Constitutional review: What does it portent for our collective future? (Page 3)

What we need is not a review of the constitution, BUT a moral review of our lives, WE, EVERYONE OF US IS VERY IRRESPONSIBLE AND INDICIPLINE.
when we become responsible and diciplined EVERYONE OF US, then we can effect a change when we are elected into public office.

Posted: at 6-09-2009 06:45 PM (14 years ago) | Gistmaniac

I concur.

Posted: at 27-09-2009 10:02 PM (14 years ago) | Upcoming

Who Wants the Constitution Amended?
Simon Kolawole Live!,


Senator Ike Ekweremadu, in case you don’t know, is a determined and calm man. Recently in Abuja, I tried to wind him up on the proposed amendment of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. I asked the Deputy Senate President, who is also Chairman of the Senate Committee on the Review of the Constitution: “To the best of my knowledge, the ruling political class is not really interested in any review of the constitution because it is not in their interest. Are you lawmakers not just trying to keep the political firmament a little bit busy by this constitution amendment talk? Are you really interested in it?”
He smiled. “I’ve heard that,” he replied. “But from day one, we decided – in fact, nobody prompted us – to make the amendment of the Constitution one of our legacies. We’re mindful of the challenges ahead of us but we are determined to do it. Early enough, the Senate constituted its committee for this purpose. What actually set us back was that it took the House of Representatives three months to set up its own committee. We were trying to find a convenient date with the House to commence the job. Eventually, we set up the Joint Constitution Review Committee. But controversy ensued. Time passed by.”
The “controversy” was that the Representatives started an argument about who should chair the joint committee. From nowhere, a fire was started about which of the chambers of the National Assembly was superior. This curious controversy made many people believe that the House was working in tandem with those who were against the amendment of the constitution, an allegation the Lower Chamber denied. But it left a sour taste in the mouth that the substance of constitution amendment was relegated to the background while a seemingly peripheral issue of “seniority” took the centre stage.
With the controversy unresolved, the two chambers decided to part ways. There is nothing in the constitution that says a joint committee is needed for the amendment. “We believed we would save cost and time if we worked jointly,” Ekweremadu told me. “But we moved on all the same. Our plan is to take it to a level and make it irreversible so that everyone will take it seriously and come to our aid. We have developed a timeline and our objectives. We will break out into geo-political zones to collate views from across the country. Like our public hearings, it will be shown live on TV. We will then set up committees for the specific issues. They will look into the details and advise the main committee appropriately. The United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) is helping us with consultants whom they will pay. We’ll seek the best possible advice across the world so that for every proposal we make, we can look at what country it has worked and why we believe it’s going to work in Nigeria.”
My cynicism was not enough to deter the Deputy Senate President from outlining his committee’s calendar. “By February 2010, we believe we will be done with this work. We will submit our recommendations to the Senate. By June 2010, we expect that the amendments will be passed. We’ll then move it to the House and see what compromise we can reach on areas of differences. We can then send it to the State Houses of Assembly for concurrence,” he said with all enthusiasm.
There is suspicion that President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua is not too keen on the amendment – just as it is also believed that the Senate is trying to kill the amendment bills sent to it by the President. Ekweremadu quickly dismissed the first allegation – “The President has been very supportive,” he declared – and went on to explain what the Senate has done or is doing to the bills sent by the President. “Presidency has proposed six bills,” he said. “The first is on the Land Use Act. The Executive is proposing an amendment so that land owners can use their land as collateral for loans without requiring Governor’s consent. Although this has nothing to do with the election, we need to empower our people to create wealth.
“The second is party registration. Presidency is proposing a commission to register and regulate parties, in this age when people are talking about the need for small government. Nigerians fought for the removal of hindrances to the registration of parties. Why do we need another bureaucracy, another body, which would only increase the cost of running government? Already, we have over 50 parties. Senators took a look at this bill critically. It died on Second Reading. The third is on electoral matters. It proposes independent candidature. It also deals with the appointment of the chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC). This one has passed Second Reading. We are still working on it.
“The fourth is the INEC Act of 1998. It was enacted just to provide a legal instrument to the elections leading up to handover in May 1999. It’s a ‘spent legislation’. The decree created INEC. All the provisions have been transferred to the 1999 Constitution. Nothing is left in the Act. All you need now is to amend the constitution. The fifth is the Police Act. The Executive bill is aimed at amending the Police Act to strengthen security during elections. The amendment says there should be security for election materials and electoral officers. As a lawyer, I know that the Police Act is all about security for all. So, I ask: Is the life and property of INEC different from others? Who advised the Executive in respect of this bill? The last is a bill seeking to create a commission to try electoral offenders. We’re going to look into it. I have gone this length to explain because Nigerians may not know the reasons why some of the bills are being thrown out.”
He spoke at length on another touchy issue – state creation. “Our aim now is to provide the atmosphere for credible elections in 2011. We have to look at incremental changes. We cannot put everything in the basket at a go. We’ll look at all those bills, consider the Uwais report and collate the views of Nigerians,” he said, explaining that it would be more beneficial to make a law that will simplify state creation processes because of the ambiguities contained in Section 8 of the 1999 Constitution.
“Look at Section 8 very well and you’ll see that it’s ambiguous. It is also very strenuous. Unlike other constitutional changes which require two-thirds of the National Assembly, state creation requires four-fifths. Pursuant to the 1979 Constitution, there is the 1982 State Creation and Boundary Adjustment Act which was meant to support the constitution on state creation. Yet, things are still ambiguous. It says a referendum must be conducted on a request for state creation and that two-thirds of the federation must support it. Now this is confusing. Who conducts the referendum? What is two-thirds of the federation? Is it two-thirds of the entire population of Nigerians or two-thirds of elected representatives or Houses of Assembly? All these are ambiguous,” he explained.
What way forward then? Ekweremadu says his committee wants to make things simple enough so that the processes of creating a state will be started by the people who desire it. He explained again: “We need to streamline the processes. Amending the Act will help us push the process to the agitators. The first step is for them to make a request. This should be signed by their elected representatives covering the area of the proposed state. Then they can send it to the National Assembly to secure two-thirds approval. Then a referendum will be conducted before it is now sent to State Houses of Assembly for concurrence. It can now come back to the National Assembly for two-thirds approval. A state is then created. It doesn’t need executive assent. You shouldn’t need anybody to create state for you anymore. You start the process yourself. If it is only to remove ambiguity, that would be an achievement for us.”
Ekweremadu is very determined to accomplish this task. After the Kaduna Retreat, public hearing will commence on Tuesday, with former Presidents and Heads of States invited to make presentations. I believe rather than spend eternity complaining about how “bad” our constitution is, it would make sense to engage with the process constructively. This is another chance for us.


SOURCE:http://www.thisdayonline.com/nview.php?id=156745

Posted: at 12-10-2009 01:14 AM (14 years ago) | Upcoming

Thank you my brother. Well said.

Posted: at 3-02-2010 01:15 AM (14 years ago) | Upcoming

English is my First Language, and I so have no idea what you just said back there.

"Constitutional Review," to my mind is nothing but a Political Shell-Game.
This is rearranging the order of the deck-chairs, as THE SS TITANIC is going down...! 

Posted: at 11-02-2010 10:34 PM (14 years ago) | Newbie

Once again, as always, I was all along & still right, when I said the process won't bring about any positive change, but only further parochial interest. I think I should start charging folks 4 my psychic abilities on politics.lol.

Posted: at 24-12-2010 12:29 AM (13 years ago) | Upcoming