POLITICAL INSTABILITY ON DEVELOPMENT OF FOOTBALL IN NIGERIA: FOCUS
ON MILITARY REGIMES IN NIGERIA 1983 – 1999
NWOSU OKWUDILI CHUKWUMA,
THE COLLEGE OF EDUCATION, P. M. B. 2003, AGU-ECHARA, NSUKKA. ENUGU
STATE NIGERIA
PROVOST,
ogornne4good@yahoo.com
EMMANUEL UGWUERUA,
THE COLLEGE OF EDUCATION, P. M. B. 2003, AGU-ECHARA, NSUKKA. ENUGU
STATE NIGERIA
DIRECTOR,
ogornne4good@gmail.com
Abstract
The study is an evaluation of political instability on development of football in Nigeria, with
focus on military regimes between 1983 and 1999. The study noted that the imbalance in the
structure of the Nigerian federation contributed to political instability that rocked Nigeria.
Political instability adversely affected all aspects of life in Nigeria. Development in all its
ramifications was therefore ruffled. The study contends that the long years of military
dictatorship in Nigeria destroyed every good structure and institution within the system.
Football development was not left out as it suffered a lot of set-back during the period.
Nigerian football experienced serious devastation during the military rule. The study
observed that the present declining performance of our various national teams in
international competitions can be traced to the military era. The study suggests that efforts
should be made to enthrone a stable political system. This can be achieved by adopting the
French system of devolution of power to the regions, thereby making the center less
attractive. The political actors should call to mind the adverse effects of instability within the
political system and shun all perpetrators. The Nigerian political class should arise towards
sustaining the present democratic dispensation in Nigeria. This will ensure conducive
environment upon which football development will thrive.
Key words: Political Instability, Development, Development of football in Nigeria, Military
regimes in Nigeria, Ethnicity.
Introduction
Political instability which could be associated with the concept of a failed state is viewed
as a situation of government’s ineptitude at providing the populace the basic amenities and
services such as water, food , shelter and security, to mention but a few. It can also be seen from
the angle of inability of enforcing rules and regulations guiding a society. Political instability
takes various forms, such as tendency of government collapse, chaos or turbulence situation in a
country, insurgency, inter tribal and communal conflicts, constant uprising, civil wars, military
interventions, coups ‘d’état and counter coups ‘d’état, etc. However, this paper focuses on
military regimes as it affects the political stability of Nigeria towards football development.
Turner (1976:63), affirmed that “political instability is one of the main hindrances
preventing the Nigerian nation in her quest for development”. Supporting Turner, Adedotun
(1971:389), stated that:
The seed of political instability were sown during the
colonial era. This emanated with the politics of ethnicity,
which developed with the British separatist policy
of indirect rule, which emphasized the differences
of the three major ethnic groups (Hausa, Yoruba
and Ibo), rather than their similarities.
The separatist policy made it impossible for post colonial (independence) politics in Nigeria
to be influenced by a high degree of consensus, rather than conflict. The three major political
parties that sprang-up during the colonial era sprang-up through ethnic background, thus, the
interest of their ethnic groups were of utmost important to them ( Adedotun,1980).
The imbalance in the structure of the Nigerian federation contributed to the political
instability that rocked Nigeria. Three regions were created in 1939, they were the North, the East
and the West, this significantly contributed to a major inequality and disproportionate in the
structure of Nigerian federation, because one of the regions, the North, was greater than both the
East and West put together. This gave the North the advantage of controlling both the federal
government as well as the Northern regional government without even having to solicit for votes
from the East and West. This lopsidedness engendered a lot of fear of domination of the North
over the East and West. As a result of this, census figure of 1963 were largely politicized, alleged
irregularities in the 1964 general elections witnessed, and there was an attempt of secession by
the East, which eventually resulted in the three-year Nigerian/Biafran War (Salawu, 2001).
Since after the war in 1970, political instability had continued to be the mainstay in
Nigerian polity, over the years, Nigeria had witnessed incessant changes of government, coups
and counter coups, political power tussle, political assassinations, inter communal and inter-state
clashes, the Niger Delta upheaval, constant labour unrests, suspensions of democratically elected
government functionaries, insurgency in the North Eastern part of Nigeria.
Political instability adversely affects all aspects of life in a society, it stands to reason that
development in all its ramifications is also ruffled; football development cannot be an exception.
Football development cannot take place under an unstable environment. Nigeria as a country, has
witnessed an incessant political instability, and this constitutes a thorn in the flesh of the growth
of football in Nigeria. It is not out of place to state that, political instability disrupts the orderly
ambience, under which effective football development will thrive. This is because cases of
instability more often than not, heralds occasions under which drastic decisions would be taken
to suit the period of uneasiness. We cannot be talking of football development, when the NFA is
grossly affected by the events taking place in the political arena.
Bad performances amidst flashes of brilliant performances can be used to describe the
Nigerian soccer history. Upon the array of Nigerian star players, making waves throughout the
world, we still witness poor performances, from our national teams. Something serious is
fundamentally wrong with our football. Experts believe that poor administration is Nigeria’s
bane, our football is not managed well, of such abundance of skillful players, what is needed is
the development and effective management so as to launch the country into the ranks of the
‘developed’ as against a ‘developing’ country. But, how can we achieve this, under political
instability?
Political instability no doubt leads to under-development of sporting activities, especially
football. A visit to North Eastern part of Nigeria, where insurgency by the Boko Haram
Terrorists has taken over, will explain how development of football has been ruffled. Students do
no longer go to school, not to talk of coming out to participate in sporting activities for fear of
bomb blasts. Visiting teams are afraid to honor their matches in those security risk areas.
Professional football clubs domiciled in North East Nigeria are constantly under threat of
terrorist attacks. Football development cannot be achieved under such stringent and unfavorable
condition. Another clear example is the South African National Team, which never appeared in a
world cup, during the political instability that rocked the country. South Africa, it should be
recalled were barred as a result of apartheid policy, their gaining of political stability, informed
football development. To cap it all, they presently have the best-organized football league in
Africa. Countries like Guinea, Sierra Leone, Rwanda, Burundi, Congo, to mention but a few,
also suffered serious set-backs in football development, as a result of political instability. In
Europe, countries where political instability led to football under-development include
Yugoslavia and Russia.
Against the backdrop that political instability adversely affects almost all aspects of the
society, and going by the high spate of such instability in Nigeria, the need arose to see if and
how political instability had affected football development in Nigeria. Thus, we would perhaps
ask and highlight, whether or not the long years of military dictatorship in Nigeria led to the
development of football in Nigeria. The study will however be limited between 1983 and 1999.
