Nigerians Clamour For A New Constitution

With myriad of challenges facing the country now, can the National Assembly led-Constitutional amendment process bring the elixir to ongoing agitations and clamour for brand new constitution ahead of 2023 elections?


Nigeria which prides itself as Africa’s largest democracy is plagued with intractable socio-political and economic challenges shaking her unity as a nation. These ranges from security challenges resulting in ongoing insurgency in north-east region for over a decade; banditry in north-west and middle belt regions; herders/farmers clashes over access to resources (pasture and water) beginning in the middle belt region but spreads to southern regions of the country. As if the earlier challenges were not enough, agitations for self-determination and calls for secession arose, led by groups in south-east, south-south and south-west geopolitical regions, driven largely by the demand for resource control, perceived exclusion and discriminations in political appointments and juicy offices at the federal level.

These have resulted in the moves also for constitutional amendments to address these nagging problems “to save the nation from its problems including disintegration”. While a school of thought has recommended the need to amend the present 1999 Constitution to address the new challenges and the expectations of the people with modern day realities, others are calling for a brand new Constitution for the country if it must survive this intractable crises as the current document is defective and will not deliver justice and fairness for its teeming citizens.

The National Assembly, the nation’s highest legislative body in opting for the amendment of 1999 constitution is very much abreast of its historic role as arbiters, which will help resolve these crises through legislative intervention. Towards this end, President of the Senate, Ahmad Lawan, who spoke at the national public hearing on the review of the 1999 Constitution held from June 3 to June 4 in Abuja, affirmed the desire of the ninth National Assembly to give vent to this process. The Senate president noted, during plenary in a letter addressed to him by chairman of the National Assembly Constitution Review Committee, Senator Ovie Omo-Agege described the zonal public hearings held across six geo-political zones of the country as “quite successful” exercise. Lawan appealed to Nigerians to seize opportunity provided by public hearing to state their positions on issues that would improve the quality of governance.

“Let me also congratulate members of the Constitution Review Committee of the Senate that conducted the public hearings across the country. “In fact, the report we received has shown that in all the centers, the public hearings were quite successful.” He noted thus, “We believe that we must do whatever is necessary to provide a platform for Nigerians to hear their views, give their positions and canvass for whatever they feel would make our country better, and make governance more efficient and successful. “Like I said before, we have no pre-conceived positions on anything and, therefore, this is the time for our citizens to take the opportunity,” he added.`

All said and done, some Nigerians consider the 1999 Constitution a military-driven document and that the reference to ‘We the people’ in the constitution does not truly represent Nigerian people. Several political and non-state actors have therefore advocated for change of the constitution. It is instructive to note that other than the first, second and third alterations to the 1999 constitution enacted during the Sixth National Assembly (2007-2011), no significant amendments have been made to the country’s constitution. The Seventh National Assembly (2011-2015) undertook constitution review process, but it ran into a logjam despite huge public resources deployed into the process. That effort represented first genuine participatory process in constitution making since the country’s return to democracy in 1999 with public hearings held across the six geo-political zones of the country at the constituency and zonal levels.

Nonetheless, one of the proposed amendments on the removal of presidential assent from process of constitutional amendment unsettled members of political class with former President Goodluck Jonathan vetoed these amendments. Since all the amendments were submitted as a single Bill, the former Nigerian leader refused to grant his assent to all the changes. Facing the threat of legislative override of the veto, Jonathan dragged the National Assembly to the Supreme Court and sought to annul the amendments for failure to comply with the required super majority. The Supreme Court directed all parties to maintenance of the status quo; restrained National Assembly from overriding the presidential veto, and ordered the President and National Assembly to resolve their differences over the issues, which the court said were simple.

This saga which occurred few days to expiration of Jonathan’s administration, and the veto was not overridden, thereby leading to the lapse of the amendment bills without the court passing a final judgment. The Assembly adopted a piecemeal approach to this constitution review process, with each proposed amendment presented in separate bills. Conversely, the Eighth Assembly (2015-2019) under the leadership of Senator Bukola Saraki commenced the review process with establishment of two separate Ad hoc Committees in House of Representatives and Senate in January 2016. The National Assembly adopted piecemeal approach towards constitution review process with each proposed amendment presented in separate bills, to avert the fate of the last amendment proposals which were rejected en bloc. A total of 33 bills, some of which bundled together related bills making the total 46 bills, covering a range of issues were eventually considered.

