The Nation Newspaper

Tag: Constitutional amendment

  • Addressing security challenges through constitutional amendment

    Addressing security challenges through constitutional amendment

    As the nation grapple with series of security challenges, there has been clamour for various reforms to enhance the workings of the nation’s security personnel. Some, including state governors, legislators and many Nigerians alike have advocated for the establishment of state police, while some others have argued against it for fear of abuse. The 10th House of Representatives have introduced a new dimension to the review system, bringing together security chiefs to make their own input into the constitution review process. TONY AKOWE reports.

    Since the return to democratic rule in 1999, the Nigerian constitution has gone through five different alterations by the National Assembly. However, for the first time, the National Assembly, especially the House of Representatives are putting the security agencies into consideration why trying to amend the constitution. Although the 10th House of Representatives has promised to deliver a new constitution by December 2025, they have brought the security agencies in the country into the picture. The aim, according to Benjamin Kalu, Deputy Speaker and Chairman of the House Committee on Constitution Review is to get the views of the security chief on areas they need constitutional amendment to enhance their operations. He said the central aim he said is to synthesize and collate, directly from the security chiefs who are the key actors in the national security architecture, their candid perspectives on the “sickness” in the constitution that impedes the effective delivery of their mandates.

    He said “over the years, laws have been crafted on various aspects of national life, including security governance, often without a proper diagnosis of the real gaps and challenges as experienced by those on the frontline. To proceed with constitutional amendments without first hearing from you would be akin to a medical doctor prescribing treatment without a thorough diagnosis or treating a patient without listening to their symptoms. As legislators, we recognize that the work of parliament is much like that of a physician: we must depend on accurate laboratory diagnosis to prescribe the right medication to cure an ailment. We are here to listen to you, those who wear the shoes and know exactly where it pinches. Whether the issues are rooted in inter-agency harmonization, command authority, intelligence coordination, or other critical aspects, your insights are indispensable. You, our security sector stakeholders, are best positioned to articulate the constitutional and operational bottlenecks that hinder your effectiveness.”

    He said the outcome of the dialogue will help the legislators to make an informed decision in the course of the review of the constitution. To the Deputy Speaker, the overall objective of the dialogue aimed to advance the ongoing Constitution Review process, focusing on security and policing reforms, facilitate inter-agency collaboration for a unified approach to national security, discuss and refine legislative proposals, particularly those on state policing and intelligence coordination, enhance border security strategies and promote regional stability and encourage robust public engagement and stakeholder input. He said “Our commitment is to first diagnose, by gathering your experiential knowledge, institutional challenges, and actionable recommendations. Only then can we, as legislators, responsibly frame the “prescriptions”: the constitutional amendments and legislative reforms necessary to address these challenges. Importantly, this is not a one-off event. Before the finalization of the constitution review process, we will return to you, the stakeholders, to review the proposed prescriptions, collate further feedback, and ensure that the final version of the constitution truly reflects the needs and realities of Nigeria’s security sector. This approach ensures that the solutions we design are comprehensive, inclusive, and sustainable. The legislature, as we always say, is the solution hub for the hydra-headed problems facing our country. Through this collaborative, diagnostic approach, we aim to craft a legislative framework that delivers long-lasting national solutions”.

    READ ALSO: How we survived herdsmen attack that claimed 200 lives in Benue community – Residents

    This view is also held by Speaker of the House, Abbas Tajudeen who stressed the urgent need to review existing laws, close and streamline overlapping one and enact new ones to strengthen and reposition the security architecture to be able to confront existing and emerging security challenges that now threaten the nation. The Speaker said the complex and dynamic nature of the security challenges facing the nation demands new approaches and strategies that are multi-dimensional, adaptable, inclusive, and technology-driven. He said these new approaches and strategies must be backed by legal and institutional frameworks that would ensure enhanced capacity, capability, and competence for overall effectiveness. He stressed the need to deepen discussions on the constitution review by focusing on how best to achieve comprehensive security and policing reforms, improve cooperation and coordination between security agencies, enhance border security for national and regional stability as well as make inputs into proposed security related bills including the bill that seeks to establish state police.

    Speaker Abbas said further that terrorism, banditry, piracy, militancy, and oil theft in different parts of the country combined to make life difficult for Nigerians. We therefore resolved to take the necessary legislative measures that would support the government’s drive to end insecurity. He also reiterate the need for renewed attention on House Bill 617, which supports the creation of state policing systems. This topical issue continues to generate public interest and concern. H also spoke on the need to enhance border security saying “the issue of border security is also critical and needs urgent legislative attention. The porous nature of Nigeria’s expansive border makes it vulnerable to crime and criminality. Although we have enacted the Control of Small Arms and Light Weapons Law, 2024, legislation on border security is necessary to strengthen this law and make it more effective. Stronger legal support in these and other critical areas can improve safety and give our people more confidence in our security agencies. Community involvement is also key to making our country safer. Security is not just the job of the military or the police; it is the collective responsibility of all Nigerians. Therefore, our reforms must reflect the voices of everyday Nigerians, and this justifies the importance of this dialogue. I am confident that the outcomes of this dialogue will meet our collective expectations”.

    President Bola Ahmed Tinubu admitted that the country stand at the crossroads of constitutional responsibility and national necessity. The President said “for decades, our Constitution has served as the bedrock of our democracy. Yet, the pace of change in technology, in the complexity of security threats, and in the dynamics of our federal structure has far outstripped the capacity of some constitutional provisions”. He said the time has come to realign Nigeria’s security architecture with her live realities, saying “our national experience has shown that neither centralisation nor fragmentation alone can secure the vast and diverse territory of Nigeria. The growing agitation for State Police, the complex demands of cybersecurity, and the urgent need for efficient intelligence sharing among agencies all point to one truth: our constitutional framework must evolve or risk becoming a danger to the very unity it was meant to protect”. The President said consensus security in the 21st century is cooperative, not competitive, adding that “terrorism in the North East, banditry in the North West, piracy in the Gulf of Guinea, farmer-herder clashes in the Middle Belt, and separatist agitations in the South East all share one characteristic: they transcend the capacity of any single agency or tier of government. This is why this dialogue is timely. It offers an opportunity to entrench constitutional provisions that encourage real-time intelligence sharing, joint operations planning, and unified strategic responses. As the commander-in-chief of our armed forces has emphasised repeatedly, security agencies must act as one, united in purpose, coordinated in action”.

