This articles examines the applicability of the federal form of government appies is african multiculturalism?

According to someit is the best way to rule big states , to decentralize authoritarian power , to appease internal tensions or to reconstruct countries torn apart by wars such as Somalia. Adopting a critical historical approach, it explores the experiences of federalism in Nigeria and in Sudan Synoninom of democratization, the adoption of federal systems has regained interest since the 1990s, especially in Ethiopia. However, the negative experiences of Sudan and Nigeria leave some doubts. Some scholars analyzed the two cases to study whether federalism applies to Sub-Saharan Africa realities . Retracing important landmarks of the history of the two nations and using an institutional and practical approach, the paper examines the factors that lead the two countries to adopt the federal model, identifying differences and similarities between their form of governments. Since the 1900s, Nigeria and Sudan had many points of convergence. Both were characterized bycultural, religious and educational inequalities and by divergences in regional development. Moreover their state apparatuses were based on the british model, which contributed, through the indirect rule system of government, to perpetuate cultural differences and ethnical rivalries. Culltural differences between Nord and South were so deep-seated, that the elites attempted to stop the decolonization processs. In this context, federalism for Sudan and regionalism for Nigeria, seemed to be the best methods to respect cultural differences but they didnt resolved regional tensions. In fact,in in Sudan the project of regionalism failed as a consequence of the establishment of the dictatorship of Nimeiry and the following statute, which promoted centralization. In Nigeria, starting from the 70s, federalism was promoted by dictators to rule better, avoiding minorities exclusion and calming their pretensions. On the contrary in Sudan, the redivision relaunched the civil war, giving birth to a new contrast between South and North. Thereafter, an Islamic committee proposed a national model of federalism transcending the the souths needs of autonomy. The common problem was that the federal solution was proposed in both cases during a military regime and the result was an hegemonic central power and many weak territorial autonomies. In Nigeria federalism seems to have been more successful thank to the popular legitimization and the better efficiency of the redistribution of resources.