Kogi State; Benue Ala State, Apa-Agba State and Apa State from the present Benue State and Federal Capital Territory State.
The South-East has five requests – Etiti State from the five the five states of the zone, Adada State from the present Enugu State, Urashi State and Orlu State from the present Imo State and Aba State from the present Abia State From the South-South are four requests, comprising Ori State and Obolo State from the present Rivers State, Ogoja State from the present Cross River State and Warri State from the present Delta State.
The South-West has seven requests – Toru-Ebe State from the present Ondo, Edo and Delta states, Ibadan State from the present Oyo State, Lagoon State from the present Lagos State, Ijebu State from the present Ogun State, Lagoon State from the present Lagos and Ogun states, Ife-Ijesha State from Ogun, Oyo and Osun states and Oke-Ogun from the present Ogun, Oyo and Osun states. The North-West has five requests.
They are New Kaduna State and Gurara State from the present Kaduna State, Tiga State and Ghari State from the present Kano State and Kainji State from the present Kebbi State. The North-East, on its part, has four requests. They are Amana State from the present Adamawa State, Katagum State from the present Bauchi State, Savannah State from the present Borno State and Muri State from the present Taraba State. If the proposal scales through, Nigeria will be made up of 67 sub-national governments as the country’s current states stand at 36, including the Federal Capital Territory.
NASS and unending demand for new states
This is not the first time the National Assembly would be flooded with demands for new states during constitution review process. New Telegraph recalls that the number of memoranda submitted by various interest groups on state creation were more than 45 during a similar exercise by the 7th Assembly in 2012. Thirty-four of such memoranda were intra-state demands, seven on inter-state, while four cut across geo-political zones. It was a similar experience, when the 9th National Assembly embarked on a review of the constitution. Among the demands then include that by the Annang speaking people of Akwa Ibom State, who then called for the creation of ITAI State from the present Akwa Ibom State.
A proposal and memorandum in that regard was submitted to the Senate ad-hoc Committee on Constitutional Review by leader of the delegation and chairman of the Board of Trustees of Ati Annang Foundation, Sir Emem Akpabio, through the then senator representing Ikot Ekpene Senatorial District, Chris Ekpenyong.
Akpabio then said that the people of the old Annang province led by representatives from Ati Annang, Afe Annang, Afe Nkuku Annang and Annang Leaders of Thought decided to submit the proposal and memorandum for the creation of ITA State with its capital in Ikot Ekpene as the Annang nation remains one of the country’s oldest nationalities. He added that people of the area are homogeneous aborigines with a population of 1.1 million as projected from the provisional figures of the 1991 National census, covering eight local government areas of Abak, Etim Ekpo, Ika, Ikot Ekpene, Essien Udim, Obot Akara, Ukanafun and Oruk Anam.
There was also a demand for the creation of Katagum State from the present Bauchi State. Its campaigners at the time, led by a former Secretary to the Government of the Federation (SGF), Alhaji Yayale Ahmed, said the demand dates back to 1980s and that the Second Senate in 1981 as well as the 2014 National Conference approved it. Alhaji Ahmed, who declared that the proposed state is economically viable in the areas of agriculture, solid minerals, livestock and water resources, added that it would bring development closer to the people when created. Other new states that have been proposed over time include ToruIbe, Anioma, Oil Rivers, Ogoja, Afemaiesan and New Delta in the South-South; Oduduwa, Ijebu, Ibadan, Ijesha in the South-West; Apa, Idoma, Edu, Okun and Oya in the North Central; Amana and Savannah in the North-East, and Gurara in the North-West.
Peculiar case of South-East
For the people of the South-East zone, their demand for an additional state has been a recurring decimal. Their quest is premised on the belief that an additional state will bring them at par with the other zones of the country. The South-East is the only geopolitical zone in the country with five states; Abia, Anambra, Ebonyi, Enugu and Imo and there have been campaigns by several groups in each of the five states of the zone over the years for the proposed new state to be created from their respective areas. The demands are Aba State from the present Abia State vy the people Ukwa and Ngwa ethnic nationalities.
Same goes for the people of the old Nsukka Division in Enugu State, who want Adada State. It is the same story Imo State, where there have been demands for Orlu, Njaba and Orashi states respectively by different groups. Agitators of Aba State made up of Ukwa and Ngwa ethnic nationalities are of the view that a similar demand was made to the British Colonial Government in 1954 as well as in 1980 and 1983 to both Houses of the National Assembly.
