Constitution Amendment: Another Wild Goose Chase? – By Comrade Timi Frank.

Recently the leadership of the National Assembly inaugurated separate special ad-hoc Committees to, again, review the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria in their respective chambers. Expectedly, many have expressed misgiving concerning the proposal. In the face of harsh economic realities and social dislocation nationwide, according to them, should the National Assembly kick start another ‘wasteful jamboree’ in the name of altering the Constitution? In other words, how crucial is it to start another amendment process when the last efforts could not secure presidential assent in spite of the huge financial outlay?
The last Assembly had done a good job obtaining national consensus on key challenges on the operation of the constitution as a coherent framework through its work on the 4th Alteration Bill. The necessity of bringing the process to a logical conclusion is therefore well justified; and should not be seen as another wasteful jamboree but rather as a process of revitalization in order to maximize value for money.
Let us not forget that since the promulgation of Decree No. 24 of 1999 by General Abubakar Abdulsalami’s military regime which formally established the 1999 Constitution, there have been several calls for its review in order to correct some of the identified hiatus and weaknesses in the document. For example, ex-President Olusegun Obasanjo’s administration set up a presidential technical committee on the review of the 1999 Constitution, on October 19, 1999, which received memoranda from the public, organised public hearings and submitted its report to the government in February 2001. The findings of the committee were later processed into “A Bill for an Act to provide for the Amendment of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria; 1999 and for Purposes Connected Thereto.” The Bill, however, expired with the life of that assembly in 2003 as the harmonisation committee of both chambers of the National Assembly did not conclude work on it before its dissolution.
Moreover, the National Assembly also set up its own joint Committee on the Review of the 1999 Constitution on October 30, 2003. Unfortunately, the effort could not fly as the Obasanjo government apparently starved the committee of necessary funds possibly as comeuppance. Moreover, on February 21, 2005, the Presidency inaugurated the National Political Reform Conference (NPRC) thinking, perhaps, it was part of executive responsibilities to rework the constitution. This move by the Obasanjo administration was viewed in many quarters as outright usurpation of the powers of the legislature in terms of its pre-eminent role in constitutional amendment process. According to Section 9 of the 1999 Constitution, the National and State Legislatures are constitutionally recognised to review and amend the document. By September 2005, the National Assembly read for the first time “The Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (Amendment) Bill 2006” which was later thrown out due to controversy over alleged tenure elongation (aka Third Term) attempt by Obasanjo.
Despite several billions of Naira spent, time and energy wasted, efforts expended to amend the constitution did not succeed as not even a Section of the 1999 Constitution was amended during the first eight years of the current democratic governance under the Obasanjo administration.
However, some level of successes have been recorded following renewed efforts since 2007 in constitution amendment. Within this timeframe, the 1999 Constitution had been amended successfully three times resulting in First, Second and Third Alteration respectively. The First amendment altered 31 provisions. The Second amendment altered 11 provisions; while, the Third amendment focused on a single item. The 4th Alteration contains far-reaching provisions – that would help transform the system of local government administration, provide for state police and the autonomy for State Houses of Assembly, among others.
Meanwhile, the history of constitutional amendment under the 4th Republic has produced varying levels of successes, setbacks and lessons which should not be lost on all of us. It has produced experiences that could be useful for the newly inaugurated committees by the 8th National Assembly – the Senate and the House of Representatives – in carrying out their assignment successfully.
Some .of the lessons discernible from the Constitutional Review Process in Nigeria since 1999 bears further elucidation as follows:
The constitutional amendment process is better driven by the legislature as envisaged by the framers of the 1999 Constitution for three main reasons in my view. First, the National Assembly and the House of Assembly in the 36 States of the Federation are the recognised authorities saddled with the responsibilities as enshrined under various sections of the 1999 Constitution. Second, the legislators at both national and state levels represent various constituencies which guarantee adequate representation of all strands of opinion in the country. As our representatives, members of parliament have the legitimate mandate and responsibility to rework the Constitution. Third, it helps shifting unnecessary pressure and or suspicion away from the Executive to the Legislature.
Similarly, as constitutionally recognized, actors in the constitutional review process – all the 36 States’ House of Assembly – cannot be forced to rubber stamp what the federal parliament has done. It is therefore necessary for the National Assembly to always collaborate with the States’ Assembly through the Conference of Speakers for successful outcome.
The piece-meal approach to constitutional review seems to be more effective than the holistic approach; the approach had led to three successful alterations in the last five to six years.
The cooperation of the executive arm of government with the legislature is of particular importance and crucial for the success of the process. It is on record that President Goodluck Jonathan’s assent to the first three alterations brought the process to fruition while his refusal to assent to the 4th alteration led to wasted efforts and money.
The input of the wide spectrum of Nigerians is also needed to secure the necessary national consensus for the process.
The donor community and development partners provide financial and technical assistance often rooted through the ever vibrant Nigerian civil society to support the process. In order to reduce the huge financial outlays often expended on the constitutional amendment process, the technical and funding support of the donor and development partners remain very strategic.
No amount of alteration can make a constitution transform a people or a nation if the political will is lacking to give bite to its provisions. For this, experts contend that what we lack in Nigeria as a modern society is not the lack of relevant laws, but the will to implement the provisions of the law, be it the Constitution or other Acts of the National Assembly. Yes, the Constitution as of necessity needed to be fine-tuned periodically to address certain national challenges undreamt of by the framers of the document, but what we direly need is to firm up our resolve to subject ourselves to the rule of law. By this I mean that we should come up to that pedestal where we can judge the success or failure of any administration, body corporate or individual based on their strict adherence to the rule of law in the execution of their developmental objectives, socio-economic policies, business activities and personal pursuits.
In the final analysis, it is well justified to see to the logical conclusion of the 4th Alteration Bill in addition to other areas that have not be covered.
However, frequent amendments of the Constitution do not present us as a disciplined society. Already, our constitution is voluminous, it has eight different chapters, 320 sections and seven schedules – a burden some constitutional experts believe we can do without.