Nigeria’s Betrayal of True Federalism Through Political Tribal Appointments

In a country as diverse and complex as Nigeria, the principle of true federalism was meant to be the foundation of national unity—a system designed to give every region, ethnic group, and citizen a fair stake in the Nigerian project. Yet, what we continue to witness under successive administrations, including those of Presidents Muhammadu Buhari and Bola Ahmed Tinubu, is a systematic subversion of that federal spirit through politically tribal and regionally lopsided appointments.

True federalism demands not just devolution of powers, but fairness in representation. The Federal Character Principle, enshrined in Section 14(3) of Nigeria’s 1999 Constitution, clearly mandates that appointments to public service institutions should reflect the diversity of the federation to promote unity and prevent the dominance of one ethnic or regional group over others. However, in practice, the presidency has become a citadel of nepotism and ethnic favoritism, often run like a tribal extension of the president’s place of origin.

Take the Buhari era as a case in point. By the end of his first term, over 70% of key security, intelligence, and economic positions were occupied by individuals from the North, particularly from his home state of Katsina and surrounding areas. Critics widely panned this as a northernization of the federal government, raising fears of marginalization among other ethnic groups and sowing further discord in a country already rife with tensions.

Under Tinubu, many expected a departure from this pattern, given his campaign rhetoric about unity and competence. But instead, what has emerged is a new form of sectionalism—appointments heavily skewed in favor of the South-West, particularly Lagos-Yoruba technocrats, many of whom have deep personal or political ties to the president.

This trend has left many Nigerians questioning: Is Nigeria truly a federal republic or a federation of ethnic fiefdomswhere whoever gains the presidency turns the federal structure into a personal political estate?

Pundits and Federalists Speak Out

Renowned political analyst Dr. Ayo Okunlola, a vocal advocate of restructuring, argues that what Nigeria practices is “unitary federalism in disguise—a central government that behaves more like a monarch handing out favors to loyal clans.”

“Appointments should reflect merit, competence, and most importantly, national balance. Once a president concentrates power in one ethnic group or region, he erodes national confidence in the federation,” Okunlola stated.

Federalists like Barr. Ifeanyi Umeh, co-founder of the Centre for True Federalism, note that lopsided political appointments have far-reaching consequences: “They fuel agitation, deepen mistrust, and make people feel excluded. When your people are not represented, you don’t feel you belong.”

The Fallout

The fallout is visible in the growing disenchantment with the Nigerian state, especially in the South-East and South-South. The resurgence of Biafra agitation, the rise of separatist groups like IPOB and MASSOB, and increasing voter apathy can be traced back, in part, to the perception of deliberate exclusion from the national table.

Even the North-Central and Middle Belt regions, once considered politically loyal, have begun expressing frustration at being treated as second-tier members of the federation.

Meanwhile, Northern elites, emboldened by years of privileged access, continue to push back against calls for restructuring, fearing a loss of federal control and resources.

What Is the Way Forward?

If Nigeria must survive as one united entity, it must return to the core ideals of federalism—equity, fairness, regional autonomy, and decentralization. Political appointments should not be reduced to reward systems for ethnic loyalty but should serve as mechanisms to build national confidence.

True federalism isn’t just about the structure of government; it’s about the spirit of inclusiveness. Without this, Nigeria will remain a nation of regions pulling in different directions—a republic in name but tribal in operation.