After over one year of extensive research, study tours, collating proposals from the public, strategic collaboration with key partners, consultations with stakeholders and feedbacks from national and zonal public hearings, the Chairman of the Senate Committee on the Review of the 1999 Constitution and Deputy Senate President, Ike Ekweremadu, presented the report of the committee to the Senate plenary last week. GEORGE OJI reports on details of the proposed amendments.
The report of the Senate Constitution Review Committee, submitted to the Senate last week, no doubt, is a significant milestone in the nation's march towards constitutional democracy. It is the fourth attempt at remodelling the 1999 Constitution since the inception of the present democratic dispensation.
The first attempt in 2006/2007 was unfortunately bogged down by the bogey of tenure extension. However, the amendments of 2009 and 2010 were very successful to the extent that it strengthened the nation's electoral laws and significantly insulated the electoral umpire, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) from the stranglehold of the executive by legislating its autonomy and independence through financial independence. The current exercise has already shown signs of boldness and significant improvements.
For example, the recommendation for a single tenure for elected executive officers, no doubt, is a very bold and hard sell. For it to scale through, it requires very versed and tested policy advocates to market. It is hoped that the committee is already thinking along this line. Expectedly, the single tenure proposal is already stocking wide range controversies.
What that shows is that you need very patriotic, altruistic and nationalistic person to come up with such a bold prognosis in a multicultural and multireligious society such as ours.
Frankly speaking, the task of amending a constitution, particularly in a complex society such as ours is by no means an easy exercise. This much was admitted by Senator Ike Ekweremadu, Deputy Senate President and Chairman of the Senate Constitution Review Committee, when he said on the occasion of the presentation of his committee's report before Senate plenary last week that "the process of drafting or amending a constitution in any society is a complex one."
The process is not only complex but highly political and sensitive. Logically therefore, reaching a consensus on any issue in such a society and through such a daunting process could be very frustrating, more so, among a 49-member committee, whose membership were carefully drawn from all the zones and other interests of the country by the Senate. Somehow, the issues before the review committee did not make its tasks any easier. What were those?
They were devolution of powers, creation of states, recognition of the geo-political zones in the constitution, constitutional roles for traditional rulers, local governments, fiscal federalism, immunity clause, Nigerian police, Judicial reforms, the executive, rotation of executive offices, mayoral status for the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), residency and indigene provisions, amongst a few others. Considering the foregoing therefore, the logical question that follows will be: how were the senators able to come to consensus on all these contentious issues?
Ekweremadu again on the rescue here: "Members always tried to reach out for consensus decision. Hence, decisions and recommendations in the report have been approved by consensus. In those rare occasions where there were strong divergence of views, decisions were supported by a majority of members and where it was requested, the minority view is also recorded." In other words, the recommendations that were served Nigerians by the review committee were the products of consensus. The issues in question were:
Single tenure
By far, the most controversial recommendation from the review committee had to do with the single six year term tenure for elected President, Vice President, governors and their deputies, contained in section 135 of the draft constitution (for the president and his vice) and section 180 (for the governors and their deputies).
For the president and the vice, section 135 states that, (1) Subject to the provisions of this constitution, a person shall hold office of President until- (a) When his successor in office takes the oath of that office; (b) He dies whilst holding such office or; (c) The date when his resignation from office takes effect; or (d) He otherwise ceases to hold office in accordance with the provisions of this Constitution (2) Subject to the provisions of this subsection (1) of this section, the President shall vacate his office at the expiration of a period of six years commencing from when – (a) in the case of a person elected as President under this constitution, he took the oath of allegiance and the oath of office and – (b) in any other case, the person elected to that office under this constitution took the oath of allegiance and oath of office or would but for his death, have taken that such oaths.
Concerning the succession of a president by his vice, the committee recommended that, "Where a Vice President-elect or Vice President succeeds the Presidentelect or the President in accordance with subsection (1) of this section, he shall not be eligible to contest for the office of the President in any subsequent election.
