Towards A Peoples’ Constitution (I)

After the nationwide public hearing on the review of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria,  convoked by the House of Representatives in all 360 Federal Constituencies across the country, on Saturday, November 10, 2012, issues raised by the exercise have continued to dominate public discourse. They have also put on the line the credibility of the National Assembly.

Apart from a few cases of partial or non-compliance details and the attack of some law makers in a constituency, the exercise went well across the country. In addition to the involvement of the people in the process, the prospect of changing some extant clauses from the constitution can only be exciting.

This is perhaps why we should commend the National Assembly for commencing the review process in line with the yearnings of majority of Nigerians. We hope, however, that the ultimate outcome of the exercise will reflect the true wishes of the people and not that of the political class only.

Surely, while the process offers the people an opportunity to provide a stronger basis for the existence of the country, a negative outcome can actually take Nigeria many years backward. Indeed, if this review does not bring about a substantial and indeed positive change in the constitution, the exercise cannot be said to have succeeded.

This has become an issue because of the systematic use of some Nigerians to resist every change suggested by the present government. The ambush of the planned elimination of criminal wastes in the downstream sector of the oil and gas industry, through the removal of petroleum subsidy and the restructuring of the Naira have only suggested that some people may be benefiting from the deplorable conditions in the country and would not mind if the country crashes.

Added to this, is the fact that handling of the exercise in some states fell short of expectation as the quality of contributions from such areas can hardly be said to reflect the true views of the people. In some places, it was more of a hush-hush affair, while the envisaged professional and representative groups were not involved.

In the first place, since the process was not to be an exclusively elitist affair; we had expected that some kind of enlightenment should have been conducted with a view to generating dispassionate analysis in smaller groups before the public hearing.

The Tide also notes with dismay the kind of media reports that came out of a lot of the public hearing. Indeed, the greater emphasis focused on States and local Governments creation gave the impression that the whole idea was about the demand for more states in Nigeria. A review of the 1999 Constitution requires much more than just political space for adventurers.

From a mine-field of issues listed on the House of Representative’s template for discourse, we expected the media to help set an agenda of priorities listing pressing national needs that frequently hinder the practice of Federalism in its true form. That we think should occupy a central place behind which many others could follow.

What, for instance is wrong with the system? If nothing, theoretically, what with its practice? Which are the key components of a Federal State? Should the States in the union, not be granted, as of right, the powers to articulate, fashion and manage their economies and resources?

What should be the limit of such powers in areas such as internal State Security, Resource Control, Creation and Funding of Local Governments and most importantly, the ceiling on derivation and likely taxes accruable to the centre.

To be sure, the constitution amendments contemplated must be such that remove all encumbrances to the practice of true federalism, as that alone would encourage ingenuity, better fiscal discipline and more creative resource development, management and control, and not one that sees  States in the union being utterly dependent on hand-outs from the centre.

With the right expression of a Federal Government, issues like Land Use Decree, Resource Control, Local Government Administration among others would be addressed naturally.

In like manner, the nagging issue of State police, working side by side the federal command should have been taken care of, as obtains in similar Federated unions. This is because, issues that should be covered by one are clearly defined as distinct from crimes of national nature that require central handling.