The Patriots, an eminent group of Nigerian elder statesmen led by former Secretary General of the Commonwealth, Chief Emeka Anyaoku, stirred the hornet’s nest last week when it demanded that President Bola Tinubu should take measures to give the country a new constitution. Rising from a meeting with the President in Abuja, the group advised the government to do certain things that would strengthen democracy and, perhaps, help in good governance.
The Patriots had advised government to set up a Constituent Assembly that would draft a new constitution for Nigeria. It also advised that, in the absence of a Constituent Assembly, the government should adopt the 2014 National Conference agreements and recommendations. The group equally advised that the document to be produced by the Constituent Assembly, if the government chooses this option, or the 2014 National Conference document, if so adopted, should be subjected to a referendum for Nigerians to affirm that the content truly represents their wishes.
In asking for a new constitution, The Patriots said that the 1999 Constitution, as amended, was not the people’s constitution, having been drafted by a few people for a military government then in power, without the inputs of the Nigerian people. According to it, the new constitution that would be so drafted by representatives of the people making up a Constituent Assembly would be a people’s constitution and, therefore, the declaration, “we the people of Nigeria made this constitution for ourselves…” would have its true meaning.
The Patriots, as a group, is not the only organisation that has called for a new constitution for Nigeria. Many organisations have in the past called for a new constitution. Individuals have equally called for a new constitution over the years. The argument has always been that the current constitution was military-powered and does not represent the wishes and aspiration of the people, calling to question the actions of the military, which, 26 years ago, assembled some lawyers and jurists to draft the initial 1999 Constitution. There has not, however, been any consensus whatsoever that the successes and failures recorded by past governments since 1999 have something to do with the constitution.
No doubt, there are many questions that stare us in the face when we talk about the 1999 Constitution, as amended. Is there anything wrong with the 1999 Constitution as amended? Yes. Is there need for the country to have a constitution that would meet global standard and take care of the wishes of the citizenry? Yes. To have a good constitution, does the country need a totally new constitution? Yes and no. To get a perfect constitution, can the current constitution be straightened? Yes. Is the problem of Nigeria, regarding governance and democracy, about the constitution? No. If Nigeria has a good constitution, is it a guarantee for good governance? No.
Those who are raising issues about the constitution have a point. The constitution is not perfect as it has some flaws. The defect in the constitution is not about those who drafted it. The blemish is the altruistic act of the military and the limitation of its knowledge in constitutional democracy. A dictatorship is averse to the tenets of democracy and, therefore, would not take care of them in any governance document.
It must be emphasised that no constitution is perfect. That is why there are provisions for amendments. A good constitution today could be imperfect tomorrow because of changing dynamics and certain socio-economic and political developments. That is why the constitution undergoes amendments, when necessary. A bad constitution could also be improved upon, if the institution charged with such responsibility would do its job with all diligence, having the interest of the country and the people at heart.
There is a fundamental difference between a good constitution and good governance. A good constitution does not guarantee good governance. The implementation of the constitution and a good leadership, in all ramifications, bring about good governance. A constitution is the supreme law of a land, outlining the fundamental principles, structures, and powers of a government. A constitution serves as the backbone of a nation’s governance system, shaping the relationship between the state and its citizens.
Good governance, on the other hand, refers to the effective, efficient and accountable management of a country’s resources and institutions. A well-crafted constitution could set the road map for good governance, but good governance is only possible where there are checks and balances among government branches, where there is protection against abuse of power and where there is a culture of transparency and accountability.
Dwelling on the constitution, as it relates to how it was drafted and adopted as well as raising issues as to whether it is really the constitution of the people is just like addressing the symptoms and ignoring the ailment. The problem of Nigeria’s democracy is not the constitution. The problem of the country’s democracy is the implementation of the constitution. A perfect constitution that is circumvented or not well implemented has no value. A good constitution that is badly implemented would still not guarantee good governance.
In situations where governments or leaders circumvent the constitution, the very foundation of democracy and the rule of law is undermined. The consequences of side-stepping the constitution, and, therefore, having an unchecked authority is the entrenchment of authoritarianism, suppression of individual rights and freedoms, undermining of public confidence in government institutions, as well as bringing about social unrest and conflict. That should be our major headache.
There are glaring failures by the arms of government making it impossible for Nigeria, as a nation, to achieve its full potential. The executive, in forging policies and programmes and implementing them, has performed below average. The legislative arm of government has not also given Nigerians the confidence to trust it as it shirks its responsibility and kowtows to the executive. The judiciary, which ought to serve as arbiter, on its part, has also fallen short of its glory, to the extent that it is accused of being a nest of corruption, where justice is bought. This is a social malaise we need to address.
One agrees that the 1999 Constitution of Nigeria has a blight. One agrees that a Constituent Assembly could be raised to draft another constitution. One agrees that the 2014 National Conference recommendations could be adopted for a new constitution. However, the fact remains that the current constitution could undergo amendments that could make it better. This is the duty of the National Assembly and the 36 state Houses of Assembly, and Nigerians should hold them accountable for this.
There is need for those in government to mend their ways. Their actions and inactions are our problem as a nation. That elections are rigged is not the fault of the constitution. That the Tinubu government removed fuel subsidy without first putting the mechanism to cushion the effects and thereby causing hardship is not the fault of the constitution. That the judiciary would not give justice is not the fault of constitution. That people appointed to positions of authority compromise and not do the right is not the fault of the constitution.
What Nigeria needs is a good leadership. What Nigeria needs is transparent elections, whose results would reflect the people’s wishes. What Nigeria needs is for people in government to be punished for corruption and stealing of our commonwealth. What Nigeria needs is for the arms of government to perform their duties and to be held accountable for their actions and inactions. These should be our primary concern.