Disqualification of President and Vice President
Section 137(3) of the draft bill states that, "A person holding the office of the President or Vice President immediately ofbefore the coming into force of the alteration of section 135 and 136 of this constitution shall not be eligible to contest election for a single term of six years." In justifying its recommendation regarding the single tenure the committee noted that "considering the financial expenses often associated with re-election and to ensure that executive heads are freed from the distractions to be able to concentrate on public policy issues, a provisions for single term of six years for president and governors is made in section 135 and 180 respectively."
Office of the Attorney General
Another far-reaching recommendation of the review committee was its proposal for the separation of the office of the Attorney General from the Minister of Justice, which under the current constitution are fused in one. This is to apply at both the federal and state levels. The Attorney General is accordingly designated as the Chief Law Officer of the Federation or the State as the case may be.
To further guarantee the holder of the office of the Attorney General, the committee recommended that the appointment must be made by the president and confirmed by the Senate.
Also, the Attorney General must be tenure- based. In this regard, the committee recommended a seven-year non-renewable tenure. Also to further insulate the holder of the office of Attorney General from politics, the committee recommended that such a person must not be a member of any political party nor is a civil servant. The justification of this recommendation according to the committee is to guarantee the independence of the office of the Attorney General of the Federation.
Section 150 of the draft constitution, where this proposal is contained states that, (1) There shall be an Attorney General of the Federation who shall be the Chief Law Officer of the federation. (2) The President shall appoint the Attorney General subject to confirmation by the Senate. (3) A person shall not qualify to hold or perform the functions of the office of Attorney General for the federation unless he- (a) is qualified to practice as a legal practitioner (b) has been so qualified for not less than ten years (c) is not a member of a political party or a civil servant. (4) The Attorney General of the Federation shall not be subject to the direction or control of any authority or person in the performance of the function of his office (5) The Attorney General shall hold office for a single term of seven years.
Abolition of State-Local Government joint account
To make for accountability and effective local government system, the committee recommended the removal of the joint account from the constitution. Consequently, the review committee proposed that all amounts due each of the local governments from the federation account shall be paid directly to such council areas.
This of course is with a caveat: for any local government to be a beneficiary of this new financial regime, it must be a democratically elected council. Section 162 where this is contained states in subsection (5) that, "any amount standing to the credit of the local government in the federation account shall be allocated and paid directly to the local governments for their benefit on such terms and in such manner as may be prescribed by the National Assembly. (6) The amount standing to the credit of a local government without a democratically elected council shall be withheld until there is a democratically elected local government council in such local government.
Mayoral administrative system for the FCT
This proposal no doubt will go a long way to gladden the hearts of the indigenes of the FCT, who had always seized any given opportunity to drum support for this position. The committee in its recommendation noted that a Mayoral status for the FCT was not only in keeping with the practice in many capital cities of the world, but also to ensure efficient administration of the FCT. According to the proposal, there shall also be a Deputy Mayor for the city.
Curiously, the committee threw the position of Mayor open to all Nigerians and not restricted only to indigenes of the territory. It also recommended that the Mayor and his Deputy must emerge through the process of an election. It further made similar provision for state governors for the Mayor as well. Section 302 where this provision is contained states is subsection (1) that, "There shall be for the Federal Capital Territory a Mayor. (2) The National Assembly shall make law to provide for the establishment, structure, composition, finance and functions of the office of Mayor of the Federal Capital Territory.
Presidential assent to bills
If the recommendation of the committee on the above subject matter is finally accepted presidential veto of bills will have been finally laid to rest. This is also a way of addressing the nagging issue of unnecessary withholding of presidential assents to bills passed by the National Assembly without tangible explanations.
What this means is that once a bill is passed by the National Assembly and sent to the President for his assent, if within 30 days the president refused to assent to the bill or send it back to the parliament with convincing explanations, the bill automatically becomes a law, an act. In its rationalisation of such provision, the committee stated that, "in the light of recent experience, the committee inserted a new provision in the draft bill to resolve the impasse where the President neglects to signify his assent or that he withholds such assent.
