CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS: THE GRAND ANTI-CLIMAX OR RED HERRING?

DA DA IDO

DITV/ALHERI RADIO, KADUNA

NEWS ANALYSIS/COMMENTARY

21st November, 2011

CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS: THE GRAND ANTI-CLIMAX OR RED HERRING?

          President Goodluck Jonathan finally inaugurated a committee which he charged with the task of reviewing some aspects of the constitution. The committee, made up of eminent and vastly-experienced Nigerians is however to undertake only a review of past efforts at constitutional amendments, and reports of other committees which looked at the Nigerian political system and its relationship with our constitution. In specific terms, the President ordered the committee to stay off issues and areas which are likely to generate much disagreements and debates, or involve the necessity to assembly large groups of people in order to achieve consensus. Instead, the committee, headed by no less a chairman than the former Chief Justice of Nigeria, Alfa Belgore is to review and advice on what the President referred to as settled issues. Settled issues, according to the President, are areas where previous committees or fora have deliberated on, and had made extensive recommendations on, and around which there is national consensus. These will include recommendations on national security; human rights and social security; people’s charter and national obligations; models and structure of government; public service, power sharing and local government reforms and the economy. Other areas where President says there are firm agreement include proposals for judicial and legal reforms, constitutional amendments relating to the public service, anti-corruption, State-Local Government Joint Account, traditional institutions and cultural reforms, and issues around civil society, labour and trade unions, and the media.   

          The committee is therefore basically limited to reviewing reports and recommendations made earlier. Presumably, the President will then use its report to decide which of the settled issues and safe areas he wishes to present to the legislature and the nation for constitutional amendments. The committee will not engage in fresh assessment of issues and areas which need amendment. It will not be expected to raise issues outside those prescribed by the President’s definition of settled issues, or issues around there is wide consensus. It will not attempt to break new grounds, or capture the national or sub-national mood around specific issues which a constitutional amendment should address. In short the committee will not do anything beyond what an administrative committee in the public service will do, which is to compile a summary of observations and recommendations from 1996 to date which have not been implemented.    

Predictably, the President’s initiative has met with a barrage of criticisms, particularly from people who had looked forward to an exercise which will involve a substantial alteration of the nature of the Nigerian federal system and some obvious structural defects and weaknesses which the operation of the constitution since 1999 have thrown up. Some prominent citizens and constitutional experts such as Professor Itse Sagay dismissed Jonathan’s review committee as second best and a very weak option. The Professor speaks for a large body of opinion which believes that only a constitutional conference involving all of Nigeria’s ethnic groups will discuss fundamental issues affecting their co-existence. In spite of Mr President’s order to the Committee to avoid contentious issues, Professor Sagay advises it to look into political and fiscal federalism, or the manner the federating units relate and how they contribute to, and share the nation’s resources. A former President of the Nigerian Bar Association, Chief Olisa Agbakoba also says that Jonathan’s approach is not far enough, although any move to amend the constitution is welcome. Mr Ayo Opadokun of the Coalition of Democrats for Electoral Reforms (CODER) says the committee is a mere window dressing and a misplaced misadventure which is made up of recycled Nigerians who had previously participated in previous futile efforts at reviewing the constitution. He too wants to see a constitutional conference which should involve all of Nigerians ethnic nationalities before it becomes legitimate.

There will be many other Nigerians who will be disappointed by what will appear to be a huge anti-climax in the manner President Jonathan is approaching the review exercise. Given the fact that it was the President himself who ignited the old fire around the national debate over the suitability and workability of our constitution with this tenure review idea, the nation will now draw its own conclusion over his response to the interest he triggered. As soon as the President mooted the idea that he intended to present proposals to the national assembly to seek for an amendment to provide for single, seven-year term for the President the endemic national cynicism around constitutional reviews was aroused. Many Nigerians thought the President was attempting to confer certain advantages on himself. He denied this, of course, and as evidence of his sincerity, he reeled out other issues which he said would also be forwarded to the national assembly for review.  Immediately old tribal warlords dusted up old agendas for the expected constitutional review. New issues came up, many of them informed by recent political developments which are shaping perspectives about the nature and future of the Nigerian State. The national assembly set up its own constitutional review committee in anticipation of the President’s initiative; and as part of its perennial and expensive efforts at amendments of the constitution. Other bodies such as the Nigeria Bar Association also set up their own committees. It is safe to assume that there are currently many groups all over Nigeria looking into issues, problems and agendas which they want to push during the review exercise.

The President’s hamstrung review committee is therefore likely to be interpreted largely in the negative. It will be seen as a safe but ineffective approach to put something on the table for a nation whose appetite for some extensive review of the constitution has been whetted. A review in the limited manner President Jonathan wants will amount to very little. It will represent a listing of issues which the legislature may want to consider, but will not ruffle any feathers. It will not take up contentious issues such as the nature of the federal state, state creation, fiscal federalism, state-local government relations, and electoral reforms.

In the way President Jonathan plans to undertake this exercise, nothing much is likely to come out of it. The national assembly’s exercise may likely to take up some or all of these issues in one way or the other. But without a President wholly committed to a real and genuine constitutional reform, even this initiative will amount to nothing.

Another group of Nigerians will suspect that the committee is a red herring, an attempt to divert attention and achieve goals other than those made public. They will be excused for thinking along these lines one, because this committee will really do little; and two, because the Obasanjo experience is still haunting the nation. The President himself says he is still interested in pushing through the tenure extension amendment. There may be other intentions behind this exercise which are not yet known.

The calibre and integrity of the people assembled by President Jonathan are likely to be offended by the task assigned to them, if they had expected that they will be involved in some meaningful exercise. They could advise President Jonathan to ensure that their mandate is genuine and complete, or they could examine how they can both do the job and keep their personal integrity intact. Either way, Nigerians will look up to them not to lend themselves to a formalised deception or a fruitless exercise.