Background Information on Nigeria
Generally, ethnicity is a social phenomenon in correlation with synergy among members
of diverse ethnic groups. Ethnic groups are social formations differentiated by the communal
character of their boundaries. The relevant communal factors may be culture or language, or
both (Nnoli, 1978). These factors abound in Nigeria. Okibe, (2000) stated that before the British
invaded, and occupied Nigeria and prior to amalgamation of Northern and Southern Nigeria in
1914, the constituent nations-the Yoruba, Hausa-Fulani, Igbo, Efik, Idoma, Ibibio, Itshekiri,
Ijaw, Edo, Tiv, etc, numbering more than 250 with their different enclaves were autonomous.
Ethnicity, as a social phenomenon, has been noted to be one of the main worries in
Nigeria’s politics. Ethnicity can be discussed from different views. Inner-mostly viewed,
ethnicity is entrenched and encapsulated in the growth of egotism. Experiences, oral traditions,
shared symbolisms, emotions, and perceptions embodied in ethnicity are incorporated early enroute to socialization. It has been spoken about in terms of clamped prehistoric connections or
links, a sense of affinity and security in association, self-endorsement and confirmation: a part of
man’s past sound judgment.
It has been noted that ethnic identification takes on a group dimension. Those with
common national, racial, or religious origins share a sense of “people hood” and define
themselves as such: “I am a polish catholic, or a Russian Jew, an Hausa, an Ibo” and the like.
At such times, one is identified as a member of a particular in-group, which is structurally and
culturally different from the out-group. In the work of Novak (1973), it has been shown that
ethnic group identity is more than a situation of ordinary biological and historical roots, and of
shared traditions, language, sentiments, and cultural structure.
Jinadu (1979), stated that, the result of ethnicity in supporting the cohesion and
harmonious existence of a society cannot be over-stated, when it is a fact that some ethnic groups
uphold their cultural beliefs by confining themselves or rebuffing the dominant society. The
issue of ethnicity has been disproportionately inflated or excessive in Nigeria making it almost
impossible to disregard or overlook one’s ethnic identity and, worse still, it has been possible to
assume certain behavioral characteristics based on that identity. In fact, the place of ethnicity in
the historical development of Nigeria cannot be neglected.
Some of the founding fathers of Nigeria had these to say on ethnicity: A.T. Balewa - “since
the amalgamation of the Southern and Northern Nigerian Provinces in 1914, Nigeria has existed
as one country only on paper…. It is still far from being united”. (Osuntokun, 1980:99); for
Obafemi Awolowo - Nigeria is not a nation but a mere geographical expression; and Nnamdi
Azikiwe had always observed the calculated and premeditated overlook or neglect of the Igbo’s
by the British colonialists.
African politics could be interpreted in tribal terms. Though tribalism could be said to mean
almost the same thing with ethnicity, tribalism is a colonial ideological concept, while ethnicity
is a more broader concept for comprehending this phenomenon which colonial racism called
tribalism ( Nnoli, 1978). Thus, Nnoli opined that ethnic groups are social formations
characterized by the communal character of their boundaries. He explained the relevant
communal factors to be language, culture or both.
Discussing the causes and consequences of ethnicity in Nigeria, in his book, Ethnicity and
Development in Nigeria, Nnoli (1995), highlighted the causes to include among others, contact,
which he argued provides awareness of the existence of other ethnic groups; degree of socioeconomic competition between the members of the different ethnic groups; nature of socioeconomic organization; means or methods of revenue allocation; absence of class consciousness
which allows ethnicity to take precedence; bad government; internalized dimension of ethnicity,
like the passing on of sentiments, prejudices and attitudes from generation to generation through
socialization, mutual suspicion, etc.
In analyzing the consequences of ethnicity, he drew attention to the positive and negative
consequences. The positive consequences included the fact that ethnic identity has led to the
advancement of community development as against capitalist infrastructures only in area where
there can be gainful exploitation of resources; again, it has also led to the furtherance of the
struggle for economic growth; it encourages national goals by bringing together the populace in a
smooth and straight forward manner; it can be a vehicle for protection and preservation of some
democratic freedoms while promoting other democratic values like justice and equality (Nnoli,
1995).
Furthermore Nnoli (1995) highlighted some negative aspects of ethnicity to include that
ethnicity encourages disunity, disputes, quarrel and wrangling, aggravates efforts at national
harmony, and growth, which hinders morale, solidarity, and commitment to hard work. In
addition, he contended, that ethnic conflict leads to waste in the use of national resources for
development for instance the replication of industries in various parts of the country. Again, he
was of the view that ethnicity promotes the use of violence in inter-ethnic conflict which
impedes the democratic values of justice and equity (Nnoli, 1995).
Sklar (1963:3), in his book “Nigerian political parties” maintained that ethnic differences,
if not sufficiently and appropriately taken care of, may engender instability. He observed that the
federation of Nigeria consists of three political regions – the West, the North and the East.
Buchanan (1955:94), contended that “each region is said to have a dual cultural make-up: a
territorial “nucleus” inhabited by members of a cultural majority and a “peripheral zone”
inhabited by cultural minorities. Majority and minority groups include both tribes and
“nationalities” which Coleman (1958:423-424), defined thus: Tribe: “…a relatively small group
of people who share a common culture and who are descended from a common ancestor. The
tribe is the largest social group defined primarily in terms of kinship and is normally an
aggregation of clans”
Nationality: “…the largest traditional African group above a tribe which can be
distinguished from other groups by one or more objective criteria normally language”.
In the same vein, Sklar (1963:4), stated that “each region, a single “nationality” group of
culturally similar tribes is dominant in number – the Hausa in the Northern Region, the Ibo in the
Eastern Region, and the Yoruba in the Western Region”. Moreover, he illustrated how the three
main political parties prior to independence were formed along ethnic lines. The association
known as Egbe Omo Oduduwa was advertised in 1948, as a non-political cultural organization
for men and women of Yoruba enclave, this later became linked with the political party that
surfaced as the Action group (AG). In the North the association formed by Northerners as a non
political group – Jam’iyyar Mutanen Arewa emerged as political part named Northern People’s
Congress (NPC) whileNational Council of Nigeria and the Cameroons (NCNC) developed from
the East as an offshoot of the Nigerian Youth Movement and Zikist movement.