In our view, this will strengthen legislature's authority and enable timely passage of laws for good governance." Section 58(a) where this new provision is contained states that, "Where the President neither signifies that he assents or that he withholds assents, the bill shall at the expiration of thirty days become law." The same provision as contained in section 100(a) also applies at the state levels. "Where the governor neither signifies that he assents or that he withholds assent, the bill shall at the expiration of thirty days become law."
Creation of first line charge for certain bodies and officers at state level
As the National Assembly did during the last review exercise in 2009, they recommended financial autonomy for members of the States Houses of Assembly, but unfortunately, through the influence of some of the state governors, the lawmakers failed to ratify such provisions. This time around, the senators have not only re-inserted same provisions, they have gone ahead to enlarge the beneficiaries of such privileges.
Accordingly, the committee recommended that to engender accountability and efficient service delivery, a provision is made for State Houses of Assembly, State Independent Electoral Commissions (SIEC), Auditor-General of the State and the Attorney-General of a state to get their funding directly from the state consolidated revenue fund. Section 121(3) where this is contained states as follows- "Any amount standing to the credit of the (a) State Independent Electoral Commission (b) House of Assembly of the state (c) Auditor-General of the state (d) Judiciary and (e) Attorney-General of the State; in the Consolidated Revenue Fund of the state be paid directly to the heads of the respective bodies for the use of the institutions for which he is head.
Removal of some listed Acts of the N/Assembly from Constitution
The committee in addition proposed the removal of the following listed acts of the National Assembly from the constitution: (a)The National Youth Service Corps Decree 1993 (b) The Public Complaints Commission Act (c) The National Security Agencies Act (d) The National Lands use Act. The essence of the delisting of the above acts of the National Assembly from the constitution according to previous arguments all through the review process was that it does not enable faster and easier and less cumbersome amendments to the above acts. This recommendation is contained in section 315 of the draft bill.
Devolution of Powers
In response to the agitations by Nigerians to devolve powers from the centre to the states, the committee recommended the decongestion of the Exclusive List of the responsibility arrangement in the constitution. According to the committee, "the Exclusive List under Part 1 of the second schedule to the constitution is congested, cumbersome and unwieldy. There is therefore the need to decongest the Exclusive List by maintaining only items of concurrent interest to the concurrent list."
The committee therefore substituted "post and telegraph," with, "Post and Telecommunication," removed prison, railways, stamp duties and wages from exclusive legislative list and also added items to the exclusive and concurrent lists. Accordingly, the concurrent list is expanded to include arbitration, environment, healthcare, prisons, railways, road safety, stamp duties, wages, land and agriculture, youth, public complaints and aviation. National Security is subsequently retained in the exclusive list.
It noted that while most of the proposals and the forwarded bills sent to the committee which it relied on to arrive at its recommendations were widely popular with the citizenry and advanced strong arguments for constitutional amendments, the committee was constrained to assess not only the popularity of the proposals, but also their value and workability in the context of Nigeria.
It further explained that some of the bills referred to it were not as comprehensive and were rife with ambiguities, while some do not promote the spirit of separation of powers in a presidential system of government, while yet some of the proposals are better treated as conventions rather than codified in the constitution. On the strength of the foregoing, the committee said it was constrained to reject these bills and proposals. They include;
State Courts of Appeal bill
This is a Senate bill forwarded to the committee. It seeks to establish state Courts of Appeal in the six geo-political zones of the country, introduce state legislative list, adjust and modify the legislative powers of government between the federal and state governments and provide for the recognition of the six geo-political zones in the constitution. The committee rejected this on the strong conviction that the present structure/ arrangements should be sustained.
