SYSTEMS OF GOVERNMENT

CONTENTS

1.0       Introduction

2.0       Objective

• Main Content
• Federal and Unitary Systems of Government
  • Federal System
  • Unitary System of Government
• Presidential and Parliamentary Systems of Government
  • Presidential System of Government
  • Parliamentary System of Government

4.0       Conclusion

5.0       Summary

6.0       Tutor-Marked Assignment

7.0       References/Further Readings.

INTRODUCTION

This unit deals with systems of government in Nigeria. We will consider the federal and unitary systems as well as presidential and parliamentary systems of government.

OBJECTIVE

By the end of this unit, you should be able to:

 xplain the various systems of government that we have in Nigeria.

MAIN CONTENT

Federal and Unitary Systems of Government

Federal System

Nigeria is a Federation comprising of 36 states and the Federal Capital Territory. Section 1 of the 1999 Constitution refers to the nation as a Federal Republic.

The journey towards a Federal form of government in Nigeria started in 1946 when the Richard’s Constitution introduced a quasi-federal structure of government into the country. By this time, it had already dawned on the British administration in Nigeria that the country was made up of diverse elements with linguistic, cultural and religious background. There was a feeling of the need to promote the unity of Nigeria and provide adequately within that unity for the diverse  elements which make up the country.

It was also envisaged at this period that the principle of greater regional autonomy would bring about the desired unity in Nigeria. In this regard, Sir Bernard Bourdillon opined that: “In fact, this measure represents not the division of one unit into three, but the beginning of the fusion of innumerable small units into three and from these into one… the  regional House of Assembly will encourage not only a very useful interchange of ideas, but the beginning of that widening of the social, economic and political horizon which is essential if the unity of Nigeria is to have any real meaning to its inhabitants.”

Three new Regional Houses of Assembly were thus established with headquarters in Enugu, Kaduna and Ibadan. The Richard’s Constitution which came into force on 1^st of January 1947, was pre-eminently concerned with how many units should comprise the federal union and not with whether there should be a sort of Federal union. Thus it was quasi-federal in nature.

In 1951, the Macpherson Constitution was passed. It further formalized the division of Nigeria into three regions. It also established a central Legislative and a Council of Ministers for the whole country, together with a separate Legislative and Executive Council for each of the three regions. However, this constitution was basically a unitary constitution giving extensive power and authority to the central government over the regions. The legislative power of the central legislature was unlimited. It extended even to matters assigned to the regions. There was also the problem of inter regional factions championed by the ethnic based political parties in each of the three regions. However, the federal form of government was adopted with the promulgation of Lyttleton Constitution on 1^st of October, 1954. The concept of federalism was also adopted in 1960 Independence Constitution and the 1963 Republic constitution.

The Federal Status of Nigeria had a setback in 1966 when the then Military government promulgated the Constitution (Suspension and Modification) Decree No. 34 of 1966. Section 1 of the Decree stated that as from May 24^th 1966, Nigeria would cease to be a federation  and would be known as the Republic of Nigeria.

The decree made far-reaching changes in the political structure of the country and converted it to a unitary sate. The government at the Centre was named the National Military Government while regions were called groups of provinces. Commenting on this Decree the eminent jurist, Dr. TO. Elias said: “It would seem that by this Decree, a unitary form of government had been established for Nigeria. The Federation itself was abolished as were the regions as such, although the replacement of the former region by the new name, Group of Provinces, as well as the retention of the offices of Regional Governors would appear to have retained the essence of the former administrative arrangement. 

According to Professor J.D. Ojo, “This Decree that was promulgated without taking into consideration the heterogeneous nature of the society was to say the least, an exercise in futility”. Nigeria was however restored to a federation as from September 1^st 1966 sequel to another coup d’etat that ousted General Aguiyi-Ironsi through the operation of the Constitution (Suspension and Modification) Decree No. 59 of 1966.

DEFINITION OF FEDERATION

Opinions differ among writers as to what the term “federalism” implies. According to Abiola Ojo, federalism is capable of different meanings and conceptions depending on the perspective and the background of the perceiver. There are writers whose emphasis is on the form of the constitution and certain institutions. As far as they are concerned, the absence of these makes any discussion on federalism futile. Another school of thought opines that federalism is the product of social forces, while yet another posits that party system is a crucial federal variable.

However, Ben Nwabueze made attempt at defining federalism when he described it as: “An arrangement whereby powers of a government within a country are shared between a national country –wide government and number of regionalized (i.e. territorial localized governments) in such a way that each exists as a government separately and independently from the others operating directly on persons and property within its territorial area”.