The desire of the agitators of Aba State is to have their areas comprising nine local government areas; Aba North, Aba South, Osisioma Ngwa, Obingwa, Isiala Ngwa North, Isiala Ngwa South, Ugwunagbo, Ukwa East and Ukwa West local government areas, carved out of the present Abia State. They listed states which were marked for creation along with Aba State at the time to include, Adamawa, Jigawa, Katsina, Kogi, Taraba and Enugu. Similarly, those behind the Adada State project have continued to argue that of all the old provinces in the then Eastern Nigeria, Nsukka Province remains the only one that has not been accorded a state status.
They also argue that theirs’ remains the oldest outstanding state creation agitation in Igbo land, pointing out that their demand would have since come to fruition if not for the intervention by the military in 1983 as the then National Assembly, on March 16 of that year, moved a motion for the creation of Adada State. In the same Enugu State, the people of Awgu, who have over the years cried out over perceived marginalisation, want what they call Equity State, which will see them teaming with Aninri council (also in the present Enugu); Afikpo in Ebonyi; Okigwe, Onuimo, Orsu, Nwangele, Orlu, Oru East and West in Imo and Umunneochi in Abia. Another agitation is that for Etiti State.
Its proponents want it carved out from the present Anambra, Imo and Abia states. It would include councils in Anambra like Aguata, Nnewi North and South, Orumba South and North and Ihiala, while from Imo councils like Ideato North and South, Onuimo, Orsu, Nwangele, Orlu, Nkwere, Oru East and West, Njaba, Okigwe would join alongside Isu and Umunneochi from Abia. The situation is more intriguing in Imo State. A section of leaders in Imo West and Anambra South senatorial districts have continued to push for the creation of Njaba State, while others are demanding for Orlu and Orashi states respectively.
Creation of new states shouldn’t be the priority for now as most of the existing states are said to be insolvent up to the extent that they cannot even pay salaries of their respective civil servants
The proposed Njaba State, according to its promoters should be carved out of the 12 local government areas that make-up Imo West: Orlu, Orsu, Oru East, Oru West, Oguta, Ohaji/Egbema, Nkwerre, Nwangele, Isu, Njaba, Ideato North and Ideato South.
They are to be joined by Ihiala Local Government Area of Anambra State. Agitators of Orlu State want only the 12 councils that make up the senatorial district to be accorded a state status. They argue that Orlu zone is the third largest city in Nigeria with an estimated population of about two million people and enormous potentials to sustain itself as a state.
A similar demand is that of Orashi State, although its proponents want some local government areas in Anambra and Rivers states to be added to it, as accorsding to them, the area is a virtual geographical autonomy of its own and will abate complaints of marginalisation by the people of the area against the present governments in Rivers, Anambra and Imo states.
Anim and Orimili are also part of the demands and their agitators insist that since the then East Central State was split into Imo and Anambra states and from Imo; Abia was carved out, while Enugu was created from Anambra and out of the two (Enugu and Abia), Ebonyi later emerged, equity demands that the sixth state for the South-East be carved out of the present Imo and Anambra states.
Feasibility of new states
Many have attributed increase in the number of agitations for new states to minority fears, quest for equity as well as desire for speedy development, while others say they are inspired by the same concerns that preceded state creations in the past. However, it was against the backdrop of the process involved in state creation that the 2014 National Conference recommended that the country’s constitution should be amended to allow for a less onerous process.
The conference, which specifically approved the creation of an additional state for the South-East “in the spirit of reconciliation, equity and justice,” agreed that henceforth, state creation should be on the basis of parity between the geo-political zones to ensure equality of zones. The conference said such aspiration must be backed by the potential viability of the proposed state in terms of economic potential, human natural and material resources as well as minimum land and water mass.
Delegates at the confab agreed that the envisaged state, must have cultural and historical antecedent, with strong cultural affinity amongst its population while the component should be contiguous. In addition, the conference also adopted the recommendation that for any new state to be created such a new state must have a minimum population of one million persons. The delegates also approved in principle, the eventual creation of 18 additional states across the country as a way of meeting the yearning and aspirations of the people. This, added to the one approved for the South-East, brought the number 19 new states.
However, there are members of a political school, who believe that besides minority fears, inequity and skewed development, quest for political empires and influence by the elite class are the major motivations for the persistent demands for more states. But whether the motivations for agitation for the new states are genuine or not, questions that have been asked over time are: Has creation of more states addressed the fears of minorities and the feelings of marginalisation and domination?
