The move by lawmakers to create two states in the southeast of Nigeria is a misguided initiative that overlooks the pressing economic and security issues plaguing the area.

Development Diaries reports that bills for the creation of Adada and Etiti states passed their first reading on Tuesday on the floors of the Senate and the House of Representatives.

According to reports, the bill, which has been cited as the ‘Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (Alteration) Bill, 2024 (SB. 482)’, seeks to amend Section three (one) and the first schedule, part one of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria to provide for the creation of Adada State to bring the number of southeast states to six to be at par with the other geopolitical zones of the country.

The southeast has been grappling with significant challenges, including violence as a result of a stay-at-home order by a secessionist group, severely disrupting livelihoods in the region.

Instead of addressing these urgent security and economic concerns, the legislators from the area are focusing on political maneuvering that will likely increase existing tensions and divert resources away from critical areas that require immediate attention.

What is the essence of moving for the creation of another state in the southeast when Nigeria is experiencing its worst economic crisis in a generation, leading to widespread hardship? The lawmakers and other political leaders from the southeast need to get their priorities straight.

The people of the southeast, like Nigerians in other regions of the country, are facing challenging economic times. In fact, over the past two years, the southeast has been undergoing a significant economic and social decline, with companies in the area moving to neighbouring states due to security concerns.

A study conducted by SBM Intelligence has revealed that the subregion experiences a loss of about N10 to N13 billion in the transport industry alone for each day of demonstration or stay-at-home.

Furthermore, the creation of a new state could lead to further administrative complications and increased competition for scarce resources, which would do little to alleviate the suffering of the populace.

This legislative move seems disconnected from the realities on the ground, where people are more concerned about their safety and well-being than about new political boundaries.

By diverting attention to state creation, the legislators risk ignoring the root problems of the region and failing to provide the necessary support to restore peace and stability in the region.

Development Diaries calls on lawmakers representing the people of the southeast, as well as other political leaders in the region, to focus on restoring an atmosphere in which people’s potential is realised and businesses thrive again in the region.