By Yakubu Amayindi
Renowned Pan-African writer, Chinua Achebe, reflecting on the history of Africa, wrote: “The rain that beat Africa began four hundred years ago, from the ‘discovery’ of Africa by Europe, through the transatlantic slave trade, to the Berlin Conference of 1885.
“That controversial gathering of the world’s leading European powers precipitated what we now call the Scramble for Africa, which created new boundaries that did violence to Africa’s ancient societies and resulted in tension-prone modern states.”
We have heard stories of how exceptional the ancient Benin Kingdom was in the world, as well as the Oyo Empire, Ife Empire, Kanuri Empire, Kanem-Bornu Empire, Nok Kingdom, and the republican Igbo societies in eastern Nigeria. Across the African continent, there were also the great Ashanti of the Upper Volta (now Ghana), the Zulu Kingdom in present-day South Africa, and other reputable kingdoms.
Decades later, the continent still recounts the experiences and torture inflicted upon it through the demonic slave trade, the mining and shipping of its best resources to distant lands, repression, the imposition of foreign leadership structures on flourishing governments, and the alteration of mindsets that made people feel inferior due to the color of their skin.
The story of what is now called Nigeria cannot be fully told without acknowledging the patriotic struggles for its emancipation from the claws of colonialism. The partition of Africa by European powers after the Berlin Conference of 1885 turned the continent into a business venture for colonial conglomerates.
The pre-and post-colonial eras witnessed a rise in nationalist campaigns led by patriots such as Jaja of Opobo, Herbert Macaulay, Nnamdi Azikiwe, Obafemi Awolowo, Aminu Kano, and Anthony Enahoro, among others.
The clamor for a new constitution has long been a debated issue in Nigeria. Since the British imposed their version of English laws upon us, the compatibility of these regulations with our distinct societies has remained elusive. Nigeria’s indigenous laws and acts have not fully addressed the persistent desire for a new constitution among many Nigerians.
Colonial constitutions in Nigeria attempted to turn the diverse Nigerian landscape into a single nation. The 1914 constitution amalgamated the southern and northern protectorates into a single colonial entity. Hugh Clifford’s 1922 constitution took things further by providing for a legislative council that functioned primarily in the southern part of the nation.
Arthur Richards’ constitution included northern Nigeria in the legislative council alongside their southern counterparts. Macpherson’s 1951 constitution introduced a government with three regional independent legislatures at the central level. The 1954 Oliver Lyttleton constitution separated central government powers from regional powers. The 1960 constitution, Nigeria’s last colonial document, created an independent federal parliamentary system, with the Queen of England as the ceremonial head.
It is important to note that the continued drafting of new constitutions during the colonial era was an attempt to find a federal document that could successfully bind Nigeria. Each constitution came as a response to the flaws of its predecessor. However, despite these efforts, local demands for more representation and participation in governance continued.
The first republic saw the drafting of Nigeria’s first and only democratic constitution by elected representatives. This constitution allowed Dr. NnamdiAzikiwe to serve as the nation’s first ceremonial president, bringing an end to the monarchical reign of England in Nigeria. Apart from halting judicial appeals to Great Britain, the Constitution created the Mid-Western region, which eventually led to the proliferation of states in Nigeria.
However, the tide changed with the onset of military rule in Nigeria. The 1979 constitution introduced an African presidential federal model of government with 19 states. The military government in 1989 presented a constitution that operated under a two-party system, created 21 states, and granted local government autonomy.
In 1995, the military made further modifications, allowing for a multi-party system, ethnic power-sharing, and adding nine more states, bringing the total to 30. The final military constitution under General AbdulsalamAbubakar added six more states, bringing the number to 36. The last significant amendment came in 2004, addressing electoral reforms and establishing the National Industrial Court.
Looking at these developments, one can observe that with the exception of the 1960 and 1963 constitutions, most Nigerian constitutions were adopted during times of military rule. Military regimes, typically suspending the constitution upon assuming power, governed through decrees, limiting public participation.
The 1999 constitution, which serves as Nigeria’s legal framework today, was drafted by a few individuals without the collective input or aspirations of the Nigerian people. Public consultations and hearings, standard protocols for enacting laws, were largely absent. It could be argued that the constitution was more of General AbdulsalamAbubakar’s parting gift to the new civilian government.
In the fifth republic, the administration of Olusegun Obasanjo initiated efforts for a new constitution, but these efforts failed. Obasanjo’s alleged push for a tenure elongation led to the Senate halting discussions on a new constitution. Goodluck Jonathan’s 2014 National Conference was also abandoned by his successor, MuhammaduBuhari.
One of the key arguments for constitutional change stems from the reality that some provisions still retain elements of colonial laws. Running an independent nation with traces of colonialism is seen as impractical and a form of neocolonialism.
Moreover, military governments often addressed Nigeria’s complex issues through decrees shaped by the personal biases of a few individuals in the Supreme Military Council. These decrees, lacking a proper legislative process, were not representative of the Nigerian populace’s desires.
While some believe that good leadership, rather than a new constitution, is Nigeria’s priority, both are necessary for democracy to thrive. Good leadership requires the right set of rules and laws.
Earlier this year, a group known as ‘The Patriots,’ led by Chief EmekaAnyaoku, embarked on a national constitutional dialogue. At a Lagos meeting commemorating the 10th anniversary of the late Professor Ben Nwabueze, SAN, the group emphasized the need for a new constitution.
Professor Mike Ozekhome, SAN, debunked the notion that the 1999 constitution could be salvaged through continuous amendments, stating, “One million amendments of the 1999 constitution will never work.” Femi Falana, SAN, shared this view, noting that “the Nigerian Constitution is not a legitimate document, but a legal document…signed into law by General AbdulsalamiAbubakar, the last military dictator in the country.”
The group also emphasized the need for state policing and decentralization of the police structure to the local level, restructuring Nigeria’s finance system, and strengthening democratic institutions to be independent of government control.
Reiterating the need for representation, ‘The Patriots’ called for a national constituent assembly to draft a people’s democratic constitution. Chief Anyaoku relayed these recommendations to President Bola Tinubu, who pledged to review the suggestions once his economic reforms are underway.
As Nigeria pursues economic growth, it may also benefit from revisiting its legal framework and crafting a people’s constitution that can guide the nation toward true democracy. The prolonged quest for restructuring Nigeria can be attainable if the 1963 constitution and the 2014 National Conference draft are revisited, and the necessary amendments are made by an elected constituent authority. When a seamless process takes place, resulting in the president assenting to the draft, Nigeria can then boast of a truly democratic constitution that its citizens can take pride in.
