Opinion
Restructuring: Perspectives And Challenges
Before the 2019 general elections, the term restructuring became a buzz word in electioneering campaigns. Irrespective of the political divide, many aspirants promised to restructure Nigeria even though the meaning of the term appeared hazy. Some scholars in political economy posited that if the structure of state is faulty, good governance as epitomized in transparency, accountability, the rule of law and representation will be utopian. Re-structuring therefore, presupposes that there is a structure in place, which may be faulty hence the need for restructuring.
The ambivalent connotation notwithstanding, most political pundits agreed that Nigeria’s generic problem emanated from the 1979 Federal Constitution which in the view of sound legal minds, is not a true reflection of the wishes and aspirations of the people. The advocacy of a home- grown constitution has been long in coming. This group of restructuring advocates and asserts that a reversal to the 1963 constitution and its regional structure would be a panacea. Activists of this variety anchor their argument on the need to give power to the regions as it was the case during the parliamentary system.
Some minority rights advocates push for restructuring in terms of creating more states to give each ethnic group a sense of belonging. This category of advocates decry the skewed structural federalism, which is inimical to their aspirations and their ascendancy to positions of trust at the national level. For people in the Middle-Belt, restructuring might mean freedom from the Hausa-Fulani hegemony. The area is populated by the Tivs, Idomas, Jukuns and other tribes, but because of the frequent clashes and struggle for power and land for farming and grazing, the federally controlled Hausa-Fulani government has dominated and subdued the aborigines of the middle-belt. For them, restructuring would imply freedom from Fulani domination.
For the Igbo ethnic group, restructuring as defined by some agitators is outright separatism from the geo-political entity – Nigeria. However, the Igbo intelligentsia re-calibrate restructuring to mean having a fair share of power in the arithmetic of power sharing. The Igbos seek the presidency- the highest office in the land. It is only against this background that we can understand the activities of the Indigenous Peoples of Biafra, IPOB, and the centrifugal forces of pull and tear harassing the South-East.
In the Niger Delta Region, restructuring is a vociferous demand for resource ownership and control on one hand and fiscal federalism on the other. The dominant argument is that in a federalism, states should be given the right to own, control and enjoy their resources.
This advocacy was the motivating force of the “Kaiama Declaration” of December eleventh, 1998. Similarly, the militant agitations in the oil -rich region culminated in the establishment of the Niger Delta Development Commission (NDDC), the Ministry of Niger Delta and the pacification of the agitators which found expression in the Presidential Amnesty Programme. Whichever way restructuring is understood, the concept is nebulous hence, analysts cannot pin it down to one pragmatic action point. The existence of several ideological permutations makes restructuring difficult to embrace by a critical segment of Nigerians.
Whereas, balancing the political equation is a major problem, most Nigerians see the country as a dichotomy between the north and the south. Others believe that power sharing should be done along the lines of the six geo political zones while others hold that power should be rotated among the major ethnic groups. This thinking has rendered restructuring to mean a mere good intention.
Ethnic chauvinism and religious dichotomy also fuel divisive tendencies. This is the more reason the concept of restructuring is viewed as a way of dividing the nation. In the view of some vested interests, Nigeria should remain as one big and strong indivisible entity to project the interest of continental Africa. Put together, restructuring will remain a distant dream.
However, objective analysts tenaciously hold the notion that restructuring should start with developing a homegrown constitution, which is the grundnorm upon which any structural reforms will be predicated. The truism is that if the constitution is the basic document of the land, it implies that every structural change should be predicated on it. Then all Nigeria’s socio- cultural, political and economic challenges may be accommodated.
If a nation like Nigeria so stupendously endowed, parades bad statistics in all sectors, then restructuring may be a panacea. This has even become an emergency if Nigerians must live together as a people belonging to one corporate, indivisible entity.
Our leaders can take the bull by the horns by initiating the process of restructuring the Nigerian state. Our political economy has floundered from limping hope to utter despair and there is consensus among the intelligentsia that restructuring is the “silver bullet” that can assuage the fears of Nigerians and it will amount to grave injustice if we postpone the fundamental solutions to our national malaise.
The IPOB movement appears to have gathered momentum like an ideology. With the detention of Mazi Nnamdi Kanu even the November 2021 Governorship election in Anambra, which was conducted peacefully, instilled palpable fear in the electorate. Now, the earlier permutation of Igbo Presidency seems to be evaporating like the morning cloud, even though credible people like Senator Pius Anyim and Peter Obi may be ready to run.
With insecurity and banditry menacing the peaceful co-existence of the nation, the allure of restructuring as a structural panacea for national stability has become a compelling argument. The popular view of opinion leaders in Southern Nigeria is that Nigeria is ripe for restructuring and failure to do so will imperil the corporate existence of the nation. How this position will play out will determine the collective stability of Nigeria.
By: John Idumange
Dr. Idumange is a public intellectual.