• Dicey conceived federalism as: “…. A political contrivance intended to reconcile national unity with the maintenance of the state rights”.

To Taiwo Osipitan, federalism connotes an arrangement whereby powers are shared between the different levels of government such that matters of national interest are handled centrally and locally. R. L. Watts contends that federalism implies a form of political association in which two or more states constitute a political unit with a common government but in which these member states retain a measure of autonomy.

Adele Jinadu however views federalism as a form of government and institutional structure deliberately designed by political architects to cope with the twin but difficult task of maintaining unity while also preserving diversity.

The definition of K.S. Wheare appears comprehensive. He defined federalism as a system of government where the powers of government are divided between the central and the component parts of the country in such a way that each government is legally independent within  its own sphere and the states are coordinate and equal.

SELF-ASSESSMENT EXERCISE 1

What do you understand by federalism?

CHARACTERISTICS OF A FEDERAL SYSTEM OF GOVERNMENT

SUPREMACY OF THE CONSTITUTION

One of the striking features of countries which operate the federal  system of government is the supremacy of the constitution. It is the constitution that spells out the extent and limits of power exercisable by the central (Federal) government and its component parts (States). This is to minimize frictions. As Osipitan suggested, one of the fundamental features of a federal arrangement is the need for a supreme constitution which binds all persons, governments and authority. A supreme constitution has the added advantage of highlighting the existence of a binding arrangement which exists among the states within  the federation.

According to Section 1(1) of the 1999 Constitution of Nigeria, the “… Constitution is supreme and its provisions shall have binding force on  all authorities and persons throughout the Federal Republic of Nigeria”.

A similar provision is contained in the Constitution of the United States of America. Article VI, Section 2 provides that “This constitution and the laws of the United States of America which shall be made in pursuance thereof… shall be supreme law of the land and the judges in every State shall be bound thereby anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding”.

This supremacy means that the laws passed by any authority in violation of the constitution may be declared null and void.

In Kalu V Odili (1992) 5 NWLR pt 240 p. 130 at 188, Karibi-Whyte JSC stated inter alia: “It is both a fundamental and elementary principle of our law that the constitution is the basic law of the land. It is supreme law and its provisions have binding force on all authorities, institutions and persons throughout the country”.

DIVISION OF POWERS

The federal process is conditioned by a distinctive division of powers between the central (Federal) and other levels of government (State and Local). Powers are shared among the constituent parts to substantially reflect institutional and functional interactions, cooperation and coordination. The 1999 constitution clearly demarcates the functions and powers between the federal and state governments.

Section 4(1) vests legislative powers of the Federal Republic of Nigeria in the National Assembly. The areas in which the National Assembly may make laws have been enumerated in the Exclusive Legislative list contained in the second schedule of part 1 of the Constitution. It  contains 68 items. The areas covered include accounts of the Federation, defence, arms and ammunition, aviation, copyright, etc. The areas in which the National Assembly and State Houses of Assembly have concurrent powers to make laws are contained in the second schedule of part II. It contains 30 items. The House of Assembly of a State has  power to legislate on any matter not included in the Exclusive Legislative list. Such matters are deemed to be residual. See section 4(7)

(a) of the constitution.

It is also noteworthy that the executive body at the federal level is headed by the President and Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces. He is to be assisted by the Vice-President and Ministers of the Government of the Federation. At the state level, the Governor is the Chief Executiveand he is assisted by the Deputy Governor, Commissioners and Advisers. The Local Governments are also established under Section 7 of the 1999 Constitution. Their functions are enumerated in the fourth schedule to the Constitution. The Local Government Council is headed by a Chairman as the head of the executive branch while the councilors compose the legislative arm.

Judicial powers are vested in the courts established for the Federation.  At the apex is the Supreme Court. Other courts at the Federal level are the Court of Appeal, the Federal High Court; High Court of the Federal Capital Territory and such other courts as may be authorized by Act of the National Assembly. The state judiciary consists of the High Court of a State, Magistrate Court, Customary Court and such other Courts as may be authorized by law of the House of Assembly of a State.

The Constitution also makes provisions for the establishment of federal agencies or bodies like the Code of Conduct Bureau, the Federal Civil Service Commission, the Federal Character Commission, the Federal Judicial Service Commission, etc. See Section 197 of the Constitution.

