With the campaign for #BringBack1963Constitution gaining
momentum, how many Nigerians have bothered to read the document?
Never mind. In Nigeria, it doesn’t matter. Just repeat what you
hear people say and you would be fine. But if you actually go
through the 1963 constitution in line with the ferocious campaign
for “restructuring”, the part that easily stands out is section 140
(1) which stipulated derivation payment of 50% to the region where
minerals are mined. Take away that section and you will wonder what
is divine about that constitution. Then take away oil completely
from the Nigerian equation and the cries for “restructuring” will
mellow down.
That is why I suspect that the campaign for restructuring is a
political game for some people — aimed at hitting back at the north
for being “parasites on our oil”. And that is why no northerner of
note supports the campaign. Listen to Gen. Ibrahim Babangida and
Alhaji Atiku Abubakar closely and you will notice that their
definition of “restructuring” has nothing to do with a return to
50% derivation. Conversely, if the oil belonged to the north, it is
northerners that would be demanding “restructuring” and labelling
southerners as “parasites on our oil”. After all, northerners also
love to talk about “our agriculture” from time to time. Politics,
damned!
In my previous article, This Thing Called ‘1999 Constitution’, I
pursued the argument that contrary to the claim that the military
wrote the current constitution, it is strikingly a replica of the
1979 constitution, debated upon and produced by an elected
Constituent Assembly made of Nigerians (when agitators demand a
constitution “written by Nigerians”, was our constitution written
by Togolese?) There were indeed complaints that the military
“smuggled” 19 items, including the Land Use Act (which, funny
enough, favours the states) and the NYSC Act, into the 1979
constitution, but there were hundreds of provisions that were not
contraband. Just saying.
Chief Obafemi Awolowo, who declined to serve on the constitution
drafting committee in 1975 over matters of principle, was a
well-known “federalist”. But he did not reject the 1979
constitution. Rather, he decided to surrender himself to it, to
constructively engage with it and to make the best of it. Although
he did not win the 1979 presidential election, the states governed
by the UPN, his party, implemented his ideals of free education and
free healthcare — and, lest I forget, good governance. Alhaji
Lateef Jakande, the governor of Lagos state, was the shining star.
I think UPN governors generally did well under the “military”
constitution — in spite of the “smuggling” saga.
We now shift attention to the 1999 constitution — the latest
stumbling block to Nigeria’s development, according to many legal
and political experts. How many Nigerians have really spent time to
study the document? Never mind. We have been told it is a useless
constitution, so why bother to read it? Regardless, under Chapter
II of the damned constitution, section 8 says government shall
provide (a) free, compulsory and universal primary education (b)
free secondary education (c) free university education and (d) free
adult literacy programme. It also says, in section 14, that Nigeria
“shall be a State based on the principles of democracy and social
justice”.
To avoid the lopsided appointments being made by President
Muhammadu Buhari since he came to power in 2015, sub-section 14 (3)
mandates the federal government to be fair to all sections of the
country in the composition of agencies, to promote “unity” and
command “national loyalty”, thereby ensuring that there shall be no
predominance of persons from a few states or from a few ethnic
groups in government. That is the constitution we hate so much and
seek to destroy. Lawyers say Chapter II is not “justiceable” (that
is, courts can’t enforce it). Why not seek an amendment to make it
justiceable? Why re-invent the wheel? Why write an entirely new
constitution?
Mr. Femi Falana, human rights lawyer, once pointed out that
under the same 1999 constitution, railway is on the exclusive list
— but Lagos state is building a rail line from Badagry to Marina.
Rivers state has built a monorail. Heavens are yet to fall.
Aviation is also on the exclusive list. Yet states are building or
have built airports. Gombe, Anambra, Delta, Nasarawa and Akwa Ibom
states are ready examples here. Nobody has gone to jail for that.
Power is on the exclusive list. Lagos, Akwa Ibom and Rivers have
built or are building power plants — under the same “unitary”
constitution! Excuses are the easiest thing to give in this world
when all you want to play is politics.
I have thoroughly read the 1999 constitution and I have seen
nothing in it preventing states from forming “regional” alliances
to promote common interests. The last time I did some research, I
found out that south-west states have O’dua Investment Ltd as well
as the Dawn Commission. Nobody has died. South-south states have
BRACED Commission. Nobody stopped them. It is even more exciting to
me that Lagos and Kebbi states, poles apart, have co-operated on
LAKE Rice production — in the same country where we say we can’t
make progress until the constitution is thrown into the lake of
fire! Some states are co-operating and making progress while others
are making excuses.
The 1999 constitution, we are told, encourages corruption
because governors, deputy governors, presidents and vice-presidents
are accorded immunity. But you know what? Sections 143 and 188 of
the “worthless” constitution empower the legislature to impeach
them for corruption. Are the lawmakers doing their job? Should we
blame the constitution if they don’t? In truth, ministers,
commissioners and ex-governors, ex-deputy governors, ex-presidents
and ex-vice-presidents do not enjoy any immunity, but how many of
them have gone to jail for corruption? We need the 1963
constitution to jail them? We must blame the law for every failing,
isn’t it?
