Inside Nigeria’s New Statehood Battle: Etiti vs Anioma and the Race to Give the South-East a Sixth State
The agitation for the creation of a new state in Nigeria’s South-East geopolitical zone has once again surged to the front burner of national discourse. Two dominant proposals — Etiti State and Anioma State — have emerged as the leading contenders to become Nigeria’s 37th state, each backed by influential legislators, regional stakeholders, and growing public advocacy.
At stake is not merely a redrawing of Nigeria’s political map, but a broader question of equity, representation, and the unfinished business of federal restructuring. The South-East remains the only geopolitical zone with five states — Abia, Anambra, Ebonyi, Enugu, and Imo — compared to six or seven in other zones. For many in the region, this imbalance is a symbol of political marginalization and underrepresentation, a relic of Nigeria’s uneven post-civil war state creation history.
As momentum builds behind legislative bills in both chambers of the National Assembly, the Etiti and Anioma proposals have become more than regional aspirations. They now represent competing visions of what it means to complete Nigeria’s federal project and deliver justice to the South-East.
Nigeria’s state creation process has always been political and emotive, often driven by demands for identity recognition, equitable resource distribution, and administrative convenience. From the initial twelve states created by General Yakubu Gowon in 1967 to the current thirty-six states established in 1996 under General Sani Abacha, the evolution has reflected both the diversity and the divisions within the federation.
The South-East’s present configuration traces back to the dissolution of the old Eastern Region. Successive state creation exercises carved the Igbo heartland into smaller units — first East Central State in 1967, then Anambra and Imo in 1976, and later Abia and Enugu in 1991, with Ebonyi created in 1996. Yet, the region was left with only five states while the North-West and North-East have six each, and the North-Central and South-South have six, with the North-West boasting seven.
This numerical shortfall affects federal appointments, legislative seats, revenue allocation, and even political bargaining power. It is against this backdrop that the demand for a “sixth state” has gained enduring legitimacy.
During the 2005 National Political Reform Conference and the 2014 National Conference, South-East delegates unanimously called for the creation of one additional state to balance Nigeria’s geo-political structure. Etiti State was then listed as the most viable option. Yet, nearly two decades later, the demand remains unresolved — until recent legislative moves revived it.
The Etiti State proposal has its roots in the old idea of a “Central State” envisioned during the 1976 state creation debates. Its name — Etiti, meaning “centre” in Igbo — reflects both geography and symbolism: a proposed administrative heart connecting the five existing South-East states.
In July 2024, Hon. Amobi Ogah, representing Isuikwuato/Umunneochi Federal Constituency of Abia State, sponsored a bill in the House of Representatives seeking constitutional amendment for the creation of Etiti State. The bill, co-sponsored by four lawmakers from across the South-East, proposed carving the new state out of portions of Abia, Anambra, Ebonyi, Enugu, and Imo States.
The proposed capital, Lokpanta, sits strategically near the Enugu-Port Harcourt expressway, symbolically placed at the centre of the South-East.
According to the draft bill and supporting documents, Etiti would comprise the following Local Government Areas (LGAs):
- From Imo State: Okigwe, Onuimo, Isiala Mbano, Ehime Mbano, Ihitte-Uboma, Obowo, Ideato North.
- From Abia State: Isuikwuato, Umunneochi.
- From Ebonyi State: Ivo, Ohaozara.
- From Anambra State: Orumba North, Orumba South.
- From Enugu State: Aninri, Awgu, Oji River.
This spread gives Etiti a total of about eleven LGAs, forming a population base estimated at over 3.5 million people.
Supporters of the Etiti proposal frame their case around four major arguments: parity, development, viability, and historic consensus.
- Parity with Other Zones: The South-East’s demand for a sixth state is widely recognized as a matter of national equity. Hon. Ogah told the House, “Every other region has six or more states. Our region, the South-East, remains short-changed. Etiti State offers a fair and feasible correction.”
- Developmental Access: Many of the LGAs listed are rural and underdeveloped. Proponents argue that a new state would bring governance closer to these communities, decentralize administrative power, and attract federal investment.
