The Burgeoning Economy Of Constitution Review

ONE channel through which the N550 billion appropriated to fund activities of the National Assembly has been drained in the last 17 years is the Constitution Review Project. Since the beginning of the Fourth Republic, the National Assembly had received about N150 billion as yearly budget with the exception of its 7th session, when the budget was reduced to N120 billion, while the 8th session, which was inaugurated in June last year, got N5 billion lesser. N115 billion was budgeted.

The inauguration of ad-hoc committees by the two houses in the National Assembly to process another set of Bills for the review of the constitution recently brings to mind, the Assembly’s legislative engagements that have become a very expensive ritual.

Since 1999, when Nigeria re-embraced democracy, hardly had any session of the National Assembly passed without an attempt to alter one or more sections of the constitution.

Though, only one of the three attempts to review the nation’s grundnorm had succeeded, however, not less than N9 billion has gone into the project. Sadly, the Seventh National Assembly, which spent the highest amount of N4 billion, was unable to successfully achieve any amendment following its inability to convince former President Goodluck Jonathan to give his assent to the Bill it took four years to prepare.

The only successful attempt was the 2010 amendment that dealt substantially with electoral issues. That alteration attracted the sum of over N2 billion with 50 per cent of the money sourced unofficially.

Fortunately, for the National Assembly, it secured its financial autonomy through that exercise amongst other salient issues, but that could not be said of the state Houses of Assembly, which rejected the clause that sort to give them financial autonomy, a move that would have removed them from operating under the whims and caprices of their state governors.

Ironically, the state Assemblies saw the need for the National Assembly to be financially independent.
The Ibrahim Mantu-led 2006 constitution alteration attempt that got entangled with the “third term project” failed woefully when the leadership of the fifth National Assembly decided to throw away the baby with the bathe water in the desperation to kill the “third term project.” That attempt was buried with the N2.5 billion spent on it.

No word has so far been heard from the National Assembly leadership nor the committees on the budget for this latest round of alteration, but they seem set to adopt the same amount spent by 7th National Assembly, with a little reduction, considering the reduction in the over all budget of the National Assembly.

A source said that no official amount has been approved yet. Hinting that the work to be done in this amendment exercise might not be so much as to require huge budget, Senate President Abubakar Bukola Saraki, while inaugurating the new ad-hoc committee led by Deputy President of the Senate, Ike Ekweremadu, stated that the committee would not need to undergo fresh public hearing or collation of views.

He charged the committee to concentrate on the last Alteration Bill and conclusively address it before dealing with other proposals.

Saraki noted, “the 7th National Assembly had done a good job of obtaining national consensus on key challenges to the operation of the constitution and the utilisation of the constitution as the coherent framework for our development as a nation through its work on the last Alteration Bill.”

Inaugurating the 42-member committee, he said the current review is an attempt by the 8th National Assembly to cement and exhaustively conclude the process of the last Alteration Bill.

This, he said, is essentially hinged on strengthening our constitutional democracy, entrenching our unity and widening the remit of institutions that enable the implementation of development plan, respect for the Constitution and the observance of the rule of law as our primary objective.

And attempting to showcase the contents of the new job of the committee, Ekweremadu said that the last Alteration Bill, which was not assented to by Jonathan remained a huge effort in amending the 1999 Constitution in accordance with the wishes of the Nigerian people.

Notable among the key amendments, according to him, were strengthening of the local government administration, removal of presidential assent in constitution amendment, separation of the Office of the Attorney-General from that of the Minister of Justice, creation of the Office of the Accountant-General of the Federation separate from the Accountant-General of the Federal Government to enhance accountability.

• financial autonomy for State Assemblies, and provision of 30-day timeline for presidential and governors’ assent to Bills passed by the National and State Assemblies;

• empowering the Independent National Electoral Commission to deregister political parties, devolution of more powers to the states, provision of 180-day timeline for the determination of pre-election matters, provision for independent candidacy, and making it mandatory for the President present a State of the Nation address at least once in a year.

Ekweremadu, however, observed that constitution amendment exercises in election years were always caught in the web of politics and intrigues, assuring that the amendment exercise was one of the top priorities of the 8th Senate.

Will Buhari disregard Jonathan’s objections?
IN this drive to get the amendment proposal passed, the leadership of the 8th National Assembly must pay attention to key issues that might render its efforts futile again. It must take very serious look at the reasons adduced by Jonathan for vetoing the last alteration bill and ensure that no stone is left unturned to do the needed corrections where necessary.

Jonathan’s first area of disagreement had to do with the move to remove the President as an approving authority in the process of the alteration of the constitution. Jonathan had observed that the two chambers of the National Assembly failed to meet requirements for altering Section 9 (3) of the 1999 Constitution.

He argued: “Section 4 of the Fourth Alteration Act, 2015 seeks to alter Section 9 of the 1999 Constitution by the insertion of a new subsection 3A, which dispenses with the assent of the President in the process of constitution amendment. However, this alteration can only be valid if the proposal was supported by votes of not less than four-fifths majority of all the members of each House of the National Assembly and approved by a resolution of the Houses of Assembly of not less than two-thirds of all the states as provided by Section 9 (3) of the 1999 Constitution.

Besides, the President said there were a number of provisions in the Act that altogether constitute flagrant violations of the doctrine of separation of powers enshrined in the 1999 Constitution and unjustifiably whittle down the executive powers of the federation vested in the president by virtue of Section 5 (1) of the 1999 Constitution.

Jonathan also faulted the National Assembly over its alteration, seeking to limit the period when expenditure can be authorised in default of appropriation from the six months provided in the constitution to three months.

More Challenges as 8th Assembly begins the process of constitution amendment
AS the two chambers of the 8th National Assembly commenced in earnest, another constitution review process, it is heartwarming to hear that the‎ Assembly would dust the last proposed amendments and re-introduce same to the President for his assent.

This position clearly underscores the need to cut cost without necessarily indulging in another money spending spree giving the precarious state of the nation’s economy and other compelling needs of Nigerians.

An obstacle here is the provision of the Rules of both Houses that terminates the journey of any bill, at the expiration of the tenure of a particular session

Another problem is that the desire to reduce cost would not tally with the emerging agitations. That is, the yearnings of Nigerians between 2011 and 2015 that warranted the kind of amendments proposed by the 7th National Assembly might not just be the same set of agitations and demands.

Common amongst the agitations that got so much prominence during the last attempt at amending the constitution were demands for more states and local governments by virtually all the sections and geo-political zones of the country.

Another issue that might change the desire of many to have those amendments passed as they were is the one arising from the challenge of insecurity.

The proposal sought to give constitutional recognition for traditional rulers but the need to place more priority on creation and establishment of community or local policing over constitutional roles for traditional rulers might emerge.

This new thinking can be aligned with the success recorded by the military fighting insurgency in the Northeast and the critical role played by the civilian youths in curbing the menace.

The proposed amendments of the last Assembly clearly would not tally with the emerging developments, particularly, the ones that would strengthen the economy, strengthen government institutions charged with the responsibility of fighting corruption, empower agencies of government to create jobs and job opportunities, encourage local production, especially, in the areas of agriculture and many more..