As a result of the foregoing, political wrangling and the resultant instability dominated the
political life of Nigeria prior to independence, leading to ethnic rivalries that did not allow the
needed harmonious relationship among the various ethnic groups in Nigeria. Based on the above,
Onuoha (1992:19-20), while discussing the nature of Nigerian state noted among others:
The distinguishing feature of states in post-colonial
societies is the heterogeneous nature of the Guardian
class. In post-colonial societies such as Nigeria, is
made up of four different groups, namely the
surviving feudal Lords who previously constituted the
Guardian class prior to the imposition of the
imperialist capitalist mode of production, the
representatives of the multinational corporation who
determine and control the productive activities
in these societies, a small crop of indigenous
capitalists, and the petty-bourgeoisie.
Moreover, he opined that the first implication of this heterogeneity of the Guardian class is
that there is bickering among the four-group accord that makes up the Guardian class in the postcolonial era. He noted that “there is no accord among them on the ways of protecting and
guarding. It is not known whether the method of protection and guarding is capitalism,
feudalism, or mixed economy “(Onuoha: 1992:20).
Along the same line, he stated the second implication to be that the government of the day
becomes crippled on what to implement, as there is no steady or established master plan.
Apprehending the impact of this idea, Luckham (1977), observed that the ruling class conflict of
hegemony in the developing world is regular among a particular group of people and difficult to
get rid of.
The political crises, which emerged from ethnic background of the country, have led the
country to continuous cases of political instability, which has subsequently led to the underdevelopment of the country.
Political Instability
The political structure prior to independence led to the emergence of political parties
along ethnic enclaves especially among the three major ethnic groups of Ibo, Hausa and Yoruba,
subsequently promoting ethnic awareness and cognizance as a political maneuvering towards
winning elections. The situation above accorded ethnicity a very valuable and imperative
position within the political arena. One may be safe to conclude that it is in the light of the above
that (Achebe: 1983:5), observed that “nothing in Nigeria’s political history captures her problem
of national integration more graphically than the diversified or checkered future of the word tribe
in her vocabulary”.
The physical foundation of instability in Nigeria as entrenched, basically, on ethnic root is
self explanatory. As a result of great and tremendous value attached to ethnicity and the
concerned awareness from it, there is no doubt that a level of struggle or rivalry among different
exclusive groups and the competition for place was absolutely a major cause of instability in the
Nigerian political arena. In fact, as a result of the heterogeneous nature of the society, absence of
oneness, harmonious agreement among various ethnic groups has been the undoing plaguing the
stability of Nigeria unity and unstable polity. Thus, the heterogeneous society of Nigeria is such
that has been bedeviled and plagued by instability in our political system. This political
instability has been observed as boiling from the struggle for power or recognition between the
different ethnic groups. This struggle arose from the nature of Nigerian political life that could be
better explained from the point of view of the country’s political economy, which centers on
material distribution rather than material production. That is to say, the economic condition calls
for the struggle for allocation of resources rather than production of these resources.
Information on political instability in Nigeria shows that the Nigerian federation is one of
the few federal governments in history to have emerged from unitary foundations. In 1954 Lord
Milverton, an architect, declared its purpose to have been a “unitary state with wide local
government centers in the Region” ( Milverton: 1954).
Sklar (1963:24), while discussing the above, acclaimed that:
The quasi – unitary, quasi – federal constitution
Of 1951 authorized the regional government to
legislate in specified areas only, subject to
approval by the Central Executive council, but the
constitution of 1954 was a decisive federalist
departure… This essential pattern has survived
but the federal system was tightened by
constitutional conference in 1957 and 1958,
and a potentially strong federal government
appears to have emerged.
The implication is that there was no monumental or striking form or pattern upon which the
federation prospers better where the component parts are all signatory to the cause of the federal
state so that the modalities and the mode of operation will ab-initio be stated clearly and accepted
by all as workable when this happens, then certain characteristics and features that will be a
threat to a stable federation will be tolerated or intolerable issues pursued constitutionally. This,
it is believed, will avoid the kind of instability that will arise out of the directionless that attended
the setting of the political system.
Based on this, it becomes pertinent to recognize the fact that the federation of Nigeria could
be likened to a monumental structure constructed on a quaggy, implying that country’s
foundation was laid on shaky platform resulting, to unstable polity in Nigeria. As a result of the
fore going, it can be stated that political instability in Nigeria could, thus, be regarded as a time
bomb blowing up at the right time.
Okoye (1991) while discussing the effects of political instability acclaimed that it prevents
development. This prevention was evidenced in the shameful disagreement, disharmony, in
fighting, ethnic fanaticism, suspicion, uncertainty, distrust, mistrust and corruption that was
prominent during the first Republic, which consequently led to the military coup of January
1966.
The first republic collapsed as a result of the politician’s inability to paddle over the apparent
and obvious conflicts and disagreement confronting them. The 1962-63 census and the 1964
federal election were two major events that took place in the first Republic that almost brought
the country to a halt. Both events were tied together by the fact that their results would decide
who would wield political power (Ejimofor: 1987). As a result, by 1966, when it became evident
that the politicians were losing grip, the military took over. Allen, (1985) noted that with the
take-over by the Nigerian army in 1966 and the subsequent establishment of a military
government, a number of far-reaching changes took place.
It is worthy of note at this juncture to state that impressions and people’s viewpoints by the
emergence or evolution of the military for the first time in 1966, was temporal and the reason for
their evolution was to sanitize the system. It was to be noticed later that the complete
politicization of the Nigerian society has been evident within the military, just as the ethnicity
and sectionalism that is prominent in intra-bourgeois conflicts in Nigeria have churned up to the
bourgeois fraction in the army. In the same direction, “the ideological cleavages in the Nigerian
society are reflected in the positions of various fractions of the military on salient political
issues” (Tyoden: 1984:5). It was not surprising then, that Nigeria witnessed two distinct military
regimes within 1966. Since then onward, military coups, counter coups and change-over of
governments became constant.
Many believe that the structure of Nigeria is the main source of political instability that
has bedeviled the country and this will continue to generate problems. Nigeria as a country
witnessed a civil war, thus,
reaching the apex of political instability. Hooking up the
war to a structural deficiency, Ejimofor (1987: 148), observed:
Before the Nigeria civil war, both the federal and the
governmental systems in Nigeria were structurally
imbalanced. The federal system was made up of
three regions in 1960 (four in 1964) and a federal
territory; but one region was larger both in size and
population than all the rest put together. In
governmental system, the council of ministers with
the prime minister in virtual command dominated
the legislature and had great influence (after 1963)
in the employment and removal of members of the
judiciary.
