No, Mr. President: Nigeria Needs A New Constitution, Not Another Amendment

The Presidency has announced that significant progress has been made toward establishing state police and that a Constitutional amendment is imminent following consultations among the Executive, the National Assembly, and security agencies.

We say: No, Mr. President. Not another amendment.

Nigeria does not suffer from a shortage of Constitutional amendments.

Nigeria suffers from a crisis of Constitutional legitimacy.

For over twenty-five years, the political class has amended, altered, adjusted, and tinkered with the 1999 Constitution.

Yet insecurity has worsened. Federalism has weakened. Institutions have deteriorated. Public trust has collapsed.

And now we are told that state police will be achieved through yet another amendment.

The question is simple:

Why should Nigerians expect a different outcome from the same process that has repeatedly failed?

The answer is that they should not.

The issue before Nigeria is not state police.

The issue is not even security.

The issue is legitimacy.

This is why every security proposal eventually becomes a Constitutional question.

Amotekun became a Constitutional question.

State Police has become a Constitutional question.

Tomorrow's security initiative will become a Constitutional question.

The recurring obstacle is not the absence of ideas.

It is the absence of a Constitutional order derived from the consent of the peoples who must live under it.

Every discussion about security eventually runs into the same wall: the 1999 Constitution.

Every discussion about Federalism runs into the same wall.

Every discussion about resource control, local autonomy, judicial authority, fiscal federalism, and political representation runs into the same wall.

That wall is a Constitution that begins with the words "We the People" even though the people neither debated it, approved it, nor enacted it.

A military decree cannot become legitimate merely because it has survived for decades.

Age does not create legitimacy.

Repeated amendments do not create legitimacy.

Political convenience does not create legitimacy.

Legitimacy comes from the people.

That is precisely what is missing.

The tragedy is that this reality was understood from the beginning.

In 1998, as the military prepared its transition program, many Yoruba leaders and activists insisted that the Constitutional question had to be settled before participation in the transition process.

At the August 3, 1998, Yoruba Summit in Ibadan, the prevailing sentiment was clear: Nigeria needed a Constitution founded upon the consent of its peoples.

Instead, participation came first.

Constitutional reform was postponed to the future.

The argument was simple enough: once elected into office, democratic leaders would produce a new Constitutional order.

Nearly thirty years later, that promise remains unfulfilled.

Instead of a new Constitution, we have had amendment after amendment.

Instead of restructuring, we have had endless committees.

Instead of Federalism, we have had increasing centralization.

And now, instead of confronting the question of legitimacy, we are again being invited to celebrate another Constitutional alteration.

The Yoruba people have seen this movie before.

We know how it ends.

History also teaches another lesson.

When the Western Region was dismantled, Chief Obafemi Awolowo opposed the fragmentation. Others embraced it.

Today, however, one of the enduring symbols of Yoruba regional achievement remains Oodua Investments, preserved largely because the late Mr. C. S. O. Akande had the foresight to institutionalize the region's economic assets before the political structure was broken apart.

The lesson is straightforward:

Political opportunities come and go.

Moments of decision do not last forever.

Those who fail to act during decisive moments eventually inherit the consequences of their hesitation.

That is where we stand today.

The Constitution presently being amended does not recognize the peoples of Nigeria as Federating units.

That is not a side issue.

That is the issue.

Everything else is secondary.

Section 2:2 says, “Nigeria shall be a Federation consisting of States and a Federal Capital Territory.” and Section 3:1 prescribes the 36 states.

But Peoples make up Nigeria.

Nationalities do.

Historic communities do.

They can organize themselves in any administrative formation that suits their purpose.

The current amendment process therefore begins with a false premise.

The Executive is consulting the National Assembly.

The National Assembly is consulting security agencies.

Political elites are consulting one another.

Yet the people themselves remain spectators.

Exactly as they were when the military decree was imposed.

Exactly as they have been throughout every Constitutional alteration exercise since 1999.

And then we are told that this process represents democracy.

It does not.

Even the claim that the National Assembly represents "the people" collapses under scrutiny.

Members of the National Assembly represent political parties.

Political parties are creatures of the existing Constitutional order.

Their structures, regulations, finances, and operational frameworks are ultimately determined by the central state.

To suggest that partisan institutions alone can resolve the legitimacy crisis of the Federation is to assume the center can substitute itself for the people.

It cannot.

Nor should it.

The contradiction becomes even more glaring when lawmakers operating under different legal and Constitutional realities, (including states governed in part through Sharia legal systems) are expected to negotiate Constitutional arrangements for peoples whose political aspirations may be entirely different.

The result is predictable:

A Constitution negotiated by elites.

A Constitution amended by elites.

A Constitution interpreted by elites.

But never a Constitution authored by the people.

That cycle must end.

The answer is not another amendment.

The answer is a new Constitutional process.

The answer is legitimacy.

The answer is Referendums.

For the Yoruba people, that means a Yoruba Referendum.

Not because the Yoruba are uniquely entitled.

Not because they seek privilege.

But because every people must have the right to define the terms upon which they consent to political association.

That is the foundation of every legitimate Federation.

Anything less is administration.

Not Federalism.

Anything less is management.

Not consent.

Anything less is control.

Not union.

In the meantime, the security crisis does not require Constitutional paralysis.

States can immediately strengthen local security through their traditional institutions.

Obas can serve as first responders and first lines of defense within their domains.

Community-based security structures can be established without waiting for Abuja's permission or another Constitutional amendment.

What is lacking is not legal possibility.

What is lacking is political will.

And that brings us to our final point.

We do not oppose President Tinubu's pursuit of a second term.

That is his Constitutional right.

But Yoruba leaders must understand that history has returned to their doorstep.

The choice before them is the same choice that confronted an earlier generation in 1998.

Accept another Constitutional compromise.

Or insist upon Constitutional legitimacy.

Accept another amendment.

Or demand a new foundation.

Accept permanent management of the crisis.

Or address its root cause.

The Yoruba Referendum provides a path toward a genuinely Federal Nigeria founded upon Constituent Nationalities, regional autonomy, internal security, judicial authority, and negotiated Federal powers.

That is the path that deserves our energy.

Not another amendment.

Not another committee.

Not another exercise in political cosmetics.

The question before Nigeria is no longer whether the Constitution should be amended.

The question is whether the people will finally be allowed to make one of their own.

That is the issue.

That is the battle.

That is the future.

Editorial Board

Yoruba Referendum Committee