Changes that Would Take Place if A Country Changed From a Unitary to a Federal System - Essay Example

THE AL APPROACH: CHANGES THAT WOULD TAKE PLACE IF A COUNTRY CHANGED FROM A UNITARY TO A FEDERAL SYSTEM (2007) INTRODUCTION Comparative public administration brings about the understanding of the institutional structures of government in different governmental administration. According to Hague & Harrop (2004), internationally comparative approach is needed. Given problems of conceptualization, the availability of reliable and comparable data, and the (sometimes-subtle) differences between political-administrative systems, a focused comparison has the best chances of being completed satisfactorily. Institutional power structure of a system of government is based on how the constitutional allocation of power to office holder is patterned. In addition, how relationship and power sharing affect the different public servants in their different positional capacity. System of government has to do with pattern of how power allocation is being shared within the different arms and levels of government. The unitary system of government maintain the centralization of power within the central government with a subsidiary power position reserved for regional and local government. The central government in a unitary state has the power to usurp and take control of the jurisdictional functional areas of these subordinate government levels without prior notice of any difficult amendment procedure. The case is not so in a federal system of government where power among the different levels of government exist as coordinates, rather than a superior- subordinates relationship. Here, the role and jurisdictional power of each levels of government within the federal state is explicitly spelt out by the constitution of the state. Thus, the central or federal government has no power to take over the constitutional functions of the state or local governments. In such institutional power setting, the constitution would spell all tasks that are exclusive to the federal government only. Here, the exclusive list contains these functions reserved for the federal government, while the concurrent list states those functions which the federal government and other levels of government can carry out concurrently. The residual list states functions reserved for the states governments and local authorities. Thus, the institutional power structure of a state is determined by the adopted system of government. It is pertinent to state here that there is nothing, as a clear-cut federalist state and a pure unitary state, as in a unitary state there exist a level of decentralization, as well as a federal state where there is a level of centralization of power. In this view, Bakvis (1980:4) argues, "The distinction between federal and non-federal systems is not clear-cut. It is very difficult to find a purely federal state that meets all the criteria concerning the independent and co-ordinate status of governments as originally specified by K.C. Wheare (1946). At the same time, it would be unusual to find a system that can be called a purely unitary state. Most polities are decentralized in some form, even if it is only at the administrative level". CHANGES THAT WOULD TAKE PLACE IF A COUNTRY CHANGED FROM A UNITARY TO A FEDERAL SYSTEM As already stated in the previous paragraph, a unitary state is one that is characterized by centralized power distribution revolving around the central government. For a country to transfer its governmental institutional setup to adapt to a federal system from a unitary system there would be decentralization of power from the central government to the other levels of government. The devolution of power here would mean that other tiers of government would not be subordinate to central government, but they would exist as coordinates, with autonomous power to operate in their constitutional given jurisdictional area. Here, there is the need for coexistence and harmony in the relationship that would take place among these tiers of government. According to Burgess (2000), "According to this perspective, the concept of covenantal federalism embodies a set of normative principles which binds partners together in a moral contract or agreement of trust. The act of coming together remains a 'political bargain' but it is more than just this; it is also based upon mutual recognition, tolerance, respect, obligation, and responsibility". In the same vain, Mc Kay (2001:2) argues that institutional devices such as proportional representation are used as a means of avoiding conflict and the creation of harmonious existence in a federating state. Thus, the major change that would need to take place when a country is changing from a unitary system of government to a federal system is the restructuring of power base among the different tiers of government. This should be carried out based on tolerance for other components that make up the political system. The constitution of the country need to spell out vividly the jurisdictional operational is of each level of government. For instance, a unitary state like the United Kingdom and Ghana, if in anyway they decide to change to a federal state, they would need to decentralize their power structure and give other tiers of government the power to operate autonomously, as is witnessed in a federal state like the United States of America, Canada, India, and Nigeria. Though US are a federal state, its constitution practiced a highly centralized federal structure. The constitution of a state does not reflect the actual power sharing within a state. "Formal constitutional arrangements are not just accurate guide in the distribution of power between central and state authorities" (ibid). According to Wichendorfer (2001), federalism is a binding force that bind a nation together especially in an ethnic pluralized society. The political institutionalism has variables of political institutions and political actors that have the capability of making rational decisions. Thus, as a state engages in a federalist system of government, it is taking a turn to ensure that the various ethnic groupings are united together and the consolidation of a solidarity among the components parts that make up the state. "It is then difficult to enforce change within a federated state" (ibid). This means in a unitary state where there is a loose institutional framework, this will be replaced with a more solid institutional framework where there is rigorous amendment procedures to established institutions. Another changes that would occur in the change from a unitary system of government to a federal government is that the Intergovernmental relations (IGR) would move from an inclusive pattern (where the central government has control over the operations of regional and local government functions) to a separated typology where each level of government operates autonomously, with the constitution clearly stating their relationship. According to Deil S. Wright 3 typology of IGR, which include separated, inclusive, and overlapping models, these models take place within a unitary and federal government relationship. Thus, the changes in system of unitary system of government to federal system would make the relationship between the different levels of government to be clearly spelt out in the constitution. It is seen that in federal states like Nigeria, USA, Canada, the intergovernmental relationship is clearly stated in the constitution and the central government cannot usurp into the functional areas of other levels of government without due and proper consultations. This may be tolerated in a unitary state like UK and Ghana. Furthermore, it is expected that fiscal relationships among tiers of government be clearly expressed by the constitution. Here, the different levels of government are expected to have statutory allocation from the federation account. Largely the levels of government would have the autonomy to engage in internally generated revenue (IGR), where they would use this to support the statutory allocation from the federation account. The change in system of government from a unitary to a federal system would bring about different sets of bureaucrats at the federal, state, and local government levels. These would operate at different capacities. The federal civil servants are to be under the control of the federal government, and they would be remunerated by the federal government. This applies to other level of civil servants controlled by the state and local government. The change in unitary system of government to federal system would bring about the creation of law making bodies at the different levels of government. In country like Nigeria, outside the federal national senate and house of assembly, there are state houses of assemblies in the different 31 states of the federation. Also in US, outside the Senate and Congress at the national level, each state of the federation has its own law making body. This is not so in a unitary state as United Kingdom and Ghana, as there are only national legislative body. REFERENCES Bakvis, Herman (1981), Federalism and the Organization of Political Life: Canada in Comparative Perspective. Kingston, Ontario: Institute of Intergovernmental Relations, Queen's University Burgess, Michael (2000), Federalism and European Union: The Building of Europe, 1950-2000. London: Routledge Burgess M. and A. Gagner (1993), Comparative Federalism and Federations, Harvester Wheatsheaf Hague, R. and M. Harrop (2004), Comparative Government and Politics, Palgrave Macmillan. McKay, David. (2001), Designing Europe: comparative lessons from federal experience, Oxford University Press Smith, G. (1995), Federalism: the Multi ethnic Challenge, Longman Swendon, W. (2006) Federalism and Regionalism in Western Europe, Palgrave Macmillan Wichendorfer-Schmidt, U. (2001), Federalism and Political Performance, Routledge Read More