Meanwhile, the “worthless” constitution stipulates that
oil-producing states shall receive “not less than 13% derivation”.
That means it can even be up to 100%. Not even the 1963
constitution gave such a blank cheque! The National Assembly can
actually make a law taking derivation above 13%. But it may not
happen because in revenue sharing, every extra percentage gained by
an oil state is a loss to the rest. Many states will naturally
oppose increasing it. And I am not talking about the north — the
usual suspects — but even Ekiti, Osun, Enugu and Ebonyi lawmakers
may not be well disposed to it. We saw how Cross River and Akwa
Ibom fought in court over the issue of littoral states.
Sadly, the essence of Nigeria has been reduced to oil, hence the
unending threat of “restructuring”. All discussions start and end
with oil. But will oil boom last forever? Who still builds the
future on oil? Even the viability of states is often analysed
solely on oil revenue. Yet all 36 states can be viable if the
governors would use their brains properly. There is nothing in the
constitution compelling states to depend on federation allocation.
In 1999, over 90% of Lagos revenue was from allocation. Using his
brains, Asiwaju Bola Tinubu, as governor, reduced dependency to 50%
within eight years. Today, it is down to 30%. And, if I may point
this out, this is under the same “military” constitution!
Ironically, I have my own issues with the 1999 constitution
which I have highlighted in the past. I am certainly not opposed to
restructuring. I have written many times highlighting my own
thoughts on this. I sympathise with genuine advocates of
restructuring who are not motivated by politics and who have no
hidden agenda. They may have an honest desire to see a better
organised Nigeria. But I still insist that there are millions of
untapped opportunities contained in the “worthless” 1999
constitution. There is no perfect constitution anywhere in the
world — that is why there is always room for amendment. It is
always a work in progress.
Most critically, there is always a big space for good
governance, which cannot be decreed by any constitution. Proponents
of a new constitution must recognise that it is not a magic wand.
Nigeria is about the only country in the world blaming the
constitution for its underdevelopment — rather than confronting the
ineptitude and wickedness of their leaders at all levels. Rwanda
and Cote d’Ivoire survived ethnic violence and are making
tremendous progress through good leadership. Hong Kong, Singapore,
South Korea and Taiwan all became developed through quality
leadership. But in Nigeria, we blame the constitution for
everything that is wrong with us.
With the campaign for #BringBack1963Constitution gaining
momentum, how many Nigerians have bothered to read the document?
Never mind. In Nigeria, it doesn’t matter. Just repeat what you
hear people say and you would be fine. But if you actually go
through the 1963 constitution in line with the ferocious campaign
for “restructuring”, the part that easily stands out is section 140
(1) which stipulated derivation payment of 50% to the region where
minerals are mined. Take away that section and you will wonder what
is divine about that constitution. Then take away oil completely
from the Nigerian equation and the cries for “restructuring” will
mellow down.
That is why I suspect that the campaign for restructuring is a
political game for some people — aimed at hitting back at the north
for being “parasites on our oil”. And that is why no northerner of
note supports the campaign. Listen to Gen. Ibrahim Babangida and
Alhaji Atiku Abubakar closely and you will notice that their
definition of “restructuring” has nothing to do with a return to
50% derivation. Conversely, if the oil belonged to the north, it is
northerners that would be demanding “restructuring” and labelling
southerners as “parasites on our oil”. After all, northerners also
love to talk about “our agriculture” from time to time. Politics,
damned!
In my previous article, This Thing Called ‘1999 Constitution’, I
pursued the argument that contrary to the claim that the military
wrote the current constitution, it is strikingly a replica of the
1979 constitution, debated upon and produced by an elected
Constituent Assembly made of Nigerians (when agitators demand a
constitution “written by Nigerians”, was our constitution written
by Togolese?) There were indeed complaints that the military
“smuggled” 19 items, including the Land Use Act (which, funny
enough, favours the states) and the NYSC Act, into the 1979
constitution, but there were hundreds of provisions that were not
contraband. Just saying.
Chief Obafemi Awolowo, who declined to serve on the constitution
drafting committee in 1975 over matters of principle, was a
well-known “federalist”. But he did not reject the 1979
constitution. Rather, he decided to surrender himself to it, to
constructively engage with it and to make the best of it. Although
he did not win the 1979 presidential election, the states governed
by the UPN, his party, implemented his ideals of free education and
free healthcare — and, lest I forget, good governance. Alhaji
Lateef Jakande, the governor of Lagos state, was the shining star.
I think UPN governors generally did well under the “military”
constitution — in spite of the “smuggling” saga.
We now shift attention to the 1999 constitution — the latest
stumbling block to Nigeria’s development, according to many legal
and political experts. How many Nigerians have really spent time to
study the document? Never mind. We have been told it is a useless
constitution, so why bother to read it? Regardless, under Chapter
II of the damned constitution, section 8 says government shall
provide (a) free, compulsory and universal primary education (b)
free secondary education (c) free university education and (d) free
adult literacy programme. It also says, in section 14, that Nigeria
“shall be a State based on the principles of democracy and social
justice”.