Opinion
Professor Kamene Okonjo: A Life Beyond Motherhood
Quote “Professor Kamene Okonjo
Some women leave behind more t
Yet, to remember Professor Kam
Professor Okonjo was the belov
one of the most dramatic chapt
On December 14, 2012, the then
She leaves behind children, gr
Professor Kamene Okonjo deserv
By: Sylvia ThankGod-Amadi
Opinion
On Ancestrial Worship: My Take
Quote: An African who invokes
This is the concluding part
… Given the fact that I was
At the end of the visit by the
Back to my apartment, at abo
Under normal circumstances, yo
That all she asks is that Chie
For some reason that I do not
I believe that everyone in hu
Our ancestors have not gone fa
By: Jason Osai
Opinion
FG’s Transport Support And Rivers Workers
The Federal Government’s approval of a N70,000 monthly transport intervention for public service workers for six months, beginning in November 2026, offers hope to employees struggling with the rising cost of living. The agreement with the Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC), reached at a conciliation meeting in Abuja on October 27, is intended to cushion transport costs and ease pressure on workers’ incomes. But for public servants in Rivers State, it raises a familiar question: will the State Government key into the intervention and ensure that its workers benefit? The agreement provides for N70,000 monthly across all levels, for six months. The Federal Government also approved peculiar allowance arrears effective from May 1, 2026, to be paid in three equal instalments beginning in November.
The parties agreed to reconvene after one month to assess implementation. Ultimately, the value of these resolutions will be measured not by announcements but by whether eligible workers receive the money. Transport costs consume a substantial share of many civil servants’ earnings before they can meet household needs. Support for commuting is therefore not a luxury or political favour; it is temporary assistance to help workers remain at their jobs without sinking further into hardship. For lower-paid employees, transport costs can turn modest salaries into a daily exercise in difficult choices and sacrifice.
The agreement also urges State and Local Governments to participate and unions to press for implementation. The federal agreement does not automatically guarantee that every State and Local Government employee will receive the support. State authorities must clarify how it will apply to their workforce, make the necessary arrangements and publish a payment timetable. Rivers State must approach the arrangement with urgency and transparency. The Government should State whether it will implement the intervention and when payments will begin. Any administrative or financial question should be addressed promptly with organised labour, not allowed to become excuses for delay.
The concern is sharpened by the earlier N35,000 monthly wage award introduced by the Federal Government in 2023 after petrol subsidy removal. It was intended as temporary relief pending a new national minimum wage. While several States negotiated and paid wage awards or related sums, implementation nationwide was uneven. Reports in 2024 indicated that many States had failed to pay the federal award, while others provided different amounts. In Rivers, labour and media reports raised concerns about implementation of the N35,000 award for State workers, amid separate announcements and arrangements concerning Local Government employees.
The wage award was meant to ease the immediate effects of subsidy removal, yet workers faced uncertainty over whether the promised relief would reach them. In February 2024, the Rivers State Government announced approval of the N35,000 award for local government workers, but subsequent reports showed that implementation across worker categories remained a concern. The lesson is clear: approval and implementation are not the same. A declaration at a meeting offers little comfort to a worker whose account does not reflect the promised payment. For workers who travel to their offices daily, the implications of delayed support are significant. Transportation expenses compete with food, rent, school fees, healthcare and other essential household needs.
As fares rise, employees may be forced to reduce spending on necessities or borrow to sustain their families. A timely transport intervention would therefore provide practical relief and demonstrate that government understands the economic pressures confronting its workforce. Its temporary nature makes prompt implementation even more important. It is fair to acknowledge that this transport intervention is a new agreement and that its administrative details may require clarification. Rivers State should not be condemned in advance for a failure that has not occurred. Nevertheless, the earlier experience gives workers legitimate grounds to seek assurances before the November commencement date. The State should avoid allowing uncertainty to persist until workers begin asking why the promised assistance has not arrived.
The NLC and unions in Rivers State should engage the State Government immediately and seek a written commitment, an implementation plan and a process for reporting missed payments. If clarification from the Federal Government is needed, the State should seek it without abandoning the goal of providing relief. Labour leaders must also keep members informed about progress and insist that any agreed arrangements are applied fairly and transparently. The Rivers State Government should treat this intervention as an opportunity to rebuild confidence. Timely support would show that workers’ welfare is more than a talking point and that the State recognises the economic realities confronting its employees.
Silence, delay or selective implementation, by contrast, would revive frustration over earlier relief measures and weaken trust between government and labour. Every month lost to administrative delay leaves workers facing the same transport burden without the intended assistance. The State should consult labour, publish arrangements and pay eligible workers on time. Rivers workers should not have to wonder whether federal relief will reach them. The Federal Government has announced the support; now the State must make its position clear. We hope the N70,000 monthly transport intervention will not follow the troubling path of the earlier wage award. Rivers State should learn from that experience and ensure that this time, relief is not merely promised but delivered.
Sylvia ThankGod-Amadi
-
Opinion4 days ago
Ancestorial Worship: My Take (1)
-
Education1 day agoPAMO MEDICAL UNIVERSITY -Nullifies Arrest warrant on VC
-
Niger Delta1 day ago
PANDEF Seeks 50% Oil Derivation Allocation Increase
-
Rivers24 hours ago
Don Seeks Repositioning Of Tech Education For Dev
-
Education1 day agoIAUE MOVES TO END GHOST WORKERS SYNDROME AS 400 NEW NON-TEACHING STAFF UNDERGO MANDATORY ETHICS TRAINING
-
News1 day agoFresh Ebola Scare As NCDC Records Two Cases
-
News1 day ago
Customs Partners EFCC, NDLEA, Others To Tackle Money Laundering, Terrorism Financing
-
News4 days agoFG Must Address Nigerians’ Concerns On Reforms -Shettima …Warns Against Misuse of AI, Social Media