To this end, one can safely conclude that to avoid political instability in developing countries
like Nigeria there should not be any one state or region, to be so much more powerful,
numerically or otherwise than the rest even when the rest is combined together. During the first
republic before the civil war, the Nigerian state was confronted with such situation. The Northern
region occupied an outstanding and magnificent position in the Nigerian federation. The issue of
one part dominating others cannot be over emphasized, the dominant region or area has the belief
that they are born to rule and the preponderance of certain people in federal appointments under
the Nigerian situation. And this has been a major problem confronting the country. However, the
issue of rotational presidency adopted by the then ruling party the People’s Democratic Party
(PDP) which was on course in the fourth republic, to some extent bridged the long awaited gap.
The division of the regions into states did not help matters as people still talk of Easterners,
Southerners, Northerners, and Westerners as the case may be. Extraordinary precaution is needed
to fend off or avoid instability in Nigeria as the scene created about the country is one that is
prone to political instability.
Military Regimes in Nigeria
In January 1966, the first military coup led by Major Kaduna Nzeogwu was executed,
many Nigerian’s were indifference to or indeed relieved at the demise of a regime hopelessly
encumbered by corruption, election-rigging, vote-buying, indifference to the plight of the
suffering masses and thorough ineffectiveness. The coup de’etat, in a word, was welcomed by
many as a coup of grace. The first military government under Major General Johnson AguiyiIronsi, an Igbo, was therefore generally favorably received (Graf, 1979). The coup instigators
killed the Premiers of the Northern and Western Regions, the Federal Prime Minister and a
number of top army officers who were mainly from the Northern part of the country. The coup
instigators notably failed to kill two Igbo Premiers and Igbo officers, including Ironsi himself.
All of these developments did nothing to allay Northerners’ growing apprehensions about what
they perceived as a complete campaign to extend Igbo domination of the military, civil service,
education and commerce. Thus, when on 24th May 1966, Ironsi unilaterally, in a nation-wide
broadcast, proclaimed the creation of a unitary republic, the transformation of the former
Regions into mere territorial units now to be called provinces, the establishment, of a unified
national civil service and the banning of political and tribal organizations for two years, the
Northerners were unwilling to accept these pronouncement. Student’s demonstration in favour of
the North’s secession broke out. A large number of the Igbo’s living in the North were harassed
and killed, and their properties looted or destroyed. In July, Northern Officers successfully
brought off a second military coup, killing in the process General Ironsi, Brigadier Fajuyi (the
Western Military Governor), a number of Igbo officers and soldiers and some Igbo civilians. It
was a clear indication that the July coup was a manifestation of the North’s successful attempt to
assert, or re-assert its control over the army and through it, the nation (Graf, 1979).
Continuing,Graf, (1979) stated that Lt. Col. Yakubu Gowon, from the Middle Belt,
Angas tribe of the present Plateau State of Nigeria, a graduate of Sandhurst emerged the head of
state. Gown took immediate steps to enlist support for the military government. He announced
the scrapping of all plans for a unitary governmental structure and made the first of several
pledges for a phased return to civilian rule. He also released from prison some prominent
politicians including Chief Obafem Awolowo and Chief Anthony Enahoro. He organized a
constitutional conference in which each of the regions was represented, and the focus of
discussion was based on Nigerian unity. During the conference, there were series of reports of
terrorism and violence against Igbo’s in the North and counter violence against Northerners in
the South. These events polarized the Nigerian population. A large number of Easterners retuned
from the North. In October, Ojukwu who was in charge of the Eastern region, ordered all nonEasterners out of the region stating that he can no longer guarantee their safety and in November,
he refused to participate further in constitutional discussion in Lagos. When a last-ditch meeting
between Gowon and Ojukwu in Aburi, Ghana in January 1967 failed to produce any agreement,
in April the Eastern Region ceased paying federal taxes and took over control of all federal
utilities in Eastern region. On May 27, the Eastern Consultative Assembly, at Ojukwu’s
instigation, empowered him to declare the formation of a separate Biafran nation. On May 30, at
2.00am, Ojukwu summoned diplomats and journalists to the State House in Enugu, where he
proclaimed the new Republic of Biafra. More than one month passed before actual shooting
started and the Nigerian Biafran war was in progress. The war took off on 6th July, 1967, and
ended on15th January 1970 with the slogan – “No Victor, No Vanquish”.
Furthermore, Graf, (1979) also stated that .July 29, 1975 bloodless coup removed Gowon
as the head of states and brought in Brigadier Murtala Mohammed, with Brigadier Olusegun
Obasanjo as Chief of staff Supreme Headquarters and Brigadier Theophilus Danjuma as Chief of
Army Staff. The new government acted rapidly and decisively. Its targets were the omissions of
the preceding regime. The former state governors were dismissed and series of inquiry instigated
into their corrupt practices. In February 1976, an abortive coup which killed Brigadier Murtala
Mohammed brought in his second in command Brigadier Olusegun Obasanjo to power and
assisted by his head of the Supreme Military Council Brigadier Shehu Yar’Adua, to carry on and
carry out Mohammed’s policies, chief among these policies was the return to civilian rule.
Mohammed had declared that the transition to elected government would be effected not later
than 1979.
Civilian government of President Shehu Shagari took over government in 1979 and on
December 31st 1983, the military came calling again, accusing the political class of all manner of
evils to justify their seizure of power. From 1983 till May 29th 1999, Nigeria was variously ruled
by Muhammadu Buhari,(1983-1985) Ibrahim Babangida, (1985-1992) Sani Abacha (1993-1998)
and Abdulsalam Abubakar, (1998-1999). Of particular mention is Ibrahim Babangida as
Nwankwo (2005:43), noted:
However, there comes a time when a leader wishes to leave, not
just an enduring legacy, but a multiple succession of legacies,
which he hopes would outlive his generation. Former military
ruler, Ibrahim Babangida was one such Nigerian ruler. Whether in
the context of political transition, social and economic reform
programs etc, Babangida left huge imprints. Only very few
Nigerians would claim not to have been affected by his regime’s
thematic and its fundamental implications for the Nigerian state.
Babangida initiated the longest running transition program in
Nigeria’s history, which terminated in the annulment of the famous
June 12, 1992 presidential election- adjudged to be the freest and
fairest in Nigeria’s history.
The annulment of that election and its outright cancellation escalated ethnic protuberance,
boosted and stimulated separatist agitations and exacted, implanted and engendered conditions of
doubt, uncertainty mistrust, distrust and supposition.