Bill to compel President to implement N/ Assembly resolutions
This is also a Senate bill seeking to provide for the implementation and execution of the National Assembly resolution and or approve report of investigations conducted by the National Assembly. The committee noted that good as this proposal may be to assert the authority of the National Assembly it does not promote the spirit of separation of powers in a presidential system of government and it apparently encroaches on the powers of the executive arm of government. Consequently, the bill was rejected by the committee.
Bill to compel president to attach portfolio to ministerial nominees
Again, this is a Senate bill forwarded to the committee. It seeks to make provision that will enable the National Assembly to be more effective in the screening of ministerial nominees by ensuring that portfolio is attached to each nominee.
The committee stated that it turned down this bill because assigning portfolios should remain the prerogative of the president for reasons of flexibility. Besides, it has been shown that professional qualification does not necessarily approximate to performance in practical terms.
Bill to prohibit the education of children and wards of public officers abroad
This bill also is a Senate bill to the committee seeking to prohibit the education of children and wards of public officers abroad for courses offered by institutions in Nigeria, save for specialised courses at postgraduate levels. The verdict of the committee, which led to the rejection of the bill was that this may amount to a violation of the rights of such children/wards. Besides, the committee reasoned that it is discriminatory and may also be difficult to enforce.
State creation
The committee revealed that it received a total of 61 requests for state creation. However, none of the requests complied with the entire provision of section 81(1), which provides that the request must come from two-thirds serving lawmakers from the state Houses of Assembly, two-thirds serving members of the House of Representatives of the areas requesting for the state creation.
The committee disclosed that none of the requests for state creation at the close of receipt of memoranda satisfied the requirement of section 8(1)(a)(i-iii) to justify a recommendation for the next step in section 8(1)(b), namely; directing the INEC to conduct memorandum.
State Police
This is a proposal for the provision of state police in the constitution. The committee came up with the verdict that the preferred approach at this time is to critically look at the current federal police system with a view to sanitising and strengthening it. It turned down the request.
Special Status for Lagos
This was a proposal seeking the designation of Lagos as special status in the constitution and to consequently treat it as such. The committee reasoned that while it appreciated the peculiar needs and challenges of Lagos, according such status should be a matter of political decision, which should be kept out of the constitution.
Ministerial slot for "indigenes" of FCT
This proposal seeks the inclusion of the FCT in the proviso to section 147(3) of the constitution as it relates to ministerial appointments so as to ensure that an "indigene" of the FCT is appointed as a minister. The committee argued that desirable as that may be, the provisions granting mayoral status for the FCT will go a long way in ensuring equitability and is sufficient to ensure efficient administration of the Federal Capital.
Rotation of executive offices
The committee rejected this proposal on the grounds that the constitution should not make Nigerian leadership subject to ethnic or regional considerations. It rather consigned it to the whims of the political parties for consideration.
Prohibition of foreign accounts
The committee advised that the status quo be maintained in this regard, because according to it, making any alteration is most likely to be received with misgivings and outrage by Nigerians as it may portray the National Assembly as self-serving and may affect the entire legitimacy/credibility of the constitution amendment exercise.
Diaspora voting
The committee rejected this proposal on the grounds that INEC is still grappling to strengthen its capacity to conduct elections within the country. It further reasoned that it would be counter-productive to extend INEC's responsibilities abroad without the requisite capacity. The Senate is expected to commence full debate of the proposals and recommendations upon resumption on June 17. The lawmakers will also vote on each of the recommendations contained in the report.
This point was well taken when the Senate President, David Mark remarked at the end of the presentation of the report by Ekweremadu that, "You are going to take the copies home so that during the recess you will have enough opportunity to read through, digest and consult more with members of your constituents. When you come back from the recess, then senators will make individual contributions. "You need to have these copies to go home with; the debate on it will commence when we come back. We are going to devote many days or weeks to the debate on it because every senator will be given an opportunity to make a comment.
I want to remind all of us that the voting on it is not by voice vote, everybody will need to answer his father's name when the voting comes. So, prepare your mind and make up your mind where you stand on each of these issues."
National Mirror