- Resource Viability: Etiti’s proposed territory is rich in limestone, kaolin, granite, and agricultural potential. There are also emerging industrial bases such as the Masters Energy Industrial City in Isuikwuato, cited by advocates as evidence of growing economic viability.
- Historic Mandate: Delegates from the 2005 and 2014 national conferences had previously endorsed Etiti as the consensus choice for a sixth South-East state. Chief Chuku Wachuku, former Director-General of NDE, reaffirmed that “Etiti was the agreed choice across all delegations.”
Despite its symbolic appeal, Etiti faces major hurdles:
- Constitutional Rigidity: Creating a state in Nigeria requires amendments to several constitutional sections — including Sections 8 and 9 — and approval by two-thirds of the National Assembly, all affected State Houses of Assembly, a local referendum, and presidential assent.
- Administrative Complexity: Unlike previous state creations drawn from one or two parent states, Etiti involves five donor states, making coordination politically sensitive.
- Intra-Regional Rivalry: Competing proposals such as Orlu State and Adada State risk fracturing support within the region.
- Donor State Resistance: States may resist losing LGAs that contribute to their revenue or political strength.
As of mid-2025, Etiti’s bill had passed its second reading in the House of Representatives but had not yet been considered by the Senate.
Running parallel to Etiti’s campaign is the Anioma State proposal, sponsored by Senator Ned Nwoko, representing Delta North Senatorial District.
His proposal — Senate Bill 481 — seeks to carve out the nine LGAs of Delta North to form Anioma State, which, according to the senator, would become the sixth state of the South-East geopolitical zone.
Proposed LGAs of Anioma State
- Aniocha North
- Aniocha South
- Ika North East
- Ika South
- Ndokwa East
- Ndokwa West
- Oshimili North
- Oshimili South
- Ukwuani
These LGAs, located in the north of Delta State, are predominantly Igbo-speaking communities with deep cultural and linguistic ties to the South-East.
Senator Nwoko’s argument rests on identity and fairness.
He insists that Anioma people are “the western Igbos” unjustly separated from their ethnic kin by colonial boundaries. “Our inclusion in the South-East is both cultural and just,” Nwoko stated in his Senate speech, adding that “Nigeria’s federal balance cannot be achieved without correcting the anomaly of the South-East’s five-state structure.”
Anioma proponents point to the region’s economic strength — with Asaba (the current Delta capital), Onicha-Ugbo, and Agbor as thriving urban centres — as evidence of viability. They also argue that the nine LGAs have robust internal revenue potential, extensive road networks, and active manufacturing sectors.
Unlike Etiti, the Anioma proposal enjoys significant traction in the Senate, with over 85 senators reportedly endorsing the bill. This has made it one of the most discussed items in Nigeria’s ongoing constitutional review process.
Former Abia State Governor Orji Uzor Kalu and other prominent South-East figures have voiced support, saying Anioma’s creation would “complete the Igbo map.”
However, the Anioma movement has not been without scandal. In early 2025, several local government chairmen from Delta North alleged that their signatures were forged on a document purportedly endorsing the new state.
This revelation cast a shadow over the process, raising questions about legitimacy and consent. The Delta State government, under former governor Ifeanyi Okowa’s influence, has also expressed reservations about losing nearly one-third of the state’s landmass and population.
Additionally, Nigeria’s geopolitical structure complicates Anioma’s case. Delta State belongs to the South-South zone, and moving its portion to the South-East may require broader constitutional zoning adjustments — potentially igniting counterclaims from other regions.