On 26 and 27 July 2017, the Senate and House of Representatives respectively considered and voted for the passing of 41 distinct bills. The approved bills must still be endorsed in two third of the state legislative assemblies (24 of the 36), before they are sent to the President of the Republic for his assent. Though, there are grey issues that have not been addressed, the proposed amendments should be commended as a step in the right direction. Some of the most laudable amendments include the reduction of eligibility ages to run for offices, introduction of independent candidacy, timelines for appointment of ministers and commissioners, enhanced autonomy for local governments and state legislatures vis-a-vis the state governor, and allocation of funds to the state judiciary as a first line charge from the Consolidated Account.

Other key proposals as quota representation of women in national and state cabinets, devolution of powers to federating states, and separation of the office of attorney general of the federation from the office of minister of justice failed to get approval of the legislators. The proposed amendments did not also include some major reforms approved in the Seventh Assembly, including but not limited to guarantees of some justiciable socio-economic rights. Moreover, political actors dominated the reform process, with few opportunities for genuine popular and civil society engagement.

The reduction of the age of eligibility to run for office, popularly referred to as the ‘Not Too Young to Run’ Bill, was one of the most advocated for issues in the constitutional amendment process under that dispensation. The Bill sought to reduce the minimum age to run for presidency from 40 to 35, for state governorship from 35 to 30, for Senate from 35 to 30, for House of Representatives from 30 to 25, and sets the minimum age for membership to state House of Assembly at 25. Some of the amendments sought to enhance the autonomy of local governments and empower state legislators vis-a-vis governors. A number of the proposed amendments will have the effect of reining in executive discretion both at federal and state levels. One of the proposed amendments sought to remove the veto powers of the president over constitutional amendments. Another proposal sought to reduce the period during, which the President may withdraw funds from the Consolidated Account after the expiration of the annual budget from six to three months. While the Nigeria’s fiscal year ends in December of every year, it has become a norm for budgets to be signed late into a new fiscal year.

For instance, the 2017 budget was only signed into law on 12 June 2017, while the 2016 budget on 5 May 2016 after several allegations of budget paddings broke in the media. The new requirement no doubt will hasten the adoption of budgets if the proposal passes. The proposed amendments would remove presidential veto of constitutional amendments, constrain executive discretion in the approval of budget and the appointment of cabinet members, and limit their terms. One of the proposed amendments requires the President/governors to appoint ministers and commissioners within 30 days of inauguration to form executive councils at the federal and state level. There have been several instances where elected officials do not timely make these necessary appointments.

The 1999 Constitution only requires the President to ‘appoint at least one minister from each State, who shall be an indigene of such state’, without providing for a timeline. In addition, the proposed amendments also require the president/governors to add portfolios to the list of appointees sent for Senate/State House of Assembly confirmation. Currently, names are just sent to the House of Assembly for clearance with no portfolios attached. If passed, the proposed amendment will effectively allow better assessment of candidates and ensure qualified persons are given the right portfolio. There is also a proposal that seeks to ban anyone who succeeds a president or a governor and completes the tenure of such president or governor from contesting for that same office more than once.

In effect, under the envisaged amendment, when a deputy succeeds a president or a governor, the person is considered to be spending the first of the two-term constitutional limit, regardless of the length of the replacement period. The proposed amendment forecloses a situation that involved former President Jonathan following the death of Late President Umaru Yar’Adua. His deputy, Jonathan, completed the remaining tenure between 2010 and 2011, participated in the 2011 election and won a four-year term, and still ran for election again in the 2015 election, which he lost. The proposed amendment would foreclose such a scenario. A contentious proposed amendment would guarantee immunity of legislators, without excluding responsibility for criminal offences. Another amendment proposes to include all past Senate presidents and speakers of the House of Representatives as members of the Council of State provided they were not removed from office through impeachment. The bill seeks to promote the inclusion of all arms of government into the Council, which is chaired by the President and includes former presidents and heads of state, former chief justices, incumbent governors and the federal Attorney General. Currently, the Senate President and Speaker of the House of Representatives are only members of the Council during their term in office.