Has it resulted to good governance and speedy development at the sub-national level? If states are meant to bring governance closer to the people, what is the essence of local government areas? While satisfactory answers are yet to be provided for these questions, there is also a raging debate over the propriety or otherwise of the 36 state-structure as against a return to regionalism on the basis of the six geo-political zones given that global trend is aggressively moving towards contraction of size of government and cost of governance. This is even as most of the existing states are said to be insolvent.
The belief in most quarters is that without the monthly disbursement from the Federation Account Allocation Committee (FAAC), most of the states will not survive as their respective Internally Generated Revenue (IGR). practically amounts to nothing. It is against this backdrop that those who believe that the idea for additional states be jettisoned, even called for a reduction in the number of the existing ones. According to them, Nigeria cannot attain development by high recurrent expenditure and reduced capital expenditure it has continued to experience as a result of proliferation of states.
A chieftain of the apex Igbo body, Ohanaeze Ndigbo, Chief Chekwas Okorie, who spoke on the fresh demand for new states, told New Telegraph that it should not be the priority of any zone for now given the near insolvency situation of most of the existing 36 states. He, however, noted that if there should be any demand for new states, it should come from the South-East in order to bring the zone at par with the other five zones. According to him, what should be paramount as the 10th NASS embarks on another journey on constitution amendment are restructuring of the country to reflect true federalism, devolution of power to the states and state police, among others.
His words: “Although the belief before now is that equality of states among the six geopolitical zones will go a long way in further strengthening the country’s unity, I don’t think that creation of new states shouldn’t be the priority for now. The major reason is that most of the existing states are said to be insolvent up to the extent that they cannot even pay salaries of their respective civil servants. “What should be the priority as the 10th National Assembly embarks on another review of the constitution is restructuring, devolution of power and establishment to curb rising insecurity.
There is no state in Nigeria that cannot be viable but the issue is that they have not been given the necessary latitude to explore and exploit their respective comparative advantages in order to grow. “What we have is a political structure that makes it impossible for our governors not to even be creative in the area of generating revenue to run their states. Rather, they just sit down and wait for allocation from the Federal Government. That is why it looks as if some states are not viable. So, unviability of states is as a result of over concentration of power in the Federal Government and that is why everyone is talking about devolution of power.”
National Organising Secretary of pan Yoruba socio cultural organisation, Afenifere, Kole Omololu, who shared Okorie’s views, said the proposed state creation negates Afenifere’s demand for true federalism. Omololu maintained that instead of proliferating states that may later be unviable, the National Assembly should focus on constitutional reforms that will devolve power, return resource control to the regions and grant states the autonomy to develop at their own pace. His words: “The recent proposal by the House of Representatives Committee on Constitution Review to create 31 new states does not align with Afenifere’s long-standing demand for true federalism. Instead of addressing the core structural issues plaguing Nigeria, this initiative appears to be a mere political exercise that will further weaken governance and deepen economic inefficiencies.
“The creation of more states without a viable economic foundation will only compound the financial burden on the nation, as many existing states are already struggling to generate sufficient Internally Generated Revenue and rely heavily on federal allocations to survive. ‘’Turning every local government into a state is not the solution to Nigeria’s governance challenges. The real issue is not the number of states but the dysfunctional federal structure that has concentrated power at the centre, stifling regional development. “Nigeria needs a system where states or regions control their resources and contribute an agreed percentage to the Federal Government, just as it was during the First Republic.
This is the only path to sustainable development, not the reckless creation of more administrative units.” A former Kaduna Central senator, Shehu Sani, who also faulted the proposed creation of 31 additional states, in a post via his X page, described the proposal as ironic and comical. Sani, who insisted that politicians just want to carve out mini colonies for themselves, maintained that the country doesn’t need new states because many states depend on federal allocation for survival. His words: “While many states are dependent on federal allocation for their survival, the House of Representatives proposal for 31 states is ironic and comical. Politicians just want to carve out mini colonies for themselves.”
Eyes on NASS
As the 10th NASS commences work on the constitution alteration exercise, the question is: Will demand for new states be accorded priority? This is against the backdrop that the general belief during such constitutional review processes has always been that there should not be any “no go area.” Already, the Senate has constituted a 45-member committee for the exercise, chaired by the Deputy Senate President, Barau Jibrin, while the Senate Leader, Opeyemi Bamidele, will serve as deputy chairman. The Senate President, Godswill Akpabio, had during composition of the committee, said the 1999 Constitution, needed a review because it contained many issues that needed to be put right.