When compared side by side, Etiti and Anioma represent distinct approaches to solving the same problem.
| Criteria | Etiti State | Anioma State |
|---|---|---|
| Parent States | Drawn from five SE states (Abia, Anambra, Ebonyi, Enugu, Imo) | Drawn from Delta (South-South zone) |
| Geo-Political Alignment | Entirely within South-East | Currently in South-South, but claims SE identity |
| Proposed LGAs | 11 LGAs across 5 states | 9 LGAs within one state |
| Capital | Lokpanta | Asaba (likely) |
| Sponsor | Hon. Amobi Ogah | Sen. Ned Nwoko |
| Legislative Progress | Passed 2nd reading in House | Endorsed by 85+ Senators |
| Key Challenges | Multi-state coordination | Donor state resistance, zonal reclassification |
| Core Argument | Parity, development, resource viability | Identity, parity, legislative momentum |
Both proposals are framed around the same principle — giving the South-East a sixth state — but their paths diverge sharply in terms of political geography and practicality.
Nigeria’s 1999 Constitution (as amended) makes the creation of new states deliberately arduous. Section 8 outlines the process:
- A request supported by at least two-thirds of representatives of the area seeking creation;
- Approval by a majority of all members of the National Assembly;
- Approval by two-thirds of all State Assemblies in the Federation;
- A referendum by at least two-thirds of the residents in the proposed area;
- Presidential assent.
This multi-layered hurdle has prevented any new state creation since 1996. The process ensures broad consensus but also virtually locks the system against change.
Both Etiti and Anioma proponents must therefore navigate complex political negotiations, intergovernmental diplomacy, and public persuasion.
Beneath the surface of equity rhetoric lies a rich layer of politics.
For Hon. Amobi Ogah and his colleagues, leading the Etiti campaign offers regional leadership visibility and legacy value. For Senator Ned Nwoko, spearheading Anioma State aligns with his long-standing advocacy for federal equity and strengthens his influence within Delta and the Senate.
At the regional level, governors, traditional rulers, and pressure groups have begun aligning along two camps — the Pan-Etiti Movement and the Anioma Advancement Forum — each mobilizing grassroots support.
However, internal divisions within the South-East may prove decisive. Without a unified regional consensus, the National Assembly may find it easier to delay or shelve both proposals.
If the Etiti bill passes through the legislative labyrinth, Nigeria will gain its 37th state, and the South-East will achieve long-sought parity. The move could rejuvenate regional development and enhance federal allocation. But donor states may demand compensation and face internal reorganization.
If Anioma clears legislative and constitutional hurdles first, Nigeria’s federal map may be redrawn to rezone Delta North into the South-East. This could spark wider demands from other zones and test Nigeria’s constitutional rigidity.
Legislative inertia or political turnover may freeze both proposals, leaving the South-East with its historical imbalance intact.
A negotiated path could see one state approved first, with a commitment to consider the other in the next review cycle — a possibility if the 2027 political transitions align.
The push for Etiti and Anioma is not just a South-East issue — it is a national stress test.
Every new state affects federal revenue sharing, representation, and administrative overhead. Nigeria’s already strained economy, high cost of governance, and weak fiscal sustainability raise the question: can the federation afford more states?
On the flip side, denying the South-East parity perpetuates a historical imbalance that undermines national cohesion.
The real solution may lie not just in creating states, but in redefining the powers and financial autonomy of subnational governments — a larger conversation that both proposals could help trigger.
Even if a new state emerges, it must avoid the pitfalls of bureaucratic expansion without productivity. Governance capacity, fiscal prudence, and accountability will determine whether Etiti or Anioma becomes a model or a mistake.
To succeed, a new state must:
- Develop a lean and efficient civil service;
- Leverage local industries and natural resources;
- Attract private investment;
- Build modern infrastructure with federal and international support;
- Foster social cohesion among its constituent LGAs.
Without this, state creation risks becoming another symbolic gesture — politically satisfying but economically hollow.
The twin proposals of Etiti and Anioma reignite Nigeria’s unfinished conversation about fairness, representation, and federal balance. Whether through the cultural bridge of Anioma or the geographic centrepiece of Etiti, the South-East’s quest for a sixth state represents a deeper longing for inclusion and justice within the Nigerian union.
But the success of either will depend not merely on legislative arithmetic, but on vision, coordination, and authenticity.
In the end, Nigeria’s next state — if created — must not only balance the numbers but also demonstrate that state creation can deliver better governance, not just more bureaucracy.