To avoid the lopsided appointments being made by President
Muhammadu Buhari since he came to power in 2015, sub-section 14 (3)
mandates the federal government to be fair to all sections of the
country in the composition of agencies, to promote “unity” and
command “national loyalty”, thereby ensuring that there shall be no
predominance of persons from a few states or from a few ethnic
groups in government. That is the constitution we hate so much and
seek to destroy. Lawyers say Chapter II is not “justiceable” (that
is, courts can’t enforce it). Why not seek an amendment to make it
justiceable? Why re-invent the wheel? Why write an entirely new
constitution?
Mr. Femi Falana, human rights lawyer, once pointed out that
under the same 1999 constitution, railway is on the exclusive list
— but Lagos state is building a rail line from Badagry to Marina.
Rivers state has built a monorail. Heavens are yet to fall.
Aviation is also on the exclusive list. Yet states are building or
have built airports. Gombe, Anambra, Delta, Nasarawa and Akwa Ibom
states are ready examples here. Nobody has gone to jail for that.
Power is on the exclusive list. Lagos, Akwa Ibom and Rivers have
built or are building power plants — under the same “unitary”
constitution! Excuses are the easiest thing to give in this world
when all you want to play is politics.
I have thoroughly read the 1999 constitution and I have seen
nothing in it preventing states from forming “regional” alliances
to promote common interests. The last time I did some research, I
found out that south-west states have O’dua Investment Ltd as well
as the Dawn Commission. Nobody has died. South-south states have
BRACED Commission. Nobody stopped them. It is even more exciting to
me that Lagos and Kebbi states, poles apart, have co-operated on
LAKE Rice production — in the same country where we say we can’t
make progress until the constitution is thrown into the lake of
fire! Some states are co-operating and making progress while others
are making excuses.
The 1999 constitution, we are told, encourages corruption
because governors, deputy governors, presidents and vice-presidents
are accorded immunity. But you know what? Sections 143 and 188 of
the “worthless” constitution empower the legislature to impeach
them for corruption. Are the lawmakers doing their job? Should we
blame the constitution if they don’t? In truth, ministers,
commissioners and ex-governors, ex-deputy governors, ex-presidents
and ex-vice-presidents do not enjoy any immunity, but how many of
them have gone to jail for corruption? We need the 1963
constitution to jail them? We must blame the law for every failing,
isn’t it?
Meanwhile, the “worthless” constitution stipulates that
oil-producing states shall receive “not less than 13% derivation”.
That means it can even be up to 100%. Not even the 1963
constitution gave such a blank cheque! The National Assembly can
actually make a law taking derivation above 13%. But it may not
happen because in revenue sharing, every extra percentage gained by
an oil state is a loss to the rest. Many states will naturally
oppose increasing it. And I am not talking about the north — the
usual suspects — but even Ekiti, Osun, Enugu and Ebonyi lawmakers
may not be well disposed to it. We saw how Cross River and Akwa
Ibom fought in court over the issue of littoral states.
Sadly, the essence of Nigeria has been reduced to oil, hence the
unending threat of “restructuring”. All discussions start and end
with oil. But will oil boom last forever? Who still builds the
future on oil? Even the viability of states is often analysed
solely on oil revenue. Yet all 36 states can be viable if the
governors would use their brains properly. There is nothing in the
constitution compelling states to depend on federation allocation.
In 1999, over 90% of Lagos revenue was from allocation. Using his
brains, Asiwaju Bola Tinubu, as governor, reduced dependency to 50%
within eight years. Today, it is down to 30%. And, if I may point
this out, this is under the same “military” constitution!
Ironically, I have my own issues with the 1999 constitution
which I have highlighted in the past. I am certainly not opposed to
restructuring. I have written many times highlighting my own
thoughts on this. I sympathise with genuine advocates of
restructuring who are not motivated by politics and who have no
hidden agenda. They may have an honest desire to see a better
organised Nigeria. But I still insist that there are millions of
untapped opportunities contained in the “worthless” 1999
constitution. There is no perfect constitution anywhere in the
world — that is why there is always room for amendment. It is
always a work in progress.
Most critically, there is always a big space for good
governance, which cannot be decreed by any constitution. Proponents
of a new constitution must recognise that it is not a magic wand.
Nigeria is about the only country in the world blaming the
constitution for its underdevelopment — rather than confronting the
ineptitude and wickedness of their leaders at all levels. Rwanda
and Cote d’Ivoire survived ethnic violence and are making
tremendous progress through good leadership. Hong Kong, Singapore,
South Korea and Taiwan all became developed through quality
leadership. But in Nigeria, we blame the constitution for
everything that is wrong with us.
Read more https://nairalaw.com/1999-constitution-as-enemy-of-progress/