THE POLITICAL PUBLIC AND DIFFERENCE: THE CASE OF NIGERIA BY John Boye Ejobowah A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Graduate Department of Political Science University of Toronto O Copyright by John Boye Ejobowah, 1999 National Library Bibliothhue nationale I*l of Canada du Canada Acquisitions and Acquisitions et Bibliographic Services services bibliographiques 395 Wellington Street 395, me Wellington Ottawa ON KIA ON4 Ottawa ON KIA ON4 Canada Canada The author has granted a non- L'auteur a accorde me licence non exclusive licence allowing the exclusive permettant a la National Library of Canada to Bibliotheque nationale du Canada de reproduce, loan, distribute or sell reproduire, preter, distribuer ou copies of this thesis in microform, vendre des copies de cette these sous paper or electronic formats. la forme de microfiche/fih, de reproduction sur papier ou sur format electronique. The author retains ownership of the L'auteur conserve la propnete du copyright in this thesis. Neither the droit d'auteur qui protege cette these. thesis nor substantial extracts from it Ni la these ni des extraits substantiels may be printed or otherwise de celle-ci ne doivent Seimpbes reproduced without the author's ou autrement reproduits sans son permission. autorisation. ABSTRACT From the late 1940s to the present Nigeria has negotiated various constitutional arrangements with a view to meeting group claims to difference and equality. The dissertation identifies and evaluates the arrangements using principles derived fiom the theoretical arguments of Michael Walzer, Charles Taylor and Will Kymlrcka, and prescriptions drawn fiom the empirical arguments of Donald Horowitz, Donald Rothchild, Crawford Young and Eric Nordlinger. It offas a detailed account of the constitutional devices that have been used to accorrunodate ethnic difference and evaluates them in light of the nonnative and empirical arguments. The evaluation reveals that some of the arrangements were morally defensible in the very circumstances in which they were negotiated, but were either not deep enough to make for adequate political inclusion or were not combined with some strategies that would have minimised problems of group proliferation and institutional instability. There were some that either generated tension among groups or were driven by strategic considerations for power, but were morally defensible. There were others that were pragmatic at the very period they were negotiated, but not morally defensible. The most important theoretical claim of the dissertation is that, where there are multiple non-immigrant groups in a country, as in the case of Nigeria, constitutional structures that express difference have the prospect of generating social instability. However, structures that deny difference promise intense conflict and lesser stability than those that give it recognition do. Thus, recognition does not generate fundamental tension between justice and stability; rather recognition has to be carefidly worked out to ensure unity between justice and stability. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This is the time for me to pay my dues. First of all, this work would not have been possible without the intellectual and material support of a several individuals and institutions. I might be forgetful in naming all, but I will still go on to express my gratitude with the knowledge that my omission would be forgiven. I am especially grateful to Joseph Carens, my academic supervisor since 1993. The thesis was informed by a seminar course he taught in the 1993/94 academic year, and its title - "The Political Public and Difference: The Case of Nigeria" - was derived fiom one his essays on Fiji. His academic support, accessibility, liberality, patience, absolute faith and honest criticisms and were decisive in shaping my ideas about justice in a multicultural setting. From him I knew the true meaning of supervision. My special thanks also go to Melissa Williams for her very helpful criticisms and suggestions. Her sharp comments on my draft proposal came at a time when my ideas about the thesis were not clearly thought out. It was her intellectual rigour that forced me to improve my understanding of Rawls, Walzer, Taylor and Kyrnlicka and to clarifjl the arguments of the thesis. If the thread of argument that runs through the work is clear enough, then I owe it to Melissa. My deep gratitude also goes to Jonathan Barker, member of my supervisory committee, for refocusing my attention on the dynamics of Nigerian politics and for his continuous emphasis on the salient details. My profound thanks go to Dickson Eyoh for reminding me about the literature on the invention of ethnicity. His criticisms of an early draft interpretation of the literature made me to reread and improve my