The Nigerian Quota System of 1979 Is An Agent Of Division Rather Than Unity -By Nweke Daniel

There has been a great deal of discussion on the success and possible disadvantages of the 1979 Quitaism in Nigeria, whether it is an agent of unity or division. Although it was implemented to address past imbalances and foster equal opportunities across ethnic groups. The strategy, which attempted to promote inclusivity and eliminate disparities, by providing the allocation of certain percentages of positions in public offices and admission places into Nigerian universities based on populations, ethnic considerations, and states of origin has come under scrutiny for its effects on meritocracy, the continuous tensions among tribes, and its limitation to the progress and development of the nation. The Quota system that was supposed to unite us has divided us.

The compromise of meritocracy is one of the negative effects of the quota system in Nigeria and this has resulted in the recruitment of less qualified individuals to important jobs and public positions because it bases employment and university admission on ethnicity rather than personal qualities and skills. The practical example of this divisive and kakistocratic system is seen in the public school admissions where a student from Kano would be admitted by an institution with an aggregate JAMB score of 200 while another student from Enugu who scored 220 is denied admission as a result of quota policy. When positions are reserved based on ethnic quotas, individuals may become complacent, knowing that their selection is guaranteed regardless of their performance. This can result in a decline in the overall quality of candidates, discredits hard work, promote the absence of healthy competition, and limit and impede the growth and development of various sectors in the country.

While the quota system seeks to fix past ethnic imbalances, there is a risk that it could further polarize ethnic groupings. The program could inadvertently heighten tensions and foster a sense of “us versus them” among various ethnic communities by emphasizing ethnic identities and assigning posts and slots based on quotas. In a heterogeneous and complex country like ours, this can undermine efforts to create a harmonious and inclusive community as well as national unity.

The implementation of the system has given rise to opportunities for corruption and nepotism. Some people have abused the system by lying about their ethnicity or by using their political clout to obtain jobs that are only open to members of specific ethnic groups. The ineffective distribution of resources is also a result of the quota system as well. The emphasis is shifted away from assigning resources based on ability and necessity and toward meeting quota requirements by requiring precise percentages of posts, admissions, or resources for various ethnic groups. As a result, resources may not be used effectively, which might hinder overall development, local revitalization, and economic growth.

Although Nigeria’s quota system was implemented to foster equity and inclusivity, it harms meritocracy, competitiveness, social cohesion, resource allocation, and the possibility for corruption, leaving the nation more divided than united. It is still difficult to strike a balance between correcting historical inequities and promoting opportunities based on merit. To promote inclusivity, unity, and sustainable development for the country, the federal government must review and reevaluate the quota system and its execution to ensure that meritocracy is not swept under the bed in our country.