By Dianam Peresuo Dakolo
As though nemesis has caught up with the National Assembly in its misstep to have The Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as Amended) subjected to further review, practically nothing has been accomplished since February 6, when a 56-member Steering and Constitution Review Committee was inaugurated by Senate President Ahmed Lawan. There are spanners in the works because a huge budgetary allocation reportedly approved by the Senate for the exercise has yet to be received by its Committee. At the House of Representatives, the Special Committee on the Review of the Constitution published a notice titled ‘Call for Memoranda,’ signed by the Deputy Speaker of the House and Committee Chairman, Ahmed Idris Wase, and dated 17/11/2020.
A careful examination of what the Special Committee termed ‘thematic areas’ reveals that the entire scope of what the National Assembly seeks to present for amendment was exhaustively and conclusively dealt with in the National Conference of 2014 in Abuja. The areas are: 1. The Federal Structure and Power Devolution 2. Local Government/Local Government Autonomy 3. Public Revenue, Fiscal Federation and Revenue Allocation 4. Nigerian Police and Nigerian Security Architecture 5. Comprehensive Judicial Reforms 6. Electoral Reforms to strengthen INEC to deliver transparent, credible, free and fair elections 7. Socio-economic and Cultural Rights as Contained in Chapter 2 of the Constitution 8. Strengthening the Independence of Oversight Institutions and Agencies Created by the Constitution or pursuant to an Act of the National Assembly 9. Residency and Indigene Provisions 10. Immunity 11. The National Assembly 12. State Creation 13. Any Other Matter that Will Promote Good Governance and Welfare of all persons in our country on the principles of freedom, Equality and Justice.
In the aforesaid National Conference was an official acknowledgment by the Federal Government that the Constitution of this country was defective to a degree that hampered the functionality of critical organs of a federal system, both at the level of federating units (federal, state, local council) and at the level of institutions. It was the boldest and most successful attempt ever, since the General Conference of 1950 and subsequent National Conferences of 1953, 1954, 1957 and 1959, to get Nigerians of all ethnic nationalities, religious persuasions, political and economic ideologies, professions, etc. to debate and agree on how the country could be structured and how responsibilities, powers, and resources, are to be distributed, among other things.
At the end of five months (March – August 2014) of rigorous teamwork in research, examination and analyses of issues, as well as, sometimes, fierce and acrimonious debates, over 600 resolutions were reached by the 20 Conference Committees. The 492 Delegates at the Conference, arguably among the best of this country in every field of endeavour, produced a Final Report, of 10,335 pages, embodying recommendations that were far-reaching enough, relative to the expressed aspirations of citizens.
On 21 August, 2014 the National Conference Committee, led by its Chairman, His Lordship, Justice Idris Kutigi, handed that Report over to then President Goodluck Jonathan, who was required to transmit same to the National Assembly as an Executive Bill for appropriate legislative action. That, however, was not to be as the President, desperate for northern votes in the pending Presidential Election, was minded not to estrange conservative elements in the North who were unhappy with some recommendations of the Conference. It was on May 27, 2015, barely 48 hours to the end of his tenure, that Jonathan despatched the Report with a mere covering letter to Senate President David Mark. Expectedly no action was taken on it.
Some insight into the contents of the aforesaid Final Report would show that the Constitution Review exercise now underway in the National Assembly is absolutely unwarranted, and portrays our country as being in a recursive mode of one step forward, two steps backward. On ‘Local Government System,’ for instance, it was recommended that all 774 local government areas in the country should be scrapped and that states in the country were at liberty to create as many local governments as their circumstances and economic resources dictated. Anyone familiar with the harm done to this country by the military through utter arbitrariness in the creation of local governments – to confer on the North advantages in FAAC allocation and political appointments – would very much appreciate the import of such a recommendation.
Let’s take two states – Lagos and Kano – to guide us in the examination of this subject. As of 1966, that is, the First Republic, the geographical area that corresponds to today’s Lagos State had four administrative divisions (but five in 1968), while that which corresponds to today’s Kano and Jigawa States had two political divisions. Lagos State was divided into 20 local government Areas in 1976 and Kano State (which included the area now known as Jigawa State) had a similar number of local government areas. In 1991, by military decree, Kano State was split into two States – Kano and Jigawa – while Lagos remained intact. Today, Kano State has 44 local government areas, and Jigawa 27 local government areas, while Lagos State retains the 20 it had in 1976. Let’s bear in mind that Lagos State has a population of nearly 25 million.
Revenue Allocation as an issue was resolved in favour of states and local governments, as the Final Report recommended a reduction in the share of the Federal Government from 48.5 per cent to 42.5 per cent of all federally collected revenues (excluding allocations for Ecological Fund, Stabilisation Account, Federal Capital and mineral producing states0). States were to receive 35 per cent, up from 24 per cent, and local governments 22.5 per cent. As of this day, the Federal Government alone receives the aforesaid 48.5 per cent, even as state governments are known to be almost fully responsible for funding of federal institutions like state commands of the Nigeria Police. In addition, it controls the Ecological Fund of about 2 per cent.
A Modified Presidential System that incorporates critical elements of parliamentary democracy was recommended. In the prescribed system, the president would have to pick his vice from the National Assembly, and also at least 70 per cent of ministers from the Legislature. A government so constituted at the federal level would be more representative and also enjoy tremendous support as the cabinet is constituted by individuals who had submitted themselves to scrutiny in their respective constituencies and had been deemed fit, through the electoral process, for public service. The powers of the president to appoint and manipulate ministers would be significantly curtailed in such an arrangement as most of his cabinet rank ministers know they are members of parliament and have their seats assured. Also, the cost of governance would be significantly reduced.
Rotation of power was recommended at every level of government, on the basis of North and South for president, and senatorial districts for state governor. The six geo-political zones would take turns in an orderly manner to ensure equal access to power at the presidential level.
Instructively, heads of the Delegates for the North and South, Alhaji Ibrahim Coomasie, and Chief Edwin Clark, respectively, affirmed that the contents of the Final Report were arrived at in a determined effort to chart a way forward for the country out of the myriad challenges. According to Alhaji Coomasie, everything they did was “for one Nigeria,” clearly suggestive of a spirit of give-and-take, which is inconceivable in the present climate of ethno-religious bigotry, unrelentingly stoked by reactionary elements at the highest level of power. Chief Clark declared, “We came in, we came out and we conquered.”
If the 9th National Assembly were truly purpose-driven and conscientious, and realising that hundreds of billions of naira were expended on the National Conference of 2014, its leaders and members would have dusted off the aforesaid Final Report and proceeded to work on its recommendations. Initiating a fresh constitution review exercise is, to say the least, thoughtless and absurd. There is clearly no way the National Assembly could generate anything comparable to what was achieved in that Conference. The better for their image if they beat a retreat and save themselves the embarrassment of failure – that is, if at all any of them has any sense of pride and of personal integrity.
• Dakolo is a researcher and writer; author of the forthcoming book, Fifty Years of Nigerian History: From Genocide and War to Political Ambivalence
