In the tapestry of modern democracies, few threads are as intricate as federalism, the delicate balance of power between central authority and subnational entities. Nigeria, Africa’s most populous nation and a federal republic since its independence in 1960, has long modeled its governance after the United States, the cradle of modern federalism. Both countries operate under presidential systems, where an elected executive wields significant influence while sharing sovereignty with states. Yet, as Nigeria grapples with electoral turbulence and calls for reform ahead of future polls, a comparative lens reveals stark similarities and divergences. This article explores the devolution of powers, the nuances of presidential practice, and electoral administration in both nations. It also probes Nigeria’s historical electoral scars, the annulled June 12, 1993, election and the contentious 2023 vote, while spotlighting the recent nomination of Professor Joash Amupitan as INEC chairman. Finally, it argues that if Nigeria emulates the American model, it must do so holistically, with amendments that surpass U.S. shortcomings, perhaps through innovative tools like artificial intelligence (AI).
At its core, federalism in both countries aims to accommodate diversity within unity. The U.S. Constitution, ratified in 1788, established a system where states retain “powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States.” This “dual federalism” evolved into “cooperative federalism,” with states handling education, policing, and local infrastructure, while the federal government oversees defense, foreign affairs, and interstate commerce. Nigeria’s 1999 Constitution (as amended) mirrors this in Chapter 1, declaring a “Federal Republic” with 36 states and a Federal Capital Territory. Exclusive federal powers include currency, aviation, and prisons, while concurrent lists cover health, education, and agriculture, and residual powers fall to states.
Devolution of powers, however, reveals profound differences rooted in history and scale. The U.S. federal system emerged from 13 sovereign colonies wary of centralized tyranny post-British rule, fostering robust state autonomy. States generate significant revenue through property taxes and sales levies, contributing to a fiscal federalism where federal grants-in-aid (about 30% of state budgets) encourage cooperation without coercion. This has enabled innovations like California’s environmental regulations or Texas’s energy policies, often influencing national standards.