It would therefore be seen that in any federal arrangement, there must be a well laid down division of powers. It must be stated that if a state makes a law over an item on the concurrent legislative list which is inconsistent with a Federal law on the same item, the state law shall be void by virtue of the express provision of the Constitution. But where such state’s law is consistent with the Federal law but the latter has covered the field, the state law will be void under the doctrine of “covering the field”.

SELF-ASSESSMENT EXERCISE 2

List 5 items each contained in the Executive Legislative list and the Concurrent legislative list.

RIGID CONSTITUTION

Another institutionalized device in a federal system is the existence of a rigid form of amending the constitution. This is to preserve the corporate existence of the country and check secession bid by any of the states making up the federation. In line with section 9 (2) of the 1999 Constitution, an Act of the National Assembly for the alteration of the Constitution other than creation of states, shall not be passed in either House of the National Assembly unless:

1. The proposal is supported by the votes of not less than two-thirds majority of all the members of that House; and
2. Approved by resolution of the Houses of Assembly of not less than two-thirds of all the states.

Also, section 9(3) provides that sections 8 and 9 and chapter IV of the Constitution can only be amended if:

1. The proposal is supported by the votes of not less than four-fifth majority of the National Assembly; and
2. Approved by resolution of two thirds of states Houses of Assembly in the country.

In the United States, an amendment to the Constitution as stated in Article IV Section 3(1) of the U.S. Constitution, can be made by a two- thirds vote in each House of Congress or by a convention called by congress upon the application of the legislatures of two-thirds of the states. The amendments proposed by either body must be ratified by the legislatures of three-quarters of the states. 

In Australia, any amendment to the Constitution passed by both the Senate and House of Representatives must be submitted in each of the States to the electors qualified to vote for the election of members to the House of Representatives. If any of such law is passed by one House  and rejected by the other and is passed the second time by the initiating House, after an interval of three months the Governor-General may refer the law to the electors of the House of Representatives. If it is accepted by a majority of the total number of voters, it becomes law.

In the United States, an attempt by American Southern States to secede from the American Union led to American Civil War between 1869 and 1871. In the American case of Texas V. White 74 U.S. (7 Wall) 700, the US Supreme Court declared the American Federal union as perpetual and indissoluble. The court further declared that the union did not provide any place for reconsideration or revocation except through a revolution or through the consent of the states.

Unitary System of Government

A Unitary government is a government where all powers are concentrated in a single central government, which does not share power with any other body in the country, but delegates powers to regional and local governments and other subordinate bodies. All government powers are concentrated in the central or national government as the only source of authority from which power emanates. A country operating a unitary system of government usually adopts a unitary constitution. The constitution though supreme, is usually flexible and not rigid, as the government has power to amend as may be necessary.

There is no constitutional sharing and division of powers between the central government and the regional governments or local authorities. Usually there is no constitutional conflict between the central government and its subordinate regional or local district authorities, which are created for administrative purposes and are an extension of  the national government. The national government can alter the powers and boundaries of the various constituent parts of the country and there may be no need for separate parliaments in the constituent parts of the country.

The central parliament often has parliamentary supremacy to make laws for the country. A unitary system usually has a strong and powerful central government. The people usually owe allegiance to only one government, that is, the central government. Examples of countries operating a unitary system of government are the United Kingdom, France, Belgium, Italy, Gambia, Liberia, Cameroon, Ethiopia, etc.

The reasons why different countries adopt a unitary system of government may vary slightly from one country to another. However,  the common reasons include: the small land area or small size of the country, the homogenous nature of the people of the country and the absence of serious tribal differences among them. Others are absence of the fear of domination of the minority by the majority tribes, possession of a common language and culture which bind the people together in unity, absence of marked economic inequalities among the different peoples or regions that make up the country and thus lack of fear of economic domination of one people by another, absence of minority people who may be afraid of a majority tribe dominating the strong central government that does not share power with any other tier of government under the constitution, the need for cohesion of the country and to build strong solidarity and loyalty in the people to the national government, encourage patriotism and promote national unity instead of tribalism, sectionalism, stateism, etc, which often mark federalism.