To quench and lessen the pressure in the land, Babangida instituted National Interim
Government (ING) under Earnest Shonekan, a Yoruba. As a matter of fact, the crisis in the
country overwhelmed the ING of Shonekan who was subsequently ousted in a palace coup by
General Sani Abacha. The Abacha regime was characterized with high scale assassinations of
pro-democracy activists and complete reign of terror, uncertainty and insecurity. The killing of
Ken Saro-Wiwa, and his eight Ogoni kinsmen by the Abacha regime is a case to remember.
General Sani Abacha died on the 8th of June 1998 and Abdulsalam Abubakar ascended as
the next military head of state in Nigeria. Abubakar inaugurated a new transition program, and
eventually handed over power to a democratically-elected civilian administration under
Olusegun Obasanjo, in 1999.
Development
Development as a concept has continued to receive different meanings and explanation
by scholars, especially in developing nations. Thus, there is no generally acceptable operational
definition of what development is and there is no unified or uncontested agreement regarding
how development can be pursued. The multi-dimensional, multi-disciplinary and valueorientation of the concept is the major obstacle towards evolving a comprehensive and a
generally acceptable conception of development.
Most developing countries of which Nigeria is involved is the assumption that
accumulation wealth and construction of magnificent edifices and castles, driving in expensive
cars to mention but a few, constitutes the basis of development. For instance, during the oil boom
days, this type of mindset was common in Nigeria. Surplus funds gave the impression that
development was possible without proper planning, commitment, deep thinking and hard work
and proper mobilization of the people in the process of development.
But scholars and experts are agreed that development entails more than that. In the words
of Eneje (2014), development can be seen as a sustained accelerated growth in real output per
head and the attendant shifts in the economic, technological, and demographic characteristics of
humankind.
The connotation of this view of development is that in the process of development,
preference is accorded to upsurge in commodity output instead of those engaged in production
process. Nigeria sees development in this context in the late 1960s and early 1970s, thus, leading
to focusing on the production of primary agricultural commodities and minerals as a means of
raising real output per head.
Development was later to be perceived as modernization and subsequently, a lot of
emphasis was laid on social change process and the recovery of modern values. Development,
seen in terms of modernization saw the country constructing new schools from primary to
tertiary institutions, commencement of extensive housing projects, building of hospitals, etc.
Nigeria later witnessed a lot of uncompleted projects because most of these projects were
never completed. Consequently, the consumption pattern of Nigerians changed in favor of
foreign goods and services at the expense of locally produced goods.
By viewing development from this angle or spectrum of modernization, Nigerian leaders
at that time, knowingly or unknowingly nailed our local industries, thereby, curtailing our
manufacturing and technological development. Interestingly, our leaders, even today seem not to
see development as a thorough-going process of socio-economic transformation or even as a
consequence of social justice.
According to Seers (1977), a country’s development, can be viewed from three angles:
poverty; unemployment and inequality. Put in question form: What has been happening to
poverty in that country? What has been happening to unemployment in that country? What has
been happening to inequality in that country?
If all these three have deteriorated from high levels, then, this will be regarded as a period
of growth and development for that society but if all three have deteriorated from their present
levels, as witnessed in Nigeria, then that society cannot be said to have experienced growth and
development.
However in the view of Caincross (1979), the key to development of any society is
prevalent in men’s minds; in the institutions in which their thinking finds expression and in the
play of opportunity on ideas and institutions. Perhaps this brings to focus Okorie’s (2000),
affirmation that a government cannot develop a country; it can only help its country develop. In
the opinion of Abah (2000), development is the rational process of organizing and carrying out
prudently conceived and staffed programs or projects as one would organize and carry out
military or engineering operations
According to Bhatt (1980), the term development is not equivalent to growth. In the
developing countries of Africa, Latin America and Asia, development requires social and
cultural changes as well as economic growth; i.e. qualitative metamorphosis must occur
simultaneously with quantitative growth.
Development is a widely participatory process of directed social change in a society,
intended to bring about both social and material advancement for most of the people as a result
of their achieving or acquiring greater authority over their domain or neighborhood (Arvind and
Evereft, 1989). Nwatu (2001), opined that development is a constant process of metamorphosis.
It is a dynamic concept signifying a state of constant and positive transformation.
Development of Football in Nigeria
Adebowale (1999:50), writing under the caption; Flying without wings: Nigerian National
Soccer team crashes out of Nigeria ’99 and heads roll, quoting Dimeji Lawal former Flying
Eagles player, wants the federal government to probe all the allegations against the teams
selection. He was of the view that this will never lead to the development of our football. In his
words, he has this to say; “This same bad selection will be repeated in future if a thorough probe
is not carried out and affected officials punished”. Supporting Demeji Lawal, Adebowale also
quoted Emmanuel Maradas, publisher of African Soccer Magazine: “The defeat of Nigeria by
Mali is a shame and a probe of N.F.A and sports ministry officials as regards their role in the
choice
of players is necessary”. He concluded by saying that if this attitude is not
checked, and on time, our football will never develop. Continuing, Adebowale
(1999:50), quoting Phillipe Troussier, technical adviser of Japan, and former
super Eagles technical adviser, blamed flying eagles poor performance on
administrative ineptitude. He has this to say: “Nigerian’s are good ball jugglers,
but administratively, the country is zero”. He told Newswatch that an overhaul of
football administration in Nigeria was necessary to avoid a repeat of flying eagles
slipshod performance, otherwise Nigeria football will not grow. Writing on the
caption “N.F.A scribe is new victim of poor performance of flying eagles”,
Adebowale (1999:38), made it clear that: Sani Toro’s sack (former secretary
general of NFA) goes beyond civil service reforms. It was the climax of the
purge in NFA ordered by Okhai Mike Akhigbe, the then chief of general staff,
following flying eagles dismal performance at Nigeria ’99. Akhigbe was said to
have attributed the failure of the team to administrative ineptitude and corruption
in the NFA. The house cleaning began with the sack of coach Tunde Disu and his
crew. Timothy Ogunilade and Masomi Ogadan, chief accountant and internal
auditor of NFA respectively, were also redeployed.
Adebowale reported that “Toro’s sack was welcomed by most sports analysts” “It’s the best
decision taken by the sports ministry in recent times”, said Dudu Orumen, a sports analyst. It is
worthy of note that the NFA secretariat under Toro was a spoke in the wheel of football
development in Nigeria because of his inefficiency. The secretariat approved the invitation from
Europe of players who had no clubs for flying eagles, this resulted in the teams failure at Nigeria
’99. In 1995 NFA officials forgot the passports of Nigeria’s under–17 players in Lagos, during a
world championship qualifier in Ibadan with Togo. Nigeria was disqualified. The NFA
secretariat is also a haven of fraud. Player’s air ticket refunds are usually inflated. Players also
bribe officials to get their bonuses and allowances(Uzoma: 2003:30).
International football governing bodies are also not happy with the administration of
football in Nigeria. Adebowale reported that Issa Hayatou, President of Confederation of African
football (CAF), told Newswatch that football administration in Nigeria was not growing with the
achievements of Nigerian footballers abroad. He was of the view that Nigeria would have been a
stronger force to reckon with in international football, but for poor administration. Writing under
the caption “its been glorious for Nigerian sports under Abacha, but the General merely reaped
from divine generosity” Adebowale reported:that sports under the three-year old Abacha
administration did well is not a reflection of improvement in the administration of sports in the
country.
Problems of indiscipline, haphazard planning, poor maintenance of sports facilities,
frequent change of administrators and inept leadership, which have bedeviled sports
development, remain. The stadium facilities in Lagos, Ibadan, Kaduna and Enugu on which the
government spent about 1.4billion naira to repair in 1995 in preparation for the junior world cup,
have all been vandalized. Training facilities within Nigeria are so poor that most of the country’s
athletes go abroad to prepare for major competitions. Because of the politicization of sports
administration, wrong people always end-up running sports. The country is paying heavily for
this.
The frequent change of sports ministers by government continued under the Abacha
regime. Jim Nwobodo, the then minister of youths and sports, is the third in three years. If
success were recorded in sports during that three years, it can be regarded as products of divine
intervention. Contributing on how conflict can be a hindrance in football development in
Nigeria, Adebowale (1997:30), under the caption “Jim Nwobodo, youth and sports minister,
Abdul – Mumuni Aminu, NFA chairman, slug it out over Nigeria ’99”. He wrote that, “who
should constitute the central organizing committee, (COC) for Nigeria’s preparation for hosting
the 1999 world youth soccer championship, Nigeria ’99? The question became a subject of
dispute been Jim Nwobodo, the then youth and sports minister, and Abdul – Mumuni Aminu, the
then chairman of Nigeria football Association, (NFA)”. Aminu, said NFA should constitute the
COC, but Nwobodo disagreed. The ministry took over the responsibilities for constituting the
COC and the overall organization of the championship. Nwobodo said the championship was too
big to be left to the NFA to handle. He maintained that NFA members have proved, over the
years, that they were incapable of organizing such major events. He cited the poor organization
of the then domestic Pepsi Professional League as an example. Lamented Nwobodo: “Look at
the way they are running the league. It is not properly organized, and yet you want to saddle
these same people with running such a major world championship like Nigeria ’99”.
Adebowale reported that Austin Akosa, NFA member while reacting to Nwobodo’s
statement described it as “mean”. Akosa said Nwobodo was the one killing football, not NFA.
The dispute took its toll on Nigeria ’99. Nigeria failed to meet with federation (FIFA), July 5,
1997, in Malayasia, to discuss its preparation for the champioship. Nwobodo and Aminu
disagreed over those who should go. By the time an agreement was reached, it was too late. The
minister cited flight problems, but Aminu said it was a malicious lie “to sweep under the carpet
the sports ministry’s administrative ineptitude”. Paul Bassey, a Nigeria journalist who was in
Malaysia, said the inability, of Nigeria to meet FIFA officials did not go down well with FIFA,
said Bassey:
“Everybody in Malaysia was expecting the Nigerian delegation but ended up being
disappointed”.
Adebowale concluded that however FIFA officials then asked the Nigerian
delegation to meet them in Cairo, September 2, 1997, which they did, and were eventually
sanctioned.
Ugborgu(2002:62), in his own contribution, opined that “the biggest obstacle to the growth
of Nigeria football is the frequent changes of coaches”. Supporting this view, FIFA, identified
lack of continuity as the biggest obstacle to the growth of Nigeria football. A recent FIFA
publication said, Nigeria, in spite of their array of quality players might not actualize their full
potentials if the sports authorities failed to put their house in order. FIFA faulted Nigeria’s high
turn–over of coaches, which it said, does not give room for proper planning and team cohesion.
So far, Nigeria has a record of 23 past foreign coaches in 40 years.
Political Instability, Military Regimes and Development of Football in Nigeria 1983 – 1999
The Nigerian state is one that is caught up with many contradictions that bother
the federation. These contradictions, on frequent basis, usually boil down to an intractable crisis
that eventually degenerates to a state of political instability. The main purpose of this study has
been to evaluate political instability under military regimes on football development in Nigeria.
Military intervention in the political life of any nation is a harbinger to instability in its
political system, which consequently undermine development in all its ramifications. As
mentioned earlier, Nigeria was variously ruled by Muhammadu Buhari,(1983-1985) Ibrahim
Babangida, (1985-1992) Sani Abacha (1993-1998) and Abdulsalam Abubakar, (1998-1999).
During these periods, Nigeria witnessed hunger and starvation, human suffering and misery,
human rights violation in all its ramification, economic blockage, diseases with no drugs for
treatment, wide spread corruption, money laundering, etc. Football development cannot thrive
under these stringent conditions. Nigerian sports experienced serious devastation during the
military rule. There was no new stadium constructed, even the ones being constructed before the
army struck in 1983, were all abandoned. There was inadequate finance by Nigeria Football
Association (NFA) to prosecute major competitions and grass-root football development was at
its lowest ebb. There was no sports development program during the period under study. The
long years of military rule in Nigeria destroyed every good structure and institution within the
system. Football development suffered a lot of set-back during the period. The present declining
performance of our various national teams in international competitions can be traced to the
military era. It seems the Nigerian Senior National Team otherwise known as the Super Eagles
were the most affected (Uweru, 2004).
Who would have believed, if told, that the Lone Stars of Liberia almost sent Nigeria out of
the 2002 world cup during the qualification stage? That Nigeria managed to qualify for
Korea/Japan 2002 world cup is unbelievable, but true. The genesis of our National team’s (Super
Eagles) woes was during the Abacha regime when the Eagles were stopped from participating in
South Africa ’96, Nations’ cup competition. Many taught it was just a ‘game of words’, but it
turned out to be a reality. The unpopular decision taken, prevented the Super Eagles from
defending the gold medal won during the Tunisia ’94 edition of the competition. It would be
recalled that threats by the late maximum ruler, General Sani Abacha, and a nice $20,000
(about#2.8m) gift to each player was all it took for the super eagles to dump the African Nations
cup held in South Africa in 1996.
Recalling the sad events that made Nigeria to withdraw from the biennial soccer fiesta,
Garba Lawal, one of the key players in the boycott saga (Uzoma, 2003:15), revealed that the late
head of state had invited the team to Aso Rock, to plead with them to withdraw from the
competition, on grounds of security”… “Abacha had invited all of us to Aso Rock one day, while
we were in camp in Lagos preparing for the tournament. He started by telling us about the
dangers of going to a competition, which had no security guarantees. He said, ‘ South Africa is
unsafe at the moment for you people, but if you insist you must go, then this is the money’. “He
actually brought out a Ghana-must –go bag full of dollars for the trip if we were indeed willing
to take the risk. We looked at ourselves and decided it was not worth it”. Abacha was a patient
man. He waited for our response. When he was satisfied we won’t go to South Africa, he now
moved to the next stage of his plan.
“He personally ensured we were handed $20,000 each to forget the competition. I will call
our situation that day as collecting money under duress. I didn’t quite enjoy it because I felt
Nigeria should have gone to defend the title she won at the Tunisia ’94 edition. Besides, it was
my very first opportunity to represent my country at that level, but it was not to be because of the
purported disagreement he had with Nelson Mandela over political matters”.
Unfortunately, out of ignorance or mere sycophancy, the decision was hailed by a number
of Nigerians. It received a good coverage in some media organs. To some, it was a slap on the
face of the giant of Africa. The Abacha regime was given kudos for the step taken. But that was
the turning point for the Super Eagles and decline in the development of football in Nigeria. The
ghost of that decision is still-hunting Nigerian soccer. It will continue unless a positive step is
taken (Anibueze, 2000). The withdrawal from participation in the Nations cup, thus not
defending the trophy won in Tunisia ’94, resulted in the ban imposed on Nigerian teams from all
Confederation of African Football (CAF), and Federation of International Football Association
(FIFA), organized competitions. A six-year ban period was slammed on Nigeria. That was the
stroke that broke the camel’s back. Whoever was responsible for the advice that led to such a
decision never wished Nigerian soccer well. It was a display of flagrant professional ignorance.
The effect of such action has been inherited by the present soccer administrators as a “relay
baton”.
Anibueze (2000), confirmed that, after a lot of lobbying to CAF/FIFA, the ban was later
reduced to four years. However, the “quarantine” period had already damaged the super eagles
and Nigerian soccer. South Africa ’96 and Burkina Faso ’98 did not get the best of African
soccer, due to the absence of the super eagles, nations cup without the super eagles is just like the
world cup without Brazil. Even after South Africa won the Nations cup in 1996, they confessed
that they are not fulfilled as African champions due to the absence of the super eagles of Nigeria
in the championship. They tried engaging the super eagles in a friendly after winning the Nations
cup but without success.
In the same vein, our club-sides and age group teams lost in all continental championships. It
was the darkest period in the history of Nigerian soccer. Four years in which international scouts
turned their back on Nigeria for other African teams. The period was long enough to keep the
Super Eagles out of FIFA rating.
It will not be out of place to state that the dark period may
not be over yet. Our sports administrators are yet to give us direction in the relevant areas of
sports. They do not have the patience to go deep into the root of sports problem. Rather, they
specialize in “window-dressing” for immediate results.
Anibueze (2000), noted that it was at this period that FIFA declared Nigeria unsuitable to
host the under 21 world championship, citing security reasons, as a result of the instability, in the
political arena. This was after Nigeria had spent about, 1.4 billion Naira to upgrade stadia
facilities. FIFA moved the championship to Qatar and invited Nigeria. In protest, Nigeria refused
to participate.
The incessant change of government cannot be dismissed with a wave of the hand as regards
football development in Nigeria. New government always leads to new minister of sports and
new Nigerian football Association chairman. When a new minister is appointed, and is about
starting his program, he is removed and replaced by another minister. How can this lead to the
development of sports in Nigeria? From 1997 to May 2003, we had about four ministers of
youths and sports and four NFA chairmen. They were chief Jim Ifeanyichukwu Nwobodo,
Damishi Sango, Ishaya Mark Aku and Stephen Akiga…., as ministers, in the same vein, there
were Emeka Omeruah, Abdul Muminu Aminu, Kadjo Williams whose tenure lasted for only 8
months, and Dominic Oneya…, as NFA chairmen.
The situation of political instability and football development in other African countries
cannot be over-emphasized. Guinea for instance was a force to reckon with in football, before
they started witnessing instability in their political system. Going down memory lane, one cannot
easily forget the agonizing defeat of Enugu Rangers International Football Club of Nigeria in the
1975 edition of the African cup of champions, by a Guinean club side Hafia Football Club of
Conakry. They defeated Rangers 1-0 in their country and also came to Lagos to beat Rangers to
lift the trophy. It is worthy of note that till the year2002, no Nigerian club-side lifted the trophy.
Our representatives in 2002, in the championship, Enyimba of Aba, was beaten by a Cote d’
Ivorian club side, Asec Mimosa. Now, Guinea is no longer regarded as a footballing Nation, this
may be as a result of political instability that engulfed the country. Now the instability is being
cushioned, Guinea has started picking up gradually in sports development.
Liberia only rose to stardom and even threatened to stop Nigeria from going to the 2002
Korea/Japan world cup, only after there was a stoppage in the political wrangling in the country.
Football development suffered greatly in Ghana during their period of political instability. A lot
of their good players left the shores of Ghana in search of Golden Fleece. We cannot even hear
of countries like Rwanda, Somalia, Sierra Leone, etc, in football competitions these days, this is
as a result of civil wars they were engaged in.
During the era of political dis-unity in South Africa, they were not participating in sporting
activities and nobody ever knew that they have the best potentials in Africa. It is only after there
was a stable political system in South Africa that they showed the whole of Africa, in particular,
and the world, in general, that they have arrived. They qualified for the world cup and even lifted
the cup of Nations. They did these in quick succession. They confirmed their pre-eminent
position by hosting and winning the sixth all African games. South Africa is currently leading
other African countries in the organization and management of football league. All these
achievements by South Africa are as a result of political stability.