    He said further that through enhanced intelligence fusion, joint task force operations, and synchronised air and ground offensives, Nigeria’s security forces have successfully dismantled several terrorist camps in the North-East, dislodged criminal enclaves in the North-West, and reduced incidents of piracy in the Gulf of Guinea. This integrated approach has led to a noticeable reduction in high-profile kidnappings and bandit attacks, with improved responses to cross-border threats, demonstrating the effectiveness of a whole-of-government strategy in safeguarding national security.”

    Chief of Defence Staff, Gen. Christopher Musa is worried that security agencies are impeded in their operation by certain legal constraints, saying as security threats continue to evolve, ranging from terrorism and insurgency, cyber warfare and hybrid threat,  it has  become imperative that a legal and institutional framework  evolves in tandem. General Musa stressed the need for a more robust, agile, and responsive national security system, adding that the Armed Forces of Nigeria is presently operating with a legal structure that is increasingly inadequate to address the complex future environment in which it function, saying “Our current laws were not designed to support the potential welfare of communities, particularly as we achieve threats and non-trivial future engagements. Operational ambiguities regarding command authority, undefined arrest and detention procedures during internal operations and traditional overlaps with other security agencies are adversely affected by efficiency and operational coherence.  These are concerns that have practical implications on mission success and the safety of our citizens. Therefore, Legislative reforms, particularly to the Armed Forces Act and key sections of the Constitution are not just overdue, but are critical.  They must be pursued with urgency and clarity of purpose”. He highlight some key legislative areas where reform is urgently required to include the recognition of modern security threats, including terrorism, cyber warfare, and misuse of digital platforms. The review he said should “consider the establishment of a field court martial and a sitting court martial in all military divisions and commands for speedy justice and accountability and the creation of a permanent commercial tribunal within each military division to ensure consistent access to justice. In the same vein, we advocate for explicit constitutional recognition of court-martial as superior courts of record, with concurrent judicial powers alongside federal and state high courts. This review should also consider empowering the armed forces to detain and investigate suspects during internal operations. This will reduce delay and enhance efficiency of kinetic and non-kinetic efforts.  Furthermore, the Nigerian Navy should be constitutionally authorized to collaborate with the Nigerian Customs and Immigration Service along the inland waterways to combat piracy and smuggling challenges, which remain persistent in our coastal and riverine areas. We also recommend the introduction of the merit-based selection process where the Chief of Defense staff provide three nominees per service to the President for appointment. This will foster transparency, professionalism, and constitutional continuity. We also propose the insertion of a clause enabling court-martial to try individuals captured in act of terrorism and insurrection under martial law conditions.  This will streamline the justice process in hiring scenarios and a high-stake authority”. The security chief said security is not merely about boots on the ground or advanced system.  It is also about the strength of our law, the clarity they bring, and the power they confer,  and the protection they guarantee”

    The National Security Adviser, Mallam Nuhu Ribadu said security and constitutional order are inseparable, adding that resilient, inclusive and forward-looking constitution is one of our most effective tools in preventing the conditions that give rise to insecurity.  Ribadu said “the constitution is not just a legal document.  It is the bedrock of national unity, justice and stability.  In our diverse and complex society. The constitution must continue to evolve to reflect the hope, and challenges of the Nigerian people.  At the Office of National Security Advisor, we understand that addressing national security requires more than just a kinetic approach.  It involves addressing grievances, protecting human rights, fostering trust between citizens and the state and ensuring that every Nigerian, regardless of ethnicity, religion, or region, feels a sense of belonging.  These are all constitutional issues.  I commend the National Assembly and all stakeholders here today for initiating this dialogue. It is only through inclusive, consultative, and transparent processes such as this that we can truly build a constitution that strengthens our federation and enhances our national security”. 

    While drawing a nexus between economic crimes and terrorism financing, Minister of Interior, Olubunmi Tunji-Ojo said “most of what we have in Nigeria today is economic crime. Most of these people they come to Nigeria to kidnap, raise funds to be able to fund insecurity in neighboring countries. So, there is a lot we need to do. If we continue to pay lip service, we don’t really look at the issues on ground, we will just be joking. Again, in reviewing our laws, we can’t deal with insecurity and not talk of terrorism financing. We must look at the EFCC Act and strengthen it. We must look at the issue of our border. Nigeria is at a point now that the US was before 9/11 attack. After the attack, the US sat down. They looked at emerging threat. When we talk about internal security, the first thing that come to mind is the military. That is a sign of failure of our internal security agencies. Let’s tell ourselves the truth. For me, the police in terms of adequate funding, I do not see a reason why the police should even rely on budgetary allocation. When you are fighting internal security, you must mobilize your citizens. We must sit down and look at our laws. With the attention we are paying to cyber security, we are still living 20 years behind.  You cannot continue to run a cyber security architecture on an ad hoc arrangement. There must be proper security framework. Let us look wholistically at our challenges. Let us anticipate broadly. Look ahead. Look at emerging security threats and proffer solutions to them.”

    The EFCC Chairman, Ola Olukoyede pick holes in the border control system of the country which allow the entering of illegal aliens into the country to operate freely. He disclosed that just recently, the commission arrested about 194 foreigners in one single operation at a building in Lagos for various offenses, adding that investigation revealed that about 15 of those arrested were ex-convict from their own countries.

    He said 50 of those arrested have already been convicted by the court and have started serving their sentence, stressing the need to focus on emerging security challenges, while also amending the nation’s laws to remove operational challenges faced by agencies in carrying out their responsibilities and prosecuting offenders.

    State Police

    The President also join the debate for state police. He said the debate over State Police is no longer theoretical. It is grounded in the daily fears and lived anxieties of Nigerians. According to him, “farmers afraid to tend their fields, traders unsure of safe passage, and communities abandoned to self-help”. He said the dialogue between the lawmakers and security operatives “must courageously interrogate the constitutional shifts required to move policing from the Exclusive List to the Concurrent List, enabling States with capacity to assume greater responsibility for their own security, while preserving national cohesion. We must learn from global best practices, adapting decentralised policing models that enhance local accountability without sacrificing national oversight”.