MERITS OF A UNITARY SYSTEM OF GOVERNMENT

1. A unitary system of government usually removes the problem of constitutional friction between the national and regional
2. It promotes the spirit of oneness among the people and eliminates the feeling of double loyalty to one’s regional government and then to the national
3. A unitary government by concentrating powers in the national government tends to promote a strong and stable government, than a federal system where power is divided between the federal and state governments.
4. It is small and simple to operate since there is no duplication of government and offices at every
5. Every other government in the country being a creation and an extension of the national government, it therefore requires lesser personnel and financial resources.
6. It prevents the waste of human, financial and material resources unlike a federal system of government which is flamboyant with the duplication of government and
7. A unitary system of government usually has a flexible constitution. Thus the constitution even though written, can easily be amended to meet the changing social, economic and political needs of the
8. A unitary system of government is by nature small. This makes it easy for consultations to be concluded and decisions quickly
9. As a result of the small size of the government, it is usually less bureaucratic unlike a federal system where the number of governments and authorities to be consulted are usually

THE DEMERITS OF A UNITARY SYSTEM OF GOVERNMENT

1. Power is concentrated in the central or national government. Due to this, it may be burdened with too many functions and responsibilities with which it may not cope very
2. The concentration of power in the national government may encourage dictatorial tendencies on the part of the
3. The concentration of powers in the national government prevents autonomy as the local authorities are discouraged from exercising powers within their district, unless authorized or delegated by the national
4. The concentration of powers in the national government as the decision making authority in the country, may make it look down on good initiatives at the local level and kill initiative at that
5. The concentration of powers in the central government in the capital city and the small size of personnel needed to run a unitary system of government may make the government  seem far away from the people, especially those in the rural and local parts of the
6. It is not suitable for a large country with a large population, multi-ethnic population or diverse
7. It is unsuitable for a multi-ethnic country, as the majority may hold on to power and dominate the minorities who may be compelled to struggle for self determination or
8. The concentration of powers in the central government which is controlled by a relatively small number of personnel, may lead to different constituent parts of the country feeling left out, forgotten or marginalised and thereby breeding
9. A unitary system of government is unsuitable for a multi-ethnic and multi-lingual country. If it is adopted instead of federalism, the majority will lord it over the minorities and it may lead to disaffection, instability and even civil
10. The small size of a unitary government and the small size of personnel needed to run it does not create opportunity for a wide representation of the Central
11. Furthermore, the small size of a unitary government which is a result of the merger of the legislative and the executive arms of government, the non-division of powers and the non-duplication of offices, do not create employment opportunities for the people as opposed to a federal or confederal system of government, both of which usually have a big public administration or civil service and have a lot of employment

Presidential and Parliamentary Systems of Government

Presidential System of Government

A presidential system of government is a government where all executive powers are vested in a president who is the head of state and head of government. The president may exercise the executive powers  of government either directly by himself or through the vice-president, ministers or other officers in the public service of the federation. See section 5(1) of the 1999 Constitution. The powers of the president is to maintain the constitution and to apply all the laws made by the legislature for the time being in force and to implement party programmes and generally uphold the interest of the nation and the welfare of the people at all times.

The President is elected directly by the people or indirectly through an electoral college. The President and the cabinet of ministers appointed  by him are not members of the legislature. The President is free to choose his ministers from within and outside his party subject to confirmation by the Legislature. The President is a member of the ruling party. The party advises and supports him and he implements the programmes of the party. The ministers are first responsible to the president who appointed them and he is primarily responsible to discipline the ministers or otherwise call them to order. The legislature and the executive may be controlled by different political parties.

The president is responsible to the legislature which may investigate and impeach him for gross misconduct and he is also responsible to the people who are the sovereign power in a country and who may not  renew his mandate at election. The United States of America, Nigeria, Ghana, Kenya and South Africa are examples of countries operating a presidential system of government.

There are many checks and balances under the presidential system of government. While the legislature may refuse to vote for taxes, thus checking a difficult Executive, the Executive (President) in turn may veto a bill which has been passed by an uncompromising legislature. But if the bill is passed the second time by two thirds majority, it becomes law. If however the Bill/Law is challenged on questions of illegality/constitutionality in court, the judiciary may declare it unconstitutional, thus acting as a check though the judges are appointed by the Executive. One can then say that the presidential model of government is in essence a government of separation of powers coupled with checks and balances.

Parliamentary System of Government

A parliamentary or cabinet system of government is a government where all the executive powers of government are vested in a Prime Minister who is the head of government and head of the majority party or ruling party, but is not the head of state. In this system of government, the head of state who exercises only ceremonial functions may be a monarch or president who is the figure head.

The prime minister and the entire ministers in his cabinet are all members of the same party or coalition of parties. In a cabinet system of government, there is no complete separation of powers, nor a complete fusion of powers. Though the executive and the legislature are completely fused, there is no over-lapping of powers because the same people constitute both arms. Apart from the minister of justice, the judiciary is completely separate from the legislature and the executive.

Apart from the doctrine of collective ministerial responsibility and the doctrine of individual ministerial responsibility to parliament, the prime minister as head of the government or executive arm has the power to dismiss any minister and he is primarily responsible for the discipline of his cabinet. The stability of the government depends a lot on the ruling party controlling a reasonable majority in the parliament or being able to form a coalition government with another party or parties.

There is an official opposition party in the parliament, which is usually the party having the highest number of votes next to the ruling party in the parliament. The members of the parliament and the executive arm  are one. The prime minister is subject to his party and is controlled by the party. He remains in office a long as his party has the majority of members in the parliament. However when a vote of “no confidence” is passed on him and his cabinet by parliament, the Prime Minister and his entire cabinet is obliged to resign.

The United Kingdom is the origin and home of this system of government. Other countries operating a parliamentary system of government include: Canada, Jamaica, Israel, India, Australia, Lesotho, Ethiopia, etc. Before independence and between 1960 to 1966, Nigeria operated a parliamentary system of government.

MERITS

The merits of a parliamentary system of government are numerous. As a matter of fact, the fusion of the executive and the legislative arms of government have several advantages as follows:

1. It reduces friction and promotes co-operation between the two arms of
2. It helps free-flow of information between the two arms of government and bridges gaps that may lead to
3. The fusion makes parliamentary approval of the policies and programmes of government fast and thereby helping quick decision and implementation of government policies and programmes.
4. The fusion of the legislature and the executive means that less personnel and costs are required to run
5. The fusion of the two arms enables daily or frequent scrutiny, questioning and criticism of the policies and programmes of the executive, leading to the discarding of bad decisions and ill- considered actions. This promotes good governance. The immediate individual and collective responsibility of the executive to parliament make all members of the cabinet to work hard for the successful administration of the
6. The fusion of the executive and legislative arm enables parliamentarians to check the government in parliament. This ensures discipline in the cabinet as they are under the daily watch and close check of parliament.

Furthermore, the executive or cabinet being aware that parliament is watching and will not hesitate to pass a vote of “no confidence” on the executive and make it resign, will usually behave itself and discharge its functions efficiently. This normally translates into stability of the government and the political system.

DEMERITS

The demerits of a cabinet system of government are several and include:

6. Uncertainty of tenure of office, because the parliament by a vote of “no confidence” can dismiss the cabinet and elect a new party leader as prime minister or premier to form a new cabinet and government.
7. The sudden and frequent change of government if not carefully managed, may lead to crisis and instability in a
8. The fusion of the legislative and executive functions in the members of the cabinet may over burden the members of the cabinet with double functions and some ministers may not cope very well
9. A minister may lack specialization in the art of governance in one arm of government, thus leading to inefficiency in such regard.
10. Furthermore, the fusion of executive and legislative powers in the members of the cabinet may make them too powerful, arrogant and likely to abuse power.
11. Lastly, the prime Minster is not directly elected by the electorate, as he becomes Prime Minister by virtue of being the leader of his This may make him more loyal to his party than to his oath of office as Prime Minister.

CONCLUSION

To conclude, there are other systems of government which were not operated in Nigeria, such as confederation, collegiate or conventional systems of government, etc. Nigeria is presently operating the presidential system of government.

SUMMARY

In this unit, we have considered the various systems of government that is operated in Nigeria. You should now be able to explain each one of them.

TUTOR-MARKED ASSIGNMENT

1. Mention 20 items contained on the Exclusive Legislative
2. Why do countries adopt a unitary system of government?

REFERENCES/FURTHER READINGS

Abiola, Ojo. “Constitutional Law and Military Rule in Nigeria”, Ibadan: Evans Publishers Ltd.

Bernard, Bourdillon; “Nigeria’s New Constitution”, 37 Journal of United Empire Society, March – April (1946).

Constitution of Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999.

Dicey, A. V., Introduction to the study of the Law of the Constitution.10^th Edition, London.

Elias, T. O. (1967). London: Stevens and Sons.

Eze, Malemi (2006). The Nigerian Constitutional Law, Ikeja: Princeton Publishing Co.

Nwabueze, B. O. (1980). Federalism in Nigeria under the Presidential Constitution.

Nwabueze, B. O., (1993). Federation in Nigeria under the Presidential Constitution: Sweet and Maxwell.

Ojo, J. D. (1985). The Development of the Executive under the Nigeria Constitutions (1960-81), Ibadan: University Press.

Taiwo, Osipitan “The Land Use Act and the 1979 Constitution: Conflict and Resolution, Justice Journal. March 1989.

Wheare, K. C. Federal Government, 4^th Ed. New York: Oxford.