Which one is Iberiberism again o? What kind of English shall we not hear in this?

Well, the word is not regular English language, neither is it my creation. The copyright belongs to former Imo State governor, Rochas Okorocha, who created something being fast accepted in English from the Igbo word, Iberibe, meaning foolery, trickery, or stupidity. It is the act of being deceitful or untrue.

Okorocha engaged in neologism when he created the word Iberiberism, and used it to describe political foolery and trickery or stupidity.

Let’s divert a bit. There was another Imo man, who was a master neologist. His name was Chief Ozuomba Mbadiwe, man of timber and caliber, pillar and caterpillar, the political juggernaut. He would tell us that “come would soon come to become,” and other such ticklish expressions.

I once interviewed Chief Greg Iheanacho Mbadiwe, who regaled me with his father’s ability to create words. He said as a boy, he was struggling with another young boy in his father’s compound, not knowing that the father was watching with keen interest from upstairs.

When the tussle became too long, Chief Ozuomba Mbadiwe bellowed: “Iheanachooooo. Will you slap that boy, and let him be seconsaimabalism.”

Holy Moses! What does the word mean? You will search all the dictionaries in the world, including the ones that have not been compiled, and you will never find the word seconsaimabalism. It’s a creation of Chief Mbadiwe, just as Okorocha created Iberiberism.

Now, back to the main issue. The sabre-rattling about Nigeria’s unity and the possibility of disintegration has got to the point of Iberiberism. Some people have no other business than doomsday predictions of a crumbled, collapsed Nigeria, as if they actually fast and pray for that eventuality.

When Chief Olusegun Obasanjo was President between 1999 and 2007, they predicted that he was going to be the last President of a united Nigeria. It didn’t happen. When Umaru Yar’Adua came, they said he was too sick to hold Nigeria together. The country stood. Under Goodluck Jonathan, they said the man was too weak, and different components of the country would soon say, ‘to your tents oh Israel.’ Nigeria survived. And for six years under Muhammadu Buhari, they have not changed their songs. The Somaliasation of Nigeria was on the way. The Fulanisation of the country would be the final death knell. But Nigeria lives. It trudges on from day to day, month to month, and will surely survive.

Veno Marioghae (by the way, where is she?) got it right in her hit song of the 1980s, when she said:

If them thief our oil o

Even if them burn the oil o

(Nigeria go survive)

I say if them drink the oil o

No matter how them try o

(Nigeria go survive)

Our roots them strong for ground o

Ancestors no go gree ooo (Nigeria go survive)

The god of thunder and lightning

United shield Nigeria

(Nigeria go survive)

Nigeria go survive

Africa go survive

My people go survive o

Nigeria go survive.

Yes, sing it from Abeokuta to Kaura Namoda, from Isokoland to Brass, from Orlu to Nsukka, Nigeria will survive. To, therefore, continue to wail about disintegration is now bordering on Iberiberism. We need to change our tongue, and our song. Nigeria go survive.

Why do some people always dwell on the negative? They have been seeing nothing but negative for decades, but Nigeria remains sturdy and steady. Yes, countries do fail, collapse, crumble, but Nigeria will survive. Let them change from malediction to benediction. It will be well with this country.

Some fathers of the land will not fold their hands and see Nigeria go down. Fortunately, we have one of them as President now. The young Muhammadu Buhari spent 30 months in the frontlines as a young army officer, fighting the war of unity. And he has said it: we will not be around and watch Nigeria go down. Never. We will rather speak to insurrectionists in the language they understand.

And what of Olusegun Obasanjo, a civil war hero. Despite all that he has contributed to the current upheavals by his actions and inactions, words and bile, he says it is idiotic to wish Nigeria disintegration now. Good. But let us put our money where our mouth is. Let Baba mind his thoughts, and his language.