understanding of it. Richard Simeon was the main force behind my analyses of claims to revenue allocation and oil resources. Several lunchtime discussions I had iii with him in the winter of 1997 shaped the aforementioned analyses in chapters four and seven. I would Iike to thank Richard Sklar for his critical reading and incisive comments.His thoughthl notes enhanced my understanding of Nigerian politics. My thanks also go to the late Claude Ake who was my teacher for about 8 years and served as my field supervisor during the 1995/96 academic year when I was on a Rockefeller Doctoral Fellowship in Nigeria. His emphasis on the community as the building block of democracy and insistence on &can focused literature on conflict reduction shaped the presentation in chapter two. My training in the University of Toronto was made possible by a series of fellowships awarded by the university year after year and by a number of Teaching Assistantships offered by the Department of Political Science. The Rockefeller Foundation in New York granted me a Doctoral Fellowship that enabled me to do field research in Nigeria. With the research I was able to obtain tons of data that changed the quality of the thesis. The Government of Ontario also made life easier for by awarding me a one-year scholarship while I was writing the thesis. I thank all these institutions for their generous and kind contribution. I would like to acknowledge the Centre for Advanced Social Science, Port Harcourt, my institutional base in Nigeria while I was on field research. Its staff offered a lot of assistance searching for, and photocopying, relevant documents. The Staff of the National Assembly Archives, Abuja, and of the National Archives, Ibadan, all in Nigeria, were generous in digging out and photocopying baskets of documents on colonial and modem day Nigeria constitutional debates. I thank them all. TABLE OF CONTENT TITLE PAGE 1 .. ABSTRACT 11 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS iii-iv TABLE OF CONTENT v-vi CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION 1 Problem Definition 1 Forms of Group Recognition in Nigeria 3 Theoretical Foundation 4 The Argument 9 Significance of Study 12 13 CHAPTER TWO: NORMATIVE AND EMPIRICAL APPROACHES TO ETHNIC ACCOMODATION Theoretical Arguments About Justice and Difference The Empirical Viewpoint Relevant Issues Raised by the Theoretical and Empirical Arguments Potential Relevance of the Empirical and Theoretical Arguments summary CHAPTER THREE: ETl!DJICITY IN NIGERIA Ethnic Composition Emergence of the State Internal Political Boundaries and Ethnic Groups The Place of Ethnicity in Colonial Constitutional Policy Differential Responses to British Rule Part II: Should Ethnic Difference be Given Political Salience Are Ethnic Identities Real? Should Socially Constructed Groups Be Given Political Recognition? Some Grey Areas CHAPTER FOUR: THE FIRST POLITICAL STRATEGY FOR COPING WITH DIFFERENCE Competing Group Claims During the Pre Independence Constitutional Conferences Part II: Evaluating the Claims and Agreements The Political System and Difference Should Minorities Have Been Recognised in Separate States? Revenue Sharing and Political Representation CHAPTER FIVE : TE3E SECOND POLITICAL STRATEGY The Quota System The 1963 and 1967 Separation of Minorities Part 11: The Public Good and Fairness a) The Quota System and Fairness b) Were the 1963 and 1967 State Creation Exercises Morally Justifiable? S-aV CHAPTER SIX: THE FEDERAL CHARACTER APPROACH The Background a) The 1975 Panel on States Creation b) The Federal Character Policy Part 11: Evaluation a) Demand for More States: Based on Justice or Economics? b) Federal Character and Justice c) What Alternative Strategies Were Desirable and Feasible? s-arv CHAPTER SEVEN: TmREVISED FEDERAL CHARACTER STRATEGY The Political Bureau and Federal Character The 1994/95 Constitutional Coderence and New Claims to Power Sharing and To Resource Ownership Part 11: Evaluation: a) Recognition in Separate Units and the Problem of Slippery Slope b) Federal Character and the Problem of National Citizenship c) The 1995 Constitutional Agreements Regarding Political Structure and Rotational Presidency d) Claims and Agreements Regarding Revenue Allocation CHAPTER EIGHT: CONCLUSION Theories of Group Recognition: Lessons of the Nigerian Experience BIBLIOGRAPHY vii CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION PROBLEM DEFINITION In what ways, if at all, should political institutions in Nigeria try to recognise and accommodate ethnic difference? This is the central question the dissertation addresses. The question is informed by the persistence of ethnic conflict in Nigeria, a country whose history has been characterised by a cycle of instability and constitutional debates aimed at devising strategies for coping with