Nigeria, the “Giant of Africa,” faces persistent challenges stemming from its complex political and economic landscape. Among the numerous issues plaguing the nation, the call for restructuring has remained a point for debate and agitation amongst Nigerians for years. It is paramount to study Nigeria’s restructuring debate and fiasco, examine its systemic weaknesses, the failure of centralised governance, and the implications for development, poverty alleviation, and corruption, notwithstanding, it is often believed that restructuring might remain a far-fetched dream for Nigerians. The governance structure in Nigeria has been under criticism for their ineffectiveness in addressing the country’s challenges over the years. According to Transparency International’s Corruption Perceptions Index, Nigeria consistently ranks poorly, reflecting the deeply rooted nature of corruption that has plagued the country’s institutions since independence. The centralised model of governance, which was inherited from the colonials, continues to enable corruption by concentrating power and resources in the hands of a few, thereby facilitating rent-seeking behaviour and patronage networks.
This centralised governance can be said to be hindering developmental efforts, as decisions made at the federal level often fail to account for the diverse needs and priorities of Nigeria’s heterogeneous population. For instance in 2019, the World Bank estimated that by 2040, Nigeria’s infrastructure deficit would amount to approximately $878 billion, with high to zero similarities between urban and rural areas. The lack of localised decision-making highlights these disparities, leading to neglect of critical infrastructural projects in marginalised communities. Moreover, without restructuring, Nigeria’s centralised governance system will continue to be poverty and hunger-stricken, particularly, in rural areas where access to basic services and economic opportunities are limited. A World Bank report states that Nigeria’s poverty rate stood at 40.1 per cent in 2019, rising to 49 per cent in 2023, with rural areas experiencing higher poverty rates compared to urban centres which have stifled grassroots development initiatives, promoting cycles of poverty and underdevelopment. I have been studying the decentralised system of governance used in countries like the United Kingdom and the United States, which empowers local authorities to address community-specific challenges and allocate resources based on local needs. Similarly, in the US, states have considerable authority over matters such as taxation, law enforcement, security, and infrastructure development, resulting in tailored policy responses that reflect the diverse needs of local communities.
Another obstacle that constantly arouses the need for restructuring is Nigeria’s centralised policing model, which is overseen by the central government. This has remained a subject of considerable critique due to its inefficiencies and susceptibility to political interference. Corroborating this, Dr. Ifeanyi Onyeonoru, , a specialist in governance and security studies, opined that Nigeria’s centralised policing system has contributed to a lack of responsiveness to local security concerns and a failure to effectively combat crime all around the country. Furthermore, statistics from the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) reveal that crime rate in Nigeria remains alarmingly high, with constant incidents of robbery, kidnapping, banditry, and cybercrime, persisting across various regions. Many agree that the use of centralised police force hampers efforts to address Nigeria’s security challenges in a timely and localised manner. Agreeing with the above, Onyeonoru notes that this centralised control of the security architecture often leads to bureaucratic red-tape and delayed responses to emerging security threats, further exacerbating feelings of insecurity among citizens.
A policy analyst, Dr. Chukwudi Enekwechi,  stressed the detrimental effects of this centralised approach on Nigeria’s road infrastructure. Enekwechi argued that the lack of decentralisation in road maintenance perpetuates disparities in infrastructure quality, with rural areas often bearing the brunt of neglect. This is seen in data from the Federal Road Maintenance Agency (FERMA) further corroborating these irregularities, revealing the effect of centralisation in infrastructure between urban and rural areas.
Enekwechi postulated the urgent need for decentralised decision-making in infrastructure management, stating that it is more viable for local authorities to prioritise projects based on local needs and realities, without relying on the state or federal government.
Nigeria’s tax system and fiscal centralisation represent significant barriers to equitable development and governance. According to data from the World Bank, Nigeria’s tax-to-GDP ratio stands at a mere 6 per cent, significantly lower than the global average of 15 per cent, indicating a shortfall in revenue mobilisation efforts. This tax revenue is further worsened by the country’s reliance on oil revenues, which are susceptible to fluctuations in global oil prices.
Uche Uwaleke, a public affairs analyst, highlights the detrimental effects of Nigeria’s centralised tax system on local governments’ autonomy and capacity for development. He states that while the federal and state governments collect the bulk of taxes, local councils are left with limited revenue sources, often dependent on federal allocations for survival. This centralisation marginalises local governments, depriving them of the resources needed to address critical infrastructure needs, healthcare services, and educational initiatives at the grassroots level.
Moreover, Nigeria’s tax system has been criticised for its complexity and lack of transparency, worsening compliance challenges and hindering revenue generation efforts. According to the Nigeria Economic Summit Group (NESG), the multiplicity of taxes at the federal, state, and local levels, coupled with inconsistent enforcement mechanisms, creates an environment ripe for tax evasion and informal economic activities.
Restructuring Nigeria’s governance framework is of utmost importance in  addressing the root causes of fiscal centralisation and to empower local governments by granting it autonomy. Socio-political groups like Afenifere, Ohaneze, and the Middle Belt Forum have been seen clamouring for restructuring, emphasising the need to devolve power to the grassroots level and foster inclusive governance. Infact, in 2014, in a National Conference by the administration of former President Goodluck Jonathan, a platform for dialogue and deliberation on restructuring was provided, resulting in comprehensive recommendations for reform.
Even with the clamour, call and apparent need for restructuring, the actualisation of this dream remained far-fetched as it was met with political resistance, particularly from Northern elites who perceive decentralisation efforts as a threat to their entrenched interests. This can be seen in the defeat of Goodluck Jonathan in the 2015 presidential election, a well-crafted move orchestrated in part by Northern voting blocs, which stressed the challenges of effectuating substantive governance reform in Nigeria. President Muhammadu Buhari’s dismissal of the 2014 National Conference report further reflects the reluctance of the Northern political elite to embrace restructuring, but rather continued disagreements between the North and South make it hard to move forward and create fair rules for everyone.
However, the path to restructuring is laced with political obstacles and interests, highlighting the need for combined efforts to overcome resistance and implement meaningful reform. As Nigeria grapples with issues of corruption, underdevelopment, and political instability, the need for restructuring becomes increasingly urgent.
In essence, the discussion surrounding restructuring reflects Nigeria’s deep-seated political and socio-economic divides, highlighting the complexities important in effective governance reform.
While the road ahead may be filled with challenges, the need for change remains clear. Only through collective action and unwavering commitment to inclusive governance can Nigeria realise its potential as a truly democratic and prosperous nation.
Adeleye, a communication-for-development expert, writes in from London, United Kingdom, via maxwelladeleye@gmail.com

By: Maxwell A. Adeleye