Last Saturday, as Nigeria celebrated Democracy Day, some people wanted to stoke protests, riots and destruction. Did the system allow it? Not at all. Should it have been allowed? Not when there is still law and order in the land. Only anarchists would set the country on fire in the name of Democracy Day protests. And it was sad, tragic, to hear some so-called activists asking the police to apologize to Nigerians, for not folding their arms, and allowing the country to go into a tailspin. Anarchists masquerading as activists. And they would be the first to show a clean pair of heels when things go awry, leaving innocent people to suffer. Kudos to our law enforcement agents for being professional. It’s the way to go.

There cannot be development without peace. Nigeria, despite severe security challenges, is taking giant strides in development, particularly infrastructure. President Buhari was in Lagos last week to commission Lagos-Ibadan rail project, a maritime security project, Deep Blue, costing millions of dollars, and to handover massive security equipment to the Nigeria Police. This week, he has been in Maiduguri, Borno State, to also commission landmark projects. Nigeria is making progress, despite all the odds.

Next year, the last full year of the current administration in power, the country, by the grace of God, will witness the commissioning of legacy projects. Roads, bridges, gas projects, many others. Why then would anybody wish the country death? That would be Iberiberism at its height, and such people should stop it. They should begin to speak peace, rather than discord, they should begin to speak the language of God, rather than that of the accuser of the brethren. Nigeria will survive.

Some weeks back, when I wrote that Nigeria was like the testicles of a ram, which only sways from side to side as the animal runs, and would never fall off, some idle hateful hearts deliberately attempted to turn what I said upside down, and were ‘dragging’ themselves on the now rusticated Twitter. One simply ignored them. And to show that I stand by what I wrote, I repeat it again: “This country is like the testicles of a ram, which gyrates from side to side, as the animal runs. However fast the speed of the ram, have you ever seen the testicles fall off? Or when a woman runs, and holds her breasts, is it for fear that those tender parts will fall off? It never happens.”

Nigeria will survive. The polity will endure. And the component parts will live together in amity and brotherhood. Any other option is Iberiberism.

*Adesina is Special Adviser to President Buhari on Media and Publicity

Source

  By Sonnie Ekwowusi

What would have been the June 12 Democracy Day Celebration last Saturday was marred or scuttled by the Buhari-must-go protests. By midday last Saturday different anti-Buhari protesters across the country had staged tumultuous nationwide protests tagged #June12protests. The protesters were demanding that President Buhari should quit power because he has failed to put the country on the path to political, economic, social, cultural progress. Despite the spirited efforts of the Nigerian security forces to intimidate, threaten or scare away the protesters to abandon their protests, the protesters were undeterred in their resolve to exercise their right to peaceful protest.

This is the first time June 12 celebration has sparked off nationwide protests against a sitting President. The previous June 12 celebrations were marked with flowery speeches on the imperative of triumph of democracy in Nigeria. But this year’s June 12 Celebration took a different turn last week. It was marred with different protests rocking the different parts of the country. Some of the peaceful protesters were waving colourful placards some of which bore the following messages: “Buhari Must Go!”, “Say No to Government Funding Terrorism”, “#BuhariMustGo Protest is a fundamental right. All illegally detained citizens must be released unconditionally”.

But some young protesters in Kwara State went too far. They carried a mock coffin of Mr. President and were parading it on the streets whilst chanting the song “Buhari must go”. This is too bad. There is a right to peaceful protest but there is no right to mock Mr. President. Whoever organized those young persons in Kwara last week to mock the President did something very bad. There were also anti-Buhari protesters in the streets of London last week. Similar Anti-Buhari protesters waving ‘Buhari must go’ placards were sighted in Toronto, Canada, Texas, USA and other countries. Of course there was the pro-Buhari crowd apparently rented by the Presidency to neutralize the Anti-Buhari protest. But unfortunately the anti-Buhari protesters overpowered the pro-Buhari rented crowd to the extent that the impact of the latter could hardly be felt. Each of the pro-Buhari protesters was paid N1,000 to carry out the pro-Buhari protest. But not all of them got N1,000. Those who did not get the N1,000 dramatically staged protests in front of camera last Saturday and vowed that they would not embark on any pro-Buhari protest. In London the Anti-Buhari protesