Nigeria Lawmakers Propose 31 New States, Sparking Fierce Debate

When Benjamin Kalu, deputy speaker of the House of Representatives, read a letter outlining a plan to carve up the nation into 67 entities, Nigerians were left blinking in disbelief.

The proposal, lodged by the Constitution Review Committee during a plenary sessionAbuja on Thursday, February 21, 2025, would add 31 fresh states to the existing 36.

Why the idea resurfaced now?

State creation isn’t new in Nigeria. Since independence, successive governments have used it as a political balancing act, most notably in the 1996 creation of six new states under military rule. The current wave, however, is different: it arrives amid a perfect storm of hyper‑inflation, soaring youth unemployment and a fragile fiscal outlook.

Deputy Speaker Kalu, who also chairs the Constitution Review Committee, argued that “the structure of our federation no longer reflects the demographic realities of 2025.” He broke down the geographic spread: six new states in North‑Central, four in the North‑East, five in the North‑West, five in the South‑South and seven in the South‑West. Specific names floated include Okun and Confluence from Kogi, Benue Ala and Apa from Benue, a Federal Capital Territory (FCT) State, Amana from Adamawa and Katagum from Bauchi, among others.

Regional backlash and support

The reaction was immediate and polarized. The Yoruba socio‑cultural body Afenifere slammed the plan as a “political gimmick,” while its northern counterpart, the Arewa Consultative Forum, called it “ridiculous.” Yet, a vocal coalition from the South‑East – still nursing the wounds of the 2023 security crackdown – argued for a heftier share of the new states.

“South‑East deserves more states than any other zone because we have been short‑changed for decades,” said an unnamed regional advocate during a press briefing in Enugu. He went on, “If justice and equity are to prevail, the South‑East must receive the highest number of states.” The sentiment was echoed at a gathering of the Pan‑Niger Delta Forum, which warned that any meaningful reform must ensure equal state distribution across all six geopolitical zones, a promise made at the 2014 constitutional conference but never fulfilled.

Constitutional gauntlet

Even if the political din quiets down, the road to 67 states is riddled with legal hurdles. Section 8 of the 1999 Constitution demands a two‑thirds majority not only in the Senate and House of Representatives but also in the respective State Houses of Assembly and Local Government Councils of the affected areas.

Deputy Speaker Kalu later disclosed that dozens of proposals – many of them overlapping – have already been filed. “The constitutional bar is high for a reason,” he told reporters, “and we respect that process.” Yet critics point out that the fiscal burden of creating new administrative capitals, ministries, and civil service cadres could push Nigeria’s already strained budget into the red.

Economists from the University of Lagos estimate that each new state could add roughly ₦1.2 trillion in recurring costs, a figure that dwarfs the nation’s current primary‑education budget. With inflation hovering near 30 % and unemployment cracking above 35 % among youths, the money‑hungry proposal feels, to many, like a mis‑placed priority.

Fact‑checking the hype

Social media amplified the controversy. In July 2025, Facebook pages such as Crusader Radio and IgbereTV circulated a sensational claim that the Senate had already approved 12 new states. Fact‑checkers from the Nigerian Press Council stepped in, confirming that the Senate had only received the 31‑state proposal and had not taken any vote.

The clarification was stark: “All proposals for the new states failed to meet constitutional requirements,” Kalu reiterated in a televised interview. The Senate’s silence, rather than a tacit endorsement, underscored the political reality that any such restructuring would need broad consensus – something that appears increasingly elusive.

What’s next for the federal map?

For now, the proposal sits on a dusty shelf in the legislative archives, awaiting a possible revival when the next electoral cycle brings fresh faces. Some analysts argue that the debate itself serves a purpose: it forces a national conversation about equitable development, resource allocation and the lingering sense of marginalisation in certain zones.

Others warn that without a realistic financing plan, the state‑creation fever could become a political distraction, diverting attention from urgent reforms in taxation, power generation and agricultural revitalisation.

Whatever the outcome, one thing is clear – Nigeria’s federal architecture will continue to be a litmus test for how the country balances diversity with unity.