An issue of great concern to Nigerians is the devolution of power. Many have described the centralised nature of the Nigerian federation as a major bulwark against equal development of states and the effective exploration of resources for development purposes. Additionally, a proposed amendment to move certain items, such as fiscal relations and policing, from the exclusive federal legislative list to the concurrent legislative list failed earlier. The devolving of more powers to the states was one of the contentious issues as many saw it as a way to smuggle the state formation and restructuring agenda into the constitution. In fact, one of the approved amendment proposals seeks to remove state electoral commissions from the constitution, thereby undermining state autonomy in this regard. Despite persistent agitation, a proposal for the creation of new states and the restructuring of state boundaries also failed.

Similarly, during the 2014 political confab, there were failed demands for creation of additional 18 states to the 36-state structure in existence. Some of them are bound to be represented, especially state police and revenue allocations. Many Nigerians are now happy about citizen’s engagement on the process that hereto was shrouded in secrecy and conducted within the confines of two legislative chambers, with little opportunity for inputs from the people and civil society organisations. The increased participation by citizens further opens the space for constructive engagement with the National Assembly as bastion of participatory democracy. In spite of the clamour for restructuring, calls for the convening of a national conference to address nagging issues in the polity, the National Assembly continues to provide a level playing field for all to canvass variant positions in key issues with decorum and civility.

Ms. Idayat Hassan, Executive Director, Centre for Democracy and Development (CDD), a leading civil society organisation in Nigeria posits the need for Nigeria to come out with “more workable constitution this time around. While in the same vein, in his contribution, President Muhammadu Buhari noted in his democracy day address, that he was not averse to constitutional amendments or producing a new one, the processes must be done through the National Assembly. Veteran legal practitioner, Chief Afe Babalola, on his part described as a waste of time and energy the planned review of 1999 Constitution by the National Assembly. He proposed that the National Assembly should rather move for a National Conference where issues bedeviling the country could be identified, discussed and resolved through a roundtable talk. He insists that “there is no way the National Assembly can amend 1999 Constitution to cure the inherent defects, if the fraud in the system is not first got rid of. Chief Babalola, the founder of Afe Babalola University, Ado Ekiti, whose submission came a day after the Ondo State Governor, Rotimi Akeredolu, told members of Senate Committee on the Review of the constitution that a national dialogue was the way forward.

Governor Akeredolu, who was not necessarily opposed to the exercise, said the clamour of the majority of the people for a national dialogue should be given a chance. The National Assembly had started its zonal public hearings where inputs are gleaned from the various constituencies to form the basis for legislative action on the document. For Babalola, the 1999 constitution in practice is defective and needed to be reworked, having been bequeathed to the people by the military.

According to him: “Against the background of the massive demand by Nigerians, home and abroad, for a true federal constitution made by the people and for the people, the National Assembly is calling for Public Hearing in the country’s six Geo-political Zones for people’s inputs on any issue of interest to enable the National Assembly to amend the 1999 constitution.” “The root cause of our problems, which has brought Nigeria to the brink of extinction, is the 1999 Constitution foisted on it by the Military when it was exiting the reign of governance in 1999. The fact remains that you cannot amend a Coconut tree which has no branches to become and Iroko tree which has branches.

The legal luminary surmised that, “Why then is the National Assembly afraid of calling a National Constitutional Conference to fashion out a new true federal constitution and come up with a Parliamentary system of government like we had in 1963. The proposed amendment to the 1999 Constitution, whichever way you look at it, is a futile exercise. We all know that previous sessions of National Assembly had made laws to convene National Conference.” As the process continues, the National Assembly Committees is finalizing their reports to lay the outcome of the process in the plenary of both Senate and House of Representatives, which will be considered clause by clause after which it also go through the ritual of harmonization by both chambers. The road to a new constitution is still far from over as two other important processes, which include consideration of proposed amendments by each state House of Assembly before it is sent to the president for his assent. With the 2023 election around the corner, Nigerians are anxious, hoping that this exercise will not end as the previous amendments that failed to deliver the goods. Time will tell.