Conclusion
The imbalance in the structure of the Nigerian federation contributed to the political
instability that rocked Nigeria. Three regions were created in 1939, they were the North, the East
and the West, this significantly contributed to a major inequality and disproportionate in the
structure of Nigerian federation, because one of the regions, the North, was greater than both the
East and West put together. Thus, the seed of political instability was sown during the colonial
era. Political instability had continued to be the mainstay in Nigerian polity, over the years,
Nigeria had witnessed incessant changes of government, coups and counter coups, etc.
Military regimes, which is an aberration and despotic was in power for a very long time
in Nigeria, and led to decline of institutions, erosion of civil relations and steady rise of violence
in the society. Political instability prevalent during the military adversely affected all aspects of
life in society, football development was not an exception. Football development cannot take
place under an unstable environment. The long years of the military especially during the three
year reign of General Sani Abacha adversely affected development of football in Nigeria. It was
the darkest period in the history of Nigerian soccer.
To this end, the study suggests that efforts should be made to enthrone a stable political
system in Nigeria. This can be achieved by adopting the French system of devolution of power to
the regions, thereby making the center less attractive. Seven years single term should be
introduced, to allow any elected official to carry out his programs to the best of his ability.
Election into the legislature should be made to be based on a part – time basis and public
servants should be allowed to participate in vying for elective positions in the house. To this
extent, the political actors should call to mind the adverse effects of instability within the
political system and shun all perpetrations. The Nigerian political class should arise towards
sustaining the present democratic dispensation in Nigeria. This is because political stability will
ensure a conducive environment upon which football development will thrive.
References
Abah, N. (2000), Development Administration, A Multi-Disciplinary Approach: Enugu:
John Jacobs Classic Publishers
Achebe, C. (1983): The Trouble with Nigeria : Enugu: Fourth Dimension
Publishing Company Ltd.
Adebowale, Y. (1999): “ NFA Scribe is New Victim of Poor
Performance of Flying Eagles” Newswatch, March 1. Vol. 29. No. 14.
Adebowale, Y. (1999): “Nigerian National Soccer Team crashes out of
Nigeria ’99 and Heads Roll”, Newswatch, May 3, Vol. 29. No. 17.
Adebowale, Y. (1997): “Jim Nwobodo, Youth and Sports Minister,
Abdul-Mumuni Aminu, NFA Chairman, Slug it out over Nigeria
‘99” Newswatch, July 21, Vol. 26, No3.
Adedotun P, (1971:389): “Nigeria’s Federal Financial Experience”.
The Journal of Modern African Studies. IX. 3rd October.
Adedotun P. (1980): “The Decades of Intergovernmental Financial
Relationship in the Federation of Nigeria”, in the Quarterly Journal on
Public Administration Vol XIV, 1002 UNIFE,
Allen, J.G.C. (1985): A Handbook of Basic Administration and Civil
Service Procedure in the Federal Republic of Nigeria. Ibadan:
University Press Ltd.
Anibueze, O.(2000): “Eagles for Akiga” Vanguard, Tuesday, May 9.
Arvind, S. and Everett, M. (1989), “India’s Information Revolution,” in Evolution of
Development and Development Administration Theory: The India Journal of Public
Administration. Vol. XXXV, No 4
Bhatt, V.V. (1980), Development Perspectives: Problems, Strategies and Policies. London:
Oxford Pergamon
Buchanan, K.M. and Pugh, J.C. (1955): Land and People in Nigeria.
London: University of London Press.
Caincross A.K, (1979). “International Trade and Economic Development”, Journal of
Economics, Vol. 28, No. 109
Coleman, James S. (1958): Nigeria Background to Nationalism.
Berkeley; University of Califoni0a Press.
Ejimofor, C. O. (1987): British Colonial Objectives and Policies
in Nigeria: Onitsha: Africana – FSP publishers Ltd.
Eneje, O.F. (2014) “Towards a Sustainable Development in the Niger Delta” Paper Delivered on
24th October 2014 at Hotel Presidential Port Harcourt
Graf, W.D. (1979) The Nigerian Citizen’s Guide to Parties, Politics, Leaders and Issues, A Daily
Times Publication
Jinadu L. A. (1979): “A note on the Theory of Federalism” in
A.B. Akinyemi, P. D. Cole and Walter Ofonagoro, (eds) Readings on
Federalism, Nigerian Institute of International Affairs, Lagos.
Luckham, R. (1977): “ Militarism: Force, Class and International
Conflict.”Institute of Development Studies Bulletin, Vol. IX, No 1
Milverton, L.(1954): “ The future of Nigeria” in The English and
National Review, 143.
Nnoli, O.(1995): Ethnicity and Development in Nigeria.
Aldershot: Avebury.
Nnoli, O. (1978): Ethnic Politics in Nigeria. Enugu: Fourth
Dimension Publishing Company Nigeria Ltd.
Novak, M. (1973): The Rise of the Unmettable Ethnics. New York:
Macmillan.
Nwankwo, A.A (2005). Nigeria: The Future of Democracy. Enugu: Fourth Dimension
Publishing Company Ltd
Nwatu, R. (2001), Principles of Development Administration: Enugu: Computer Edge
Publishers
Okibe, H. B. (2000): Political Evolution and Constitutional
Development in Nigeria: 1861 – 1999. Enugu: Marydon
Publishers.
Okorie, J. U. (2000), Developing Nigeria’s Workforce: Calabar: Page Environs Publishers
Okoye, I. (1991):National Consciousness in Nigeria. Onitsha:
Etukokwu Publishers Ltd.
Onuoha, J. (1992): What is the State? Enugu: Acena Publishers.
Osuntokun, J. (1980): “The Historical Background of Nigerian
Federation” Journal of the Nigerian Institute of International
Affairs. Lagos; Nigeria.
Salawu B, (2001): African Journal of International Affairs and
Development. Vol. 6, No 1.
Seers, D. (1977). “The New Meaning of Development”, International Development
Review; No.3
Sklar, R. L. (1963): Nigeria Political Parties: Enugu: Nok
Publishers (Nigeria) Ltd.
Turner T. (1976): Review of African Political Economy. Vol.1, No 1.
Tyodan S.G. (1984): “The military and society in Nigeria” Lecture
Series delivered in University of Jos.
Ugborgu V.(2002): “ Set to Break the Jinx” Newswatch March 25,
Vol. 35, No.12.
Uweru N. (2004): “The military killed sports in Nigeria” Insider weekly,
No 10, March 8.
Uzoma, T.(2003): “NFA is Corrupt” The Sun, August 30.