The real issue is not the number of states but the dysfunctional federal structure that has concentrated power at the centre, stifling regional development
“There is a need for us to touch some aspects of the constitution to bring them in line with current realities,” he said, adding that members of the committee were selected from all states and geopolitical zones. Akpabio further noted that “all the motions and resolutions pertaining to constitution amendment that have been brought to the Senate will now be channelled straight to the Constitution Review Committee.” The House of Representatives, on its part, had earlier declared that it will complete activities for the review of the constitution in December 2025, to avoid conflict with electoral activities ahead of the 2027 general election.
Reacting on the requests for new states, the deputy speaker said that the law-making chamber is not taking a side on the proposal received by the committee. In a statement issued on Friday by his Chief Press Secretary, Levinus Nwabughiogu, Kalu said that the proposal for state creation read during Thursday’s plenary session of the House was to inform Nigerians about the number of applications so far received. The Deputy Speaker also said that the applications are 30 and not 31 as previously reported. He, however, said that none of the 30 proposals for new states met the constitutional requirements.
He, therefore, urged the applicants to comply with the constitutional procedures outlined in ection 8(1-3) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), informing that the parliament is giving the applicants until March 5, to rectify the gaps in their applications. The statement read in part, “We are the people’s parliament. We are not taking any position on the issue of the creation of states. We have heard a lot of people giving different narratives to the letter that was read. Let me clear the dust. “During the 9th Assembly, we received more requests for state creation and some of them came through private member bills. Some came from the memoranda we called for and in this 10th Assembly, we have received 30, not 31. I think, on that list, they repeated Ibadan State twice. It is 30 that we have received.
“But having received that, in the last Assembly, people did not know why their request for state creation did not go through. In this 10th Assembly, we decided to let the people know that, granted, we have received all the applications for new States to be created either through member bills or memoranda, but we do not concede that all of them are good enough to be created. “There are constitutional procedures in section 8, subsections 1 to 3 on how this application should be made. As we speak, none of these 30 proposals have met the requirements of section 8 and that was why we decided to bring it to the notice of Nigerians that your application before us is ineffective.
“Therefore, you need to comply with section 8, so that when we don’t consider the State creation request, you will know where it emanated from. So, the notice to he public is that you have between now and March 5, to enable you to cure the gaps in your application for state creation. “And if you go to section 8, you will see two-thirds, the majority of the Senate, that of the House of Representatives, the state Houses of Assembly as well as the local government councils.
So, let’s follow that procedure and then present these applications again. We are going to the Newspapers to place public announcements so that those who want new States to be created should follow the guidelines as laid down by the constitutional provisions.” “We are giving them one month, which is about March 5, to cure the gaps in the applications. The applications as they are will not be able to fly because we are strict with complying with the dictates of the provisions of the constitution. They should fill in the gaps and bring it back before March 5.
“There is no alternative to compliance with the provisions of the constitution. The position of the constitution is sacrosanct. It’s our grundnorm. If it says you have to follow certain procedures in line with the rule of law and observe its supremacy, you have to comply with the provision of the constitution. “Those who are desirous of state creation should comply with the procedures laid down in the constitution and bring it back. There is a window we have created which is one month. It is sufficient enough for people to cure the gaps in their applications and we will reconsider it.” Kalu also said the deluge of requests for state creation may have emanated from the people’s desire to enjoy more dividends of democracy.
“I think it reflects the desire to enjoy the dividends of democracy. People want the dividends of democracy to trickle down the grassroots and they feel in their minds that the best approach is to have their own state. “So, if you watch the space closely, you will see the President has been very intentional in creating development commissions across the country. “Beyond the feeling of marginalisation is a desire to have the dividends of democracy felt at the grassroots more than before, and the instrument of state creation, for some people, is what they believe will be used as a tool to achieve that. “That’s what many Nigerians believe.
The more states you create, the more they will have access to the dividends of democracy. Whether that is true or not, it is not for me to judge because you know I am a presiding officer and the chairman of the committee of the constitution review, and I can’t take a position.
“My position is to be the unbiased umpire, who will listen to the desires of all Nigerians either through the bills presented to the parliament for constitutional amendment or the memoranda that we received from the public. So, when we do, we analyse and then take a position based on what the people want,” he said. The arguments for and against the creation of new states, notwithstanding, whether President Bola-Tinubu-led Federal Government and the 10th National Assembly will yield to demand for new states in the face of dwindling revenue fortune would be seen in the days ahead.