    The Inspector General of Police, Kayode Egbetokun believe that there was no need to amend the constitution to allow for state police. He believe that instead of having state-controlled police which can be abused, there was the need to strengthen the Nigeria Police and well-funded to carry out its constitutional responsibility. The Police boss the Nigerian Police Force is constitutionally established under section 214(1) of the 1999 constitution as amended, which provides that “there shall be a police force for Nigeria which shall be known as the Nigerian police force and subject to the provisions of this section, no other police force shall be established for the federation  or any part thereof.  Furthermore, section 215(1) provides for the appointment of the Inspector General of Police by the President on the advice of the Nigerian Police Council.  It also places the operational command and administration of the force under the leadership of Inspector Gener of Police. These constitutional provisions make clear the centralized character of policing in Nigeria and the operational authority entrusted to the Inspector General of Police under the supervision of the President and Police Council.

    He said “one of the most pressing and controversial issues under discussion today is the proposal to amend the constitution to allow for the establishment of state police, including the evaluation of HB 617, which seeks to provide legislative authority for this. Let me state  unequivocally that the National Police Force  acknowledges the rationale  behind the demand  for state police,  including the desire  for locally responsive policing,  quicker reaction to community-level threats,  and decentralized law enforcement presence. However, our assessment based on current political, institutional and social economic realities suggests that Nigeria is not yet decisively or politically prepared for the initialization of police powers to the state level. Key concerns include the possibility of political misuse of police powers at the state level, lack of funding capacity by most states to maintain and equip a state control force, the potential for fragmentation of national security, intelligence and command,  the absence  of a regulatory architecture  to ensure standard  and operational cohesion. Instead of fragmenting our policy authority, we propose that the focus of constitutional  and legislative reform  be directed towards  strengthening the Nigerian Police Force  through improved funding  and autonomy, establish state and community policing frameworks under the Nigerian Police Force’s provision,  standardize recruitment, training,  and discipline across any policing  functions. We urge the National Assembly  to consider legislative reforms  that prioritize enhanced  federal policing capacity  while allowing  for structured auxiliary support  from sub-national units  under strict  constitutional  and operational  safeguards”. 

  • Reps begin review of 305 Memoranda, 112 bills on constitutional amendment

    Reps begin review of 305 Memoranda, 112 bills on constitutional amendment

    The House of Representatives has begun review of the 305 memoranda and 112 bills on constitutional amendment, Deputy Speaker, Benjamin Kalu has said. 

    Speaking at a two day retreat of the Committee on Constitution Review, the Deputy Speaker who heads the House Committee on Constitutional Amendment, said his committee has received 305 proposals from Nigerians and 112 bills from members on various national issues.

    Chief Press Secretary to the Deputy Speaker, Levinus Nwabughiogu quoted him as saying that the memoranda and bills have been classified and referred to the various technical experts for review.

    The Deputy Speaker further explained the amendment of the Constitution is imperative to conform to the wishes of Nigerians and to also meet up with the present economic realities. 

    He said: “In keeping faith with the timeline it set for itself to achieve the first set of amendment by December 2025, the Committee has undertaken the following activities: pre-inaugural meeting; sub-committees on workplan development; inauguration of the Committee; call for memoranda appointment and inauguration of Consultants; retreat of the Secretariat and Consultants of the House joint Committee Secretariat and Consultants of both the Senate and the House

    “Today, the Committee will now be presented with the outcome of the review of the bills and memos received. 

    Read Also: Nigeria, Germany partner on $130bn global hydrogen market

    “Furthermore, the Constitutional amendments are instrumental in achieving better economic outcome by modernizing legal frameworks, enhancing institutional capacity, better enhancing Nigeria economic potentials, addressing emerging economic challenges and facilitating inclusive development.

    “Constitutional amendment have become imperative for a couple of reasons including the need to adapt to changing economic realities; to strengthen property rights and the rule of law; to promote economic freedom and fear competition; to foster fiscal responsibilities and budgetary discipline; to enhance governance and accountability; to empower subnational government and; to facilitate for structural reforms.

    “In line with our policy of full consultation with all segments of the people and the Nigerian Society, the Committee will immediately begin meeting with identified sectors and work with the following thematic areas: Local government matters, Prof. Nuhu M. Jamo; Judiciary, Barr. Mike M. Osuman (SAN); Electoral Matters, Hon. (Dr.) Samson Osagie; State Policing, Dr. Usman Ibrahim;  Gender issues, Prof. Anthonia T. Simbine; other special matters, Prof. Yusuf M. Yusuf; and Human rights, Chris Uche (SAN). 

    “Our consultations will extend to the Judiciary, election stakeholders, women groups, traditional rulers and civil society organizations among others, and presently we have received 305 proposals from Nigerians and 112 bills sponsored by Members are at various stages of consideration in the House. These memos have been analysed by the Committee Consultants and a report will be presented to the Members during the course of this deliberations.

    “We will also engage the citizens from across Nigeria’s six geo-political zones and will cap our consultations with a National Public hearing in Abuja before the end of 2024”.

    The Senate President urged the federal lawmakers to be thorough in the ongoing review of the constitution, stressing that every bill and proposal must receive the needed consideration.

    While applauding the work of the House  committee so far, Senator Akpabio said that time has come for Nigerians to take their destiny into their hands. 

    He said: “I believe that at the end of the day, the senate and the House of Representatives will create a blueprint that guides us towards a more united and prosperous Nigeria. This journey has just begun in this retreat. 

    “So, ladies and gentlemen, the challenges before us are significant, but so are the opportunities. This opportunity is to ensure that the bills, all bills we consider and comprehend are fair, reflective of the aspiration of the Nigerian people.

    “We must take into account the diverse perspectives and experiences that make up our great nation. By doing so, we lay a solid foundation for a constitution that truly represents the hope and dreams of every single Nigerian alive.

    “Now is the time for us to take our destiny in our hands. Change will not occur if we passively wait for someone else or for another institution or for a different time to undertake this venture with all the power to bring about a change ourselves and change the purpose, trajectory of our new country. We are the ones our country had been waiting for. We are the embodiment of the change our country needs.

