*Ozekhome SAN wonders what’s frightening the governing elite that they are refusing or delaying on the constitution
*Prof Odinkalu calls for a document that will bring about restructuring of minds
*Ann Kio-Briggs, says no reason to still keep the document as a constitution
*I strongly believe that the country needs a new and popular constitution prepared by the accredited representatives of the people” – Falana, SAN
Nigerian revered lawyers have questioned the legitimacy of the Nigerian constitution, especially with the apparent flaws and consequent inability to take the Nigerian people to their desired destination.
Some of the lawyers, including Aminu Tambuwal; Mike Ozekhome, Femi Falana, Chidi Odinkalu and Mrs. Ann Kio-Briggs bared their minds during the 61st Annual General Conference of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) in Port Harcourt, Rivers state.
In a session on the legitimacy of the Nigerian constitution moderated by J. K. Gadzama, SAN; Prof Chidi Odinkalu, a senior legal officer at the African Programme of the Open Society Justice Initiative, blamed the document for promoting what he called ‘military centrism’ and ‘the infantilisation of the populace’ (that is, the notion that civilians are not mature enough to act in their best interests) and therefore called for a document that would lead towards the ‘restructuring of minds’ on the part of Nigerians.
Other panelists were the Sokoto state governor, Aminu Tambuwal; Chief Mike Ozekhome, SAN; Femi Falana, San: and Mrs. Ann Kio-Briggs, founder and executive director of Agape Birthrights (a non-governmental organization that promotes human, environmental, and developmental rights in Nigeria).
According to Ozekhome, the Nigerian constitution is “a child of bastardy” and so illegitimate.
He claimed that no essential value could be derived from such a document, even if it went through a million ‘amendments’, adding that Nigerian people had never truly had their own constitution, whether under the colonial period or subsequent civilian administrations.
Ozekhome also noted recent examples of other countries that have adopted new constitutions as a result of referendums and wondered what the governing elite in Nigeria was frightened of by refusing – or at the very least delaying – a similar exercise.
He frequently stated that this makeover is not rocket science. The only thing that is required to write a constitution that reflects both our national identity and the diversity of the individuals who make up our country is political will and sincerity.
Femi Falana, SAN, said the people of Nigeria were not involved in the processes which culminated in the constitutions promulgated by the colonial regime.
Thus, the Lugard Constitution of 1914, Clifford Constitution of 1922, Richards constitution of 1946, Macpherson constitution of 1951, and Lyttleton constitution of 1954 were enacted in London and imposed on Nigerians. In order to protect the interests of the British Government, the independence Constitution of 1960 was negotiated between the British colonial regime and the nationalist politicians. Even the much-celebrated Republican Constitution of 1963 was a mere amendment of the Independence Constitution. He said the amendment of the Constitution carried out by the first set of parliamentarians were rather cosmetic.
“I strongly believe that the country needs a new and popular Constitution prepared by the accredited representatives of workers, women, youths, physically challenged people and other interest groups. But a new Constitution can only emerge from the struggle of the Nigerian people through a process that is democratic, inclusive and transparent. The popular struggle of the past had led to the entrenchment of chapters 2 and 4 in the 1999 Constitution. Although the provisions of chapter 2 are not justiciable there are laws that have been enacted by the National Assembly to actualize some of the rights. With respect to chapter 4, some laws have been enacted against illegal arrest and detention, torture of suspects, and extrajudicial killing of citizens while indigent citizens are shall have access to free legal advice and representation by lawyers in court.
“In view of the commitment of the Nigerian Bar Association to take the lead this conference should direct the members of the Human Rights Committees of each branch to accompany Chief Magistrates and Judges during the monthly visits to police stations and other detention facilities in the country. The NBA should be prepared to partner with the human rights community with respect to the provision of pro bono services to all victims of human rights abuse in the country.
“The NBA should pluck up the courage to sanction Attorneys-General who encourage disobedience of court orders and frustrate the payment of damages awarded by courts to victims of human rights abuse. Since Nigerian lawyers support the call for a new Constitution for Nigeria the NBA should embark on consultation with the Nigerian people through its branches that are spread across the 36 states of the Federation.”
According to Mrs. Ann Kio-Briggs, another flaw in the current constitution (as amended) is its glaring unfairness. She saw no reason to keep a document in its current form that, as a previous speaker put it, “lies to itself.” How can the state of Zamfara, for example, be allowed to keep the lion’s share of gold profits found on its territory, while the Niger Delta receives only a small fraction of crude oil revenues derived from the region, thanks to the magnanimity of the powers that be at the center, she wondered? How can a constitution allow one part of the country to blatantly violate the principle of federal character at the expense of other sections? How can a constitution allow one region of the country to flagrantly violate the federal character principle at the expense of other parts? To address this shortcoming, she concluded that Nigeria must be unbundled in order for its citizens to be free of the toxic legacy of ‘Lugard’s Problem,’ as she dubbed it, and that only a brand-new constitution, subject to the will of the people as expressed in a free, fair, and credible referendum, can do so.
