“The Constitution for instance could never have imagined that a person elected to the highly respected office of governor would deliberately, despite the enormity of the expectations of his office, distract himself from governance by defecting from one party to the other”.
BY TONNIE IREDIA
The Patriots led by His Excellency Chief Emeka Anyaoku GCON former Secretary General of the Commonwealth and the Nigerian Political Summit Group (NPSG) are two reputable groups dedicated to the evolution of a true constitution for Nigeria. To this end, both groups are convening a National Summit in the next 48 hours on the future of Nigeria’s Constitutional Democracy. This writer was one of the resource persons invited to speak at the Summit. Painfully, I cannot attend because I am away on another assignment. Otherwise, it is the type of forum I would have loved to make a constructive dissent: namely that as attractive as the positive stand of the conveners of the Summit is, I doubt if our current defective constitution is more worrisome than our disposition as a people.
None of the things our people deprecate about our constitution can hardly be faulted. For instance, that we need a robust and genuine federal constitution rather than a unitary type is a solid point. It is also true that the centralization of political power in our country is a huge minus for proper growth and sustainable development. Our current constitution which was imposed by the military, precludes many citizens from maximizing their potentials to the fullest for the benefit of the nation. It would therefore be gratifying if something can be done to give Nigeria a good constitution. To that extent, the Patriots and the NPSG as well as all other well-meaning citizens who stand up for the attainment of that goal ought to be commended.
However, in a developing society such as ours, the making of a constitution is not the only way forward. Otherwise, we would have since found an acceptable one from all our unending efforts that have lasted beyond 100 years. There was the 1914 Constitution followed by the Clifford Constitution of 1922, the Richard’s Constitution of 1946, the Macpherson Constitution of 1951 and the Lyttleton Constitution of 1954. We have also had the Independence Constitution of 1960, the Republican Constitution of 1963, the Presidential Constitution of 1979 and another Presidential Constitution of 1989 that was not even used before it was discarded. We now have a bastardized 1999 Constitution.
It is against this backdrop of a costly constitution-making hobby that we need to introspect and ask ourselves certain basic questions. How come the British under whose tutelage we gained political experience do not have a written Constitution and yet do not have our type of nation-hood problems? Perhaps our problem is beyond that of an imperfect Constitution. It is interesting to note that many politicians and civil society activists have always been part of our constitution-making history. In 1988, for instance, 450 citizens were elected into what was known as the Constituent Assembly. To fill perceived gaps, the government of President Ibrahim Babangida nominated a quarter of the elected members to join those elected to draft a new constitution for the nation.
Indeed, the Constituent Assembly of 1988 arose from the findings of a Political Bureau under the chairmanship of S J Cookey set up two years earlier by Babangida’s government to review Nigeria’s political history and suggest solutions to past failures. In his days, General Sani Abacha also convened a Constitutional Conference of 1994-1995 to carry out same exercise. In 2014, President Goodluck Jonathan acted likewise in getting a conference to address constitutional challenges and promote national dialogue. Today, the National Assembly has mandated its members to go to their constituencies just like the 1986 Political Bureau did; to gather views from a cross section of Nigerians on their preferred political and Constitutional order. Certainly, a nation that is desirous of a viable constitution cannot be engaged in this process of doing the same thing over and over again while expecting a different result.
The Patriots and the NPSG no doubt mean well but they have to realize that no constitution can work well for Nigeria if it is operated by the present political class that have become experts in overturning constitutional provisions. We need to realize that a constitution like every other law has two main sides namely; a) the content or letters of the law and b) the spirit of the law. What we have been doing in Nigeria is to ignore the spirit of the law while putting the letters of the law into contentious definitions. The Constitution for instance could never have imagined that a person elected to the highly respected office of governor would deliberately, despite the enormity of the expectations of his office, distract himself from governance by defecting from one party to the other.
As a result, the Constitution did not provide for the removal of such a political joker. So, different governors are engaged in offensive political defections because there is no provision in the constitution that punishes defections by governors; they can only be impeached by state legislators who also defect along with the governors even though their own defection is legally punishable. The point to be made is that there is nothing wrong with a constitution which did not provide sanctions for defections by governors because everything cannot be written in a constitution. For a president or governor who cannot be sued while in office so that he is not distracted, the spirit of the law could not have envisaged that he would be engaged in self-distraction.
Whenever a president or governor is unable for whatever reason to attend to his duty, the deputy shall cover his principal’s duties. But if the principal refuses to transmit a letter to the legislature on his inability to work, the letters of the constitution in Section 145 say the legislature shall after 21 days, empower the deputy to act. Since the era of President Muhammadu Buhari, the political class has interpreted the letters of the law to mean that except the executive intends to be away for over 21 days, he is not obliged to handover the affairs of state to his deputy in his absence. In certain cases, our constitution specifically provides that the legislature’s approval of a request by the executive must be supported by two-thirds majority. To determine such a provision by voice votes as was recently done in Nigeria is not a problem of the constitution but that of the operators. In no sane clime would that occur.
The ordinary meaning of a referee is an impartial judge. Even if our constitution had not gone ahead to provide that officials of the Independent National Electoral Commission INEC must never have been involved in partisan politics every sane mind would have recognized that. But in Nigeria, some INEC officials are not only known for their partisanship, powerful forces veto objections to their inclusion in a game which involves their own political parties. Is that a problem of our constitution? Of course not. It is therefore clear that it is not every problem of Nigeria that is caused by our defective constitution. In other words, it is not enough to fight for a viable constitution; the fighters need to know that the operators of the constitution who love authoritarianism may reduce the long-fought-for viable constitution to the same state as the one they have been rescuing for longer than makes sense.
The current involvement of our legislators in town hall meetings that are called to redress certain imbalances and poor legislations would go nowhere. They are at best a season of renewed constitution-making jamborees. Neither the conveners nor the attendees look forward to a rational result-oriented end. The struggle for the creation of states from states that are themselves unviable settles the point. But then, the fear of well-meaning Nigerians that such a venture might further complicate our situation is worrisome but as usual it would be a miracle if it does not end as a barren exercise. One is tempted to believe that our political leaders are making it look like a reality to win more friends.
Whereas our federal legislators are enjoying the jamboree, other citizens believe it is a better evil. With their current preoccupation with the subject, leaders of Ministries, Departments and Agencies MDAs must also be enjoying the break from incessant requests in the name of oversight. In addition, the expenditures on the town halls are not as hurting as the building of street lights and boreholes with proceeds from extortion. The diversion of governance towards constitution-making may also enable civil society groups to begin to see the expedience of engaging in more effective social mobilisation to redress Nigeria’s perverted orientation.