    “Let us rise up to this duty and answer our country’s call, particularly at a time when we have a vice president as a legislator and a president as a legislator and even the wife of the president as a legislator. This is the right time for us to shape the future of our country through legislation”.

  • Constitutional amendment: Oyo Assembly approves 11 provisions

    Constitutional amendment: Oyo Assembly approves 11 provisions

    The Oyo State House of Assembly has approved 11 provisions but stepped down two others and rejected two of the provisions in the proposed amendment of the 1999 Constitution.

    At a debate to ratify the National Assembly’s alterations of the constitution sent to the Assembly in January, the Assembly, at yesterday’s plenary, presided over by Speaker Michael Adeyemo, among others, stepped down the debate on Local Government Autonomy Bill (sections 7, 318 and part 1 of the Fifth Schedule).

    It also stepped down the proposal to abrogate the State Joint Local Government Account and empower the local government to maintain a special account and make provisions for savings in the Federation Account before distributions to other tiers of government and related matters.

    Justifying the decision to step down and stop debate on the matters, the Speaker said the Assembly considered the interest of the numerous stakeholders tied to the provision and decided not to vote on the matters.

    He said this would give the Assembly sufficient time to facilitate a public hearing to accommodate all shades of opinion that would guide the lawmakers on the appropriate decision to take.

    Adeyemo said it was imperative not to continue the debate and vote on the local government issues as the workers’ union, under the aegis of Nigerian Union of Teachers (NUT) and the Nigerian Union of Local Government Employees (NULGE), had not agreed on the issue.

    According to him, while NULGE had held several protests and rallies on local government autonomy, primary school teachers, under the Nigeria Union o0f Teachers (NUT), had also held similar rallies and protests, saying they were not going with the local government, should it be granted autonomy.

    Apparently shocked at the decision of the Assembly to step down a decision on the alterations, members of the National Union of Local Government (NULGE), who had stormed the Assembly complex to witness the day’s proceedings, immediately left the legislative chambers after the ruling of the Speaker.

    President of Oyo NULGE Bayo Titilola-Sodo said: “We have met with the Assembly many times and the honourable House promised public hearings on the issue. But we heard from the grapevine that there will be a decision today (Tuesday).

    “But, lo and behold, that decision has been put on hold for a public hearing. So, we shall wait for the date of the public hearing to state our case on behalf of the Nigerian people.

    “We came purposely because of the alteration that concerns the local government system in Nigeria. Since a decision has been taken, we decided to leave the Assembly immediately to allow them to continue with the rest of their business in peace.”

  • National Assembly moves to curtail FG’s powers

    National Assembly moves to curtail FG’s powers

    • Drastic changes on the card
    • Railway to be removed from exclusive list
    • Time frame for President/Governors’ assent to bill to be modified

    Drastic changes to the 1999 Constitution by the National Assembly are on the way, with the federal government looking likely to be stripped of some of the powers it currently wields.

    More power will devolve to the states under the proposed amendments, some of which were adopted at the annual joint retreat of the Senate and House of Representatives Committee on the Review of the 1999 Constitution which ended yesterday in Lagos.

    The lawmakers believe strongly that the constitution now requires fundamental reforms in the interest of the nation’s development.

    Deputy Senate President Ike Ekweremadu told reporters at the retreat yesterday that some of the contentious issues in the document would be reviewed to meet the yearning of the generality of Nigerians.

    One of the major reforms in the offing is the removal of railways from the exclusive list, he said.

    It will be transferred to the concurrent list to allow states with the means to provide rail services.

    He said: “We have broken all the issues into specific bills. Between yesterday (Friday) and today (Saturday) we have looked at about 23 separate bills with separate issues.

    “The idea is to ensure that by the time we vote, each of them succeeds or fails on its own.  When we conclude the work, we’ll send it to the house to approve.

    “We will collate and ensure that the provisions of the constitution have been fulfilled regarding the alteration, and we will send it to the president for his assent. And the president will decide which one to assent to or not to assent to.

    “The implication therefore is that if he assents to some, then those one become part of the constitution. And the one he refuses to assent to, then we might decide whether to override the veto.

    “So, we want each of them to have a separate life of its own. And this is based on our own experience in the last exercise where everything was in one single bill and when the president withheld his assent, all of them collapsed.

    “This is just an improvement on what we did last time. It is something we innovated based on our experience in the last exercise.”

    The Constitution review committee, according to him, also considered  the time frame within which the  president or state governor has to assent to a bill and the issue of restructuring.

    His words: “You know we have been talking about the restructuring of Nigeria. One of the components of restructuring is that they are saying that there is too much power in the hands of the federal government and we need to strip some of them from the federal government.

    “What we have done is to look at the issue. Some items will be removed from the exclusive list to the concurrent list where the federal and the states can make laws regarding some of those items.

    “And where there is a conflict, the laws of the National Assembly will prevail.

    “So, things like railways will have to be moved to the concurrent list. The idea is that states can build railways within their territory and then a couple of states can even decide to build railways across their states.

    “The federal government can also build railways across the country and make policy around it.”

    There will continue to be a minimum wage applicable to the public and private sectors.

    “There should be minimum wage for both the public sector and private sector, that is to say, that if it is N5000 don’t pay any person less than N5000 but can be increased

    “If Lagos has more money, it  can pay beyond the minimum wage. All those who don’t have money cannot pay below the minimum way no matter how poor they are.

    “So, in that way we have a minimum standard for workers in Nigeria.”

    The committee plans to hold more consultations on the possibility of scrapping   the joint local government account.

    “The challenge there has been how do you take care of the issue of teachers’ salaries because it is from the joint local governments/state account that primary school teachers’ salaries are paid,” he said.

    “So, we want to be sure that if we remove the joint local government- state account we will not jeopardize the payment of teacher salaries.

    “That is a very contentious issue, so we said we have to do further consultations with the National Union of Teachers (NUT) and other stakeholders before we can take a decision on that to be sure that we don’t create more problems when we are trying to solve and existing problem. “So, that is not part of what we are going to present to the National Assembly when we get back.

    “We believe we have done sufficient work. This is an incremental approach that we have adopted in the amendment of the constitution. So, what we are saying that after we have finished with this, if we still have more time before election, otherwise maybe the next assembly will decide what to do.”

     

  • Ambode calls for closure of Federal Land Registry in Lagos

    Ambode calls for closure of Federal Land Registry in Lagos

    …Says revenue sharing formula unfair, unacceptable

    Lagos State Governor, Mr Akinwunmi Ambode on Friday described the continuous operation of the Federal Land Registry in Lagos as an aberration which the current ongoing Constitutional amendment process must address in line with the principle of fiscal federalism.

    Speaking at a joint working retreat of Senate and House Representatives Committees on the Review of 1999 Constitution held in Lagos, Governor Ambode also called on the National Assembly to jettison the proposed Stamp duties Bill currently being considered, which according to him, would cripple the internally generated revenue due to States in the federation if allowed to scale through.

    While faulting the Federal Land Registry in Lagos which was established when Lagos was Federal Capital Territory, the Governor said the continuous operation of the registry was an aberration and it ought to have been closed and all title therein moved to the Lagos State Land Registry, urging the federal lawmakers to urgently correct the anomaly.

    He also called for the restriction of Land Use Act only to the Federal Capital Territory on the basis of the fact that land had always been and should remain a residual matter for the State Houses of Assembly to legislate upon, hence the need for the Act to become Land Use Law of the States.

    On the Stamp Duties Bill, the Governor said: “I will also like to express the imminent dangers inherent in the proposed Stamp duties Bill which no doubt seeks to cripple the internally generated revenue due to States in the federation in favour of a Federal Government Agency- NIPOST.

    “The Bill is presently before the National Assembly and it is a grave threat to the principles of fiscal federalism and as representatives of the true beneficiaries of the Act as it presently stands, there is need to put an urgent and immediate end to its further coordination by the National Assembly which also has the noble tradition that once a matter is before the Court, all activities on the matter would be suspended.”

    He said the call became imperative in view of a case currently pending before the Supreme Court between Lagos State Government Attorney General and Attorney General of the Federation.

    While highlighting some of the unhelpful provisions in the Constitution, Governor Ambode attributed the imbalance in the financial resources of States and Local Governments to the current unhealthy revenue sharing formula which is heavily tilted in favour of the Federal Government, calling for an urgent review to enable other tiers of government realise their potentials and accelerate growth and development.

    He said: “The current revenue allocation formula by which the Federal Government takes as much as 52.68% of centrally-collected revenues in the Federation Account, leaving the States and Local Governments with 26.72% and 20.60% respectively has created a glaring and unacceptable imbalance in the financial resources of the three tiers of government.

    “The sharing formula should be limited to Federal and State governments. Since Local Governments are to come under the purview of the States, allocations to them should be shared to States as they can have as many Local Governments as they wish. The 774 formula is inequitable.”

    Governor Ambode also reinstated his call for special status to be granted to Lagos in the proposed Constitutional amendment being the former federal capital territory of Nigeria, the economic and commercial nerve centre of the nation, and taking into cognizance the high population density and continuous influx of people into the State.

    He said such was even more important considering the fact that whatever comes to Lagos would be in the overall interest of all Nigerians, as the State holds the trigger of Nigeria’s growth and development.

    Besides, Governor Ambode said it was time for Section 214 (1) of the Constitution to be amended to allow States to establish their own Police Service, as the current arrangement was unhelpful to truly protect the citizens.

    He said over the years, the Federal Government had been unable to provide resources necessary to pay, equip and train policemen to the level required by the challenges they face, adding that the situation whereby only about 300,000 policemen are policing more than 140 million which is a ratio of 1 to 467, confirmed the fact that the country was grossly under-policed.

    He said the situation had negatively affected States like Lagos with huge population saying despite the massive financial support to security agencies by most States including Lagos, such was still inadequate mainly because State Governments have no influence over the number of men recruited for or deployed to their domains.

  • Speakers seek speedy constitutional amendment

    Chairman, Conference of State House of Assembly Speakers, Abdul Mumuni Kamba, has urged the National Assembly to hasten the constitutional amendment process.
    Kamba made this appeal at a news conference in Abuja, yesterday.
    He noted that the association prayed for President Muhammadu Buhari’s quick recovery and urged Nigerians to do same, even as he hailed Acting President Prof Yemi Osinbajo’s style of leadership.
    His words: “The conference has been briefed as to the progress made in the ongoing constitutional amendment. We, therefore, urge stakeholders in this process to ensure that the amendments are concluded within a reasonable time.
    “The conference lauds President Buhari for heeding the provisions of the Constitution and transmitting power to the Vice President while proceeding on vacation. We, therefore, pray for his quick recovery and urge Nigerians to do same.
    “We also hail the Acting President for the resilient way he has piloted the affairs of the country since the president’s absence.
    “The conference also condemns the killings and destructions of lives and property in Southern Kaduna and urges Nigerians to be their brother’s keeper.”

  • Ex-CJN urges constitutional amendment to narrow appeals to S/Court

    Ex-CJN urges constitutional amendment to narrow appeals to S/Court

    The former Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Mahmud Mohammed, on Thursday called for a constitutional amendment to reduce appeals to the Supreme Court.

    The immediate past CJN made the call in his speech during a valedictory session organised for his exit from the bench.

    Mohammed said the volume of appeals filed in the apex court was overwhelming.

    “Permit me to re-iterate my comments made during the opening of the 2016-2017 Legal Year when I opined that our Supreme Court is arguably the most overworked in the World.

    “In the 2014-2015 Legal Year, the Supreme Court heard 1578 matters, consisting of 1000 motions and 569 substantive appeals, delivering 262 judgments.

    “In 2015-2016 Legal Year, the court heard 1489 matters, consisting of 908 motions and 581 substantive appeals, delivering 268 judgments in that period,’’ he said.

    He further said a total of 500 new appeals were filed in the Registry of the court in the 2015-2016 legal year.

    “This figure shows that nearly ten appeals were filed per week, most of which were interlocutory in nature.

    “Similarly, there were more than 5,000 outstanding appeals some of which have become academic in nature.

    “The log-jams are the result of a free-for-all appeals process, which has been given the imprimatur of our constitution. It was obvious that urgent action was required,’’ he said.

    As an interim measure, the out-gone CJN said the court had taken measure to constitute a second panel to sit on Wednesdays in-addition to the normal sitting in Chamber slated for the same days.

    “This additional Panel was a first in the history of the court and has certainly had a significant impact on the case disposal rate of the court.

    “I will not take full credit for this success, as My Brother Justices rose to the challenge, but I recognise that this was a necessary response to the yearnings of all Nigerians for justice,’’ Mohammed said.

    Besides, Mohammed said the country owed the judiciary a debt of gratitude for standing firm in the face of contrary winds that threatened to blow Nigeria’s democracy off course.

    “During the run up to the 2015 elections, our judicial officers withstood immense pressure in order to guarantee a level playing field and smooth transition of government.

    “This ensured that we were speared a re-enactment of the June 12 saga. In fact, the courts, thus securing the electoral process, disallowed so many frivolous matters aimed at truncating the electoral process.

    “I must particularly commend the Supreme Court for refusing to be intimidated or influenced by any candidates or political parties, and I make no apologies for the firm stand that we took in our decisions,’’ he said.

    On alleged corruption rocking the Judiciary, Mohammed said he had tried to use the power bestowed on him as Chairman of the National Judicial Council (NJC) to restore the integrity of the judiciary.

    “As Chairman of the National Judicial Council, I was greatly concerned about the integrity of our Judicial Institution.

    “I was particularly keen to ensure that the judiciary was properly positioned, both institutionally and ethically, to effectively play its role as valuable partner in good governance and the fight against corruption,’’ he said.

    The President of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), Mr Abubakar Mahmoud (SAN), said the out-gone CJN would be remembered not just for his judicial pronouncements.

    According to him, Mohammed will also be remembered as CJN who spear-headed some of the most innovative reforms in the Judiciary.

    The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that the immediate past CJN was born in Jalingo, Taraba capital, on Nov. 10, 1946.

    He had his early elementary education at Mallam Kasimu Koranic School and Jalingo Primary School between 1950 and 1956.

    He completed his primary education at the Senior Primary School, Jalingo, between 1957 and 1959.

    The out-gone CJN studied Law at the Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, between 1967 and 1970, and was at the Nigerian Law School between 1970 and 1971.

     

  • As we embark on another constitutional amendment

    As we embark on another constitutional amendment

    A bad workman, the English say, always quarrels with his tools. So has it been with Nigerians since their first and most thoroughgoing 1960 Constitution, which was amended in 1963 to remove the British Queen as their head of state and create a fourth region, the Mid-West, out of the original three that had emerged from the 1914 amalgamation of the country by its British colonial masters.

    So unhappy were we with the 1960 Constitution, which took decades of public debates all over the country and constitutional conferences at home and in the UK to arrive at, that we threw it away lock, stock and barrel, at the first opportunity we had to reconsider it. This was beginning from October 1975 when the military that had truncated our politics in 1966, citing corruption and inequity by politicians, inaugurated a 49-man Constitution Drafting Committee under the late Chief FRA Williams, to give the country a new blueprint for its governance.

    Chief William’s CDC was embroiled in controversy from the word go when the late Malam Aminu Kano, the enfant terrible of Northern Nigerian politics, accused the man himself of bowing to the “soft subterranean influence” of the military’s dictation for a change from the British Parliamentary model of democracy to the American presidential system. This was at a national conference on the CDC’s draft constitution in March 1977 at the Kongo Campus of Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria.

    An incensed Chief Williams threatened to sue Malam Aminu Kano if he did not withdraw his accusation. The malam refused. Instead, he called the chief’s bluff and wrote a letter to the editors of New Nigerian, which had exclusively published the story, in which he repeated his charge and said he had “grown too old in the politics of Nigeria and generally of Africa to avoid equivocation or sycophancy and to know the difference between political consistency, which is hard to maintain, and political acrobatism simple to operate.” After the New Nigerian published the letter in a front-page story on April 4, 1977, the great, much celebrated lawyer never followed through with his threat.

    In the end, the malam’s charge was born out when the country replaced the First Republic’s Parliamentary politics with the Presidential for the Second Republic in 1979. Barely three months into the fifth year of the Second Republic, the military re-intervened in our politics when it overthrew President Shehu Shagari from office on December 31, 1983.

    This time the military ruled for 16 years; three years longer than was the case with the first intervention. During those 16 years we had four military governments. Except for the first one under General Muhammadu Buhari, which was short-lived, each initiated its own constitutional conference that, in turn, came up with a draft constitution. Only the last draft the administration of General Abdulsalami Abubakar bequeathed to the country in 1999 became the supreme law of the land. It was essentially the same as that of 1979.

    When General Olusegun Obasanjo, who gave us the 1979 Constitution, returned as elected President in 1999, he initially resisted all calls to have a new one. Critics of the old one had argued that its claim of being one by “We the People” was a fraud, if only because the unelected military exercised veto over its enactment.

    Eventually Obasanjo changed his mind and initiated a conference in 2005. His motive soon became obvious when he abandoned its report after the National Assembly rejected its amendment that would have removed the two-term limit for the executive arm of government.

    As it was with the godfather, so it turned out with the eventually estranged godson; President Goodluck Jonathan initially rejected all calls for a new genuine “We the People” Constitution, only to change his mind in the run-up to last year’s general election. That was enough to question his motive. Definitive proof soon emerged when, first, he blatantly rigged the composition of the conference against the sections of the country he apparently saw as his enemies and did nothing to right the wrong even after he publicly promised to do so, and, second, when, even more tellingly, he threw its report into the dustbin following its rejection of his oft-stated wish for a five- or seven-year one term limit for the executive arm of government.

     

    Of recent there has been loud calls to resurrect this report and implement its recommendations lock, stock and barrel. Some of its advocates even see it as the antibiotic against the myriads of Nigeria’s problems. For example, Chief Ayo Adebanjo, an old guard, dyed-in-the-wool “Awoist”, says the only way President Buhari can end the country’s various cries of marginalisation is to dust the report up and implement its recommendations, especially with regards to the much-bandied around phrase, “restructuring the country.” If only the president would be sensible enough to do so, he said in effect in an interview in the Sunday Vanguard of February 7, “The question of Boko Haram will be solved; the question of Biafra will be solved”! Just like that!

    Another, but not-so-dyed-in-the-wool, “Awoist”, Chief Olu Falae, seems to agree with Adebanjo that Jonathan’s Conference ’14 report is the panacea for Nigeria’s problems because of its provision for “restructuring” the country. In an earlier interview in Sunday PUNCH of January 24 in which he attempted to clear his name as Chairman of the Social Democratic Party for his role in the so-called Dasukigate, he said he collected money for his party in exchange for its support of Jonathan’s presidential bid only on five conditions, top of which was that the then ruling party “must be prepared to restructure Nigeria from this unity system, and the best way to do that is to fully implement the report of the National Conference 2014.”

    All such grand talks about “restructuring” Nigeria are, of course, not without some merit. Our Constitution gives too many things to the central government to do, and, with it, too much fiscal power. Similarly, the executive arms of government at all levels are in a position to cow – and often do so – the other two arms with not much difficulty.

    However, the problem of those who talk so much about restructuring Nigeria is that they are, at best, vague and, at worst, possibly, even probably, dishonest. Vague, in the sense that when you press them on how to restructure the country, they often talk only about reducing the country’s 36 states into its current eight putative regions of Northwest, Northeast, Northcentral, Southwest, Southeast and Southsouth, and conveniently overlook the latent but real resistance such a move is likely to provoke, never mind the loud, even if senseless, demands for even more states.

    As for the calls for restructuring being possibly, even probably, dishonest, the proof lies in the fact that at each and everyone of the constitutional conferences we have had since 1978, whenever it came to the emotionally charged issue of “Resource Control”, which is the heart of true federalism, the same advocates of restructuring always ran with the hare in the afternoon, only to hunt with the hounds in the night, in a manner of speaking.

    This fact was attested to unequivocally over 10 years ago by Professor Itse Sagay, the well-known constitutional lawyer, at the end of Obasanjo’s constitutional conference in 2005 when, in an interview in The Guardian (July 25, 2005), he said, “The Southwest betrayed the Southsouth. There is no question about that. It was a clear deliberate betrayal…We will agree – Southsouth, Southwest, Southeast and Middle-Belt. We had a forum chaired by a Southwesterner throughout.”

    Nothing changed between Obasanjo’s conference and Jonathan’s. Indeed, if anything changed at all it was for the worse because the godson’s conference was even more skewed in favour of the South than the estranged godfather’s. So an alliance of the South and the Middle-Belt could have given the Southsouth what it wanted if all the members of the coalition were sincere about their commitment.

    Let’s face it. The alliance was not sincere, and could not have been, because its members, like everyone else in the country, knew their regions’ lives almost literally depended on oil, most of which came from offshore. And as long as oil remains the source of more than 90 per cent of public revenue, the Southsouth would be unrealistic to expect honest support from its apparent friends in its quest for complete ownership of oil other than that produced onshore.

    Fortunately, there is enough oil revenue, even now that its price has almost totally collapsed, to bring about the balanced development a true federation needs to thrive, and still make allowance for the depredations its producers suffer from, if only we would all reign in our greed.

    As a manmade instrument, all constitutions can always be improved upon. However, the problem in our own case, as one has said again and again on these pages but would never tire of repeating, is far less our Constitution, with all its shortcomings, than our bad faith in using it as the framework of our politics.

    We must keep this in mind as our National Assembly embarks on yet another expensive, but perhaps useless, round of constitutional amendment, which started last month when the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Honourable Yakubu Dogara, inaugurated a 50-man committee for that purpose.

  • Ministers: Need for constitutional amendment?

    The need for a major overhaul of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (As Amended) is generally accepted. The importance and necessity of its overhaul was reinforced by the attempts made to amend the constitution by the last National Assembly. Despite the huge cost, time and energy deployed to the legislative exercise, it turned out a stillbirth. Whether the 8th National Assembly and the presidency will allow the revival the Bill for the Constitutional Amendment as passed by the 7th Assembly is a different matter.

    It is equally accepted and understood that owing to the dwindling revenue, the federal and the states as presently constituted, cannot be sustained if any meaningful development is to be expected from the new APC government.

    Yes, the President Muhammed Buhari has finally inaugurated the Federal Executive Council with the appointment of the ministers, but can it really be said that, the inauguration of the ministers reflect the compliance as envisaged by the constitution. How do we reconcile the expressed desire of the President to have a lean, compact and effective government with the appointment of 36 ministers?

    Despite the promise by the new administration to maintain a lean government, there is the corresponding provision of the 1999 Constitution (As Amended) that’s demands that the President must appoint a minister from each state of the federation.

    Over the years, certain constitutional provisions seem to have created periodic dilemma as to the number of ministers to be appointed. Section 147 (1) of the Constitution specifically gives the President unfettered power to determine the number and nature of offices of ministers of the government of the federation. But the exercise of this absolute power seems to have been made subject to the provisions of Section 147(3), which demands that the appointment of ministers shall be in conformity with the provisions of Section 14 (3) with respect to the need to maintain the Federal Character by specifically ensuring that every state of the federation is adequately represented. Section 147 (3) also demand that, every minister so appointed shall be an indigene of that state. Therefore, there are only two constitutional Caveats in the exercise of this presidential power to appoint Ministers – (i) a minister from each state and (ii) the minister must be an indigene of that state. The word “shall” was used in the Section 147(3), which projects a mandatory obligation.

    But, is the President Constitutionally required to give effect to the provisions of Section 147(3)?

    Beyond these provisions, the President is not constitutionally encumbered in the appointment of his ministers. He has unfettered discretion.

    Therefore, except the President would want to take advantage of the Constitutional requirements of Section 147(3) to satisfy political considerations and expediencies, the issue is, how immune from attacks and charges of impeachable offences would a President who intends to maintain a lean Government be, without running foul of the provisions of Section 147(3), in the appointment of less than 36 Ministers, in view of the different positions already thrown up in the public discourse, on how to comply with the constitution?

    It should be noted preliminarily that, while there is no provision in the constitution with respect to the period within which the President must appoint all the 36 ministers; there is also no constitutional requirement that all the 36 ministers must be inaugurated on the same day to constitute the Federal Executive Council.

    An interpretation of the combined provisions of Sections 14(3), 147 and 149 of the constitution assists us in determining the intents and purposes of the drafters of the constitution.

    In doing this, a literal interpretation of these sections shows that the constitution intended to give the President, full constitutional power to determine who exercises his delegated executive powers on his behalf; save for the checks and balances, with the confirmation of the Senate.

    It is quite incongruous that, while the President would be given an absolute power to determine the number and nature of offices of ministers of the federation, ‘’AS MAY BE ESTABLISHED BY THE PRESIDENT’’ in Section 147(1), the same President will now be mandated or controlled in the exercise of this seemingly absolute powers, by subjecting the powers, to the observance and compliance with the provisions of Section 14(3) of the Constitution, which incidentally is a provision within Chapter II of the Constitution that has been made non-justiciable by Section 6(6)c of the Constitution in Nigerian courts. Presumably to cure this inherent and obvious Constitutional defect in Section 14(3), the drafters of the constitution, through the provisions of Section 147(3),now tried to take the requirements of observing and complying with the Federal Character principle out of the purview of Section 14(3), by now specifically identifying and stating out, the two irreducible requirements of compliance as envisaged in Section 14(3)in the provisions of Section 147(3).

    We submit that, a closer scrutiny of the proviso in Section 147(3) ONLY tried to impose HOW the Executive power of appointing ministers can be exercised, ONLY WHEN the President decides to conform with the provisions of Section 14(3) of the constitution.

    There are two scenarios here –

    1. If the President decides to comply with the two requirements of each state appointment and indigeneship consideration, or
    2. If the president decides for whatever reason, not to conform or ‘’give effect’’ to the provisions of Section 14(3) and Section 147(3) respectively.

    What are the legal consequences of scenario 2 above?

    We submit further that, while Section 147(5) is a section of the constitution that also state the criteria in appointing a minister, its applicability is not made to be dependent on Chapter II of the Constitution. A combined reading of Sections 65, 66 and 147(5) of the constitution reveals the clear constitutional obligations of the President in his consideration of who to appoint as a minister. We state that the same cannot be said of Section 147(3) that makes its applicability on the constitutional obligations as stated out in Section14 (3). Unfortunately, Section6 (6) c of the constitution is still a constitutional hindrance in Nigerian courts, in any attempt to ensure compliance with the provisions of Chapter II of the Constitution.

    It is trite that, you cannot put something on nothing. The raison d’etre or the foundation for the compliance with Section 147(3) is Section 14(3), which is a provision of the constitution that cannot be constitutionally enforceable against the President, if he decides not to give effect to the two requirements of Section 147(3).

    We state further that, the restrictive provisions of Section 6(6)c of the Constitution cannot be deemed to have been removed by the provisions of Section 147(3) of the constitution, without a corresponding amendment thereto.

    We state that, what is required is an express constitutional provision extending or expanding the judicial powers of the courts to adjudicate on Sections 13-24 of Chapter II of the Constitution, which has not been done. In the circumstances, and in other not to create absurdities in the constitutional interpretation of Section 147(3), the word “shall” can only be regarded as being permissive and not mandatory on the President.

    From the foregoing, in as much that the President cannot be compelled to conform with the provisions of Section 14(3), the President cannot be regarded to be under any form of compulsion to give effect to the two requirements in Section 147(3) of the constitution in appointing ministers.

    Finally, instead on embarking on the cumbersome and expensive processes of a constitutional amendment of the provisions on appointment of ministers, we urge the Attorney General of the Federation to, as a matter of direct constitutional intervention, initiate proceedings at the Supreme Court, for the interpretation of the combined provisions of Sections 6(6)c, 14(3), 147(3) and 147(5) of the constitution for a judicial pronouncement, instead of this relatively safe and politically acceptable compliance, with the appointment of 36 ministers.

    • Olaleye is an Attorney practicing in Lagos.
  • Constitution: Mark faults FG’s court action

    Constitution: Mark faults FG’s court action

    Senate President, David Mark, on Monday faulted the Federal Government for dragging the National Assembly before the Supreme Court over some sections of the Constitution Amendment Bill.

    Federal Government had invoked the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court to scuttle the ongoing amendment process of the 1999 Constitution by the National Assembly.

    The government contended that the National Assembly did not comply with the constitutional procedure of altering the constitution before transmitting it to President Goodluck Jonathan for assent.

    Significant among the items that scaled the amendment hurdle at both chambers of the National Assembly are the creation of constitutional role for traditional rulers, electoral reforms, separating the offices of the Accountant-General of the Federation and Accountant-General of the Federal Government, separation of the offices of the Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, and making aspects of the Constitution relating to the Fundamental Objectives and Directive Principles of State Policy in Chapter II, which deal with political, economic, social, educational and cultural objectives, enforceable and granting state legislatures financial autonomy, among others.

    But Jonathan declined his assent to the bill.

    He was said to have accused the NASS of having arrogated to itself the power to pass any constitution amendment without the assent of the President.

    He was also said not to be comfortable with aspect of the amended Bill capable of eroding presidential powers should he assent to the bill.

    In the suit already lodged at the registry of the Supreme Court, the Federal Government prayed the apex court to hold that due process was not followed by the lawmakers during the amendment process.

    Mark, who spoke while answering questions from journalists at the induction course for elected and returning federal lawmakers in Abuja, said he could not understand the rationale behind the said suit.

    Mark said: “The President has taken a Bill to the court and you heard people saying it is a Bill at the moment, unless it is signed, I really don’t see why they are in court. But anybody can go to court, so I can’t stop you from going to court, can I?”

    On his part, the Deputy Senate President, Ike Ekweremadu, said the National Assembly is not aware that the Presidency has taken the legislature to court over the 4th alteration to the Constitution.

    Ekweremadu, who is the Chairman, Senate Committee on the Review of the 1999 Constitution, said that the National Assembly has not been served any court process regarding the constitution alteration.