ANALYSIS: Many Nigerians want more states, but constitutional hurdles won’t make it happen

Sixty-three years ago, the Midwest Region was created following the 1963 plebiscite that carved out part of the then-Western Region. The historic referendum increased Nigeria’s regions from three to four, and remains the last time a civilian government successfully created a new subnational entity.

Since the creation of the Midwest Region, Nigeria’s subnational structure has expanded from four regions to 36 states, all created through military decrees, largely free from the constitutional restrictions that currently apply. All military heads of state, except Johnson Aguiyi-Ironsi, Olusegun Obasanjo, Muhammadu Buhari and Abdulsalami Abubakar, created states during their tenures. Yakubu Gowon created 12 states, Murtala Muhammed created seven, Ibrahim Babangida created 11, and Sani Abacha created six.

Many of these states emerged from popular agitations by groups that feared political marginalisation and economic domination. Through military fiat, successive military governments bypassed the need for a broad consensus on contentious issues such as boundaries and the location of state capitals. Some of these decisions were also accompanied by allegations of favouritism.

Twenty-seven years after the return of democracy in 1999, agitation for the creation of more states has continued, despite concerns over the economic viability of many existing states.

For instance, there has been persistent agitation in the South-east geopolitical zone for the creation of an additional state to bring the region’s number to six and place it on the same footing as most of the other geopolitical zones. Similar demands have emerged from other parts of the country.

Nigeria currently has 36 states. The North-west has seven states, while the North-east, North-central, South-south and South-west have six states each. The South-east remains the only geopolitical zone with five states.

In 2014, the National Conference convened by the administration of former President Goodluck Jonathan recommended creating 18 additional states to promote equity, despite concerns about the sustainability of existing states.

Although the current administration is unlikely to implement the recommendations, the demand for new states remains active within the National Assembly through ongoing constitutional amendment efforts.

Previous attempts to create states through constitutional amendments failed. In the current 10th National Assembly, the prospect of creating additional states appears increasingly uncertain.

Several lawmakers who sponsored state creation bills failed to follow the procedure established under Section 8(1) of the 1999 Constitution, which outlines the requirements for creating new states.

“Although we have received 31 requests for state creation, none has met the constitutional requirements for amendment,” Deputy Speaker of the House of Representatives and Chairman of the House Committee on Constitution Review, Ben Kalu, said in Ikot-Ekpene, Akwa Ibom State, in February 2025.

The process of creating a state

Under Section 8(1)(a) of the Constitution, the process begins with a request for state creation. The request must be supported by at least two-thirds of federal lawmakers representing the affected area, as well as members of the relevant state Houses of Assembly and local government councils.

The proposal must then be approved by referendum by at least two-thirds of the people in the area seeking the new state.

Following the referendum, the result must be approved by a simple majority of all states of the federation and by a simple majority of members of the various state Houses of Assembly.

Finally, the proposal must be approved through a resolution supported by a two-thirds majority of members of both chambers of the National Assembly.

Under this process, the National Assembly’s legislative action comes at the final stage. However, several lawmakers sponsoring state-creation bills proceeded without first meeting earlier constitutional requirements, prompting the House leadership’s clarification in February.

Referendum: The biggest hurdle

Section 8(1)(b) of the 1999 Constitution requires that at least two-thirds of the people in the affected area must approve the proposal through a referendum.

“A proposal for the creation of the State is thereafter approved in a referendum by at least two-thirds majority of the people of the area where the demand for creation of the State originated,” the provision states.

Experts argue that this requirement remains one of the biggest obstacles to state-creation efforts.

Challenges include the accuracy of voters’ registers, historically low voter turnout during elections, and Nigeria’s experience with similar referendum-based processes, such as the recall of elected lawmakers.

Under the 1999 Constitution, a legislator can be recalled through a process that includes a referendum among constituents. Since the return of democracy, several recall attempts have been initiated, but none have successfully crossed the referendum stage. Meanwhile, less than 27 per cent of the registered voters participated in the 2023 presidential election.

The constitutional provisions governing state creation have therefore served as a safeguard against the unchecked proliferation of states. Similar restrictions apply to the creation of local government areas.

Currently, lawmakers are considering 494 requests to create new local government areas: North-east (106), North-west (40), North-central (148), South-east (41), South-south (92), and South-west (67).

State creation in the 10th Assembly

With less than a year remaining in the life of the 10th National Assembly, the prospect of creating a new state appears increasingly remote.

According to the report submitted by the House Committee on Constitutional Review on 6 June, the Assembly received 56 requests for new states, distributed across the six geopolitical zones:

• North-east — 8
• North-west — 8
• North-central — 14
• South-east — 6
• South-south — 10
• South-west — 10

Some of the notable proposals include Okun, Okura and Confluence states in Kogi State; Benue Ala, Apa-Agba and Apa states in Benue State; and a proposed Federal Capital Territory State.

In the South-east, proposed states include Etiti, Orashi, Adada, Orlu and Aba. In the South-south, proposals include Ogoja from Cross River State, Anioma and Warri from Delta State, and Ori and Obolo from Rivers State.

In the South-west, proposals include Torumbe from Ondo State, Ibadan from Oyo State, Lagoon from Lagos State, Lagoon State from Ogun State, Ijebu from Ogun State, and Oke Ogun/Ife-Ijesha from parts of Oyo, Ogun and Osun states.

In the North-west, proposed states include New Kaduna and Gurara from Kaduna State, Tiga and Ari from Kano State, and Kainji from Kebbi State.

The North-east proposals include Amana from Adamawa State, Katagum from Bauchi State, Savannah from Borno State and Muri from Taraba State.

However, none of the proposals has met the constitutional threshold, according to the deputy speaker.

In several instances, lawmakers have also failed to reach consensus on how proposed states should be constituted. One example is the proposed Anioma State from Delta State, championed by the Delta North Senator, Ned Nwoko, who argued that the state should become the sixth state in the South-east geopolitical zone.

However, some lawmakers and council chairpersons from the area have opposed the proposal’s inclusion in the South-east.

Similarly, the proposed Orlu State, sponsored by Ikenga Ugochinyere, a member representing Orlu Federal Constituency of Imo State, has faced opposition from some lawmakers in the South-east.

Beyond constitutional challenges, questions about economic viability have also continued to shape the debate.

According to the 2025 State of States Report by BudgIT, 28 states relied on Federation Account Allocation Committee (FAAC) receipts for at least 55 per cent of their total revenue in the 2024 fiscal year, while 21 states depended on FAAC for at least 70 per cent of their revenue.

This means that a significant majority of Nigeria’s states remain heavily dependent on federal allocations for survival.

These constitutional barriers, along with concerns about viability and disagreements among stakeholders, have slowed progress in state-creation efforts.

As a compromise, the Joint Committee on Constitutional Review recommended creating one additional state in Southern Nigeria.

“In the interest of fairness, national cohesion, and balanced representation, it was recommended that one additional State be created in the Southern region to bring it at par with other geopolitical zones in terms of the number of States,” the report stated.

Following the recommendation, two southern geopolitical blocs proposed different states. The South-south proposed Toru-Ebe State, with Burutu as the proposed capital, while the South-east proposed Anim State, with Orlu as the proposed capital.

However, both proposals must still meet the constitutional requirements set out in Section 8 of the 1999 Constitution — a hurdle that has continued to frustrate Nigeria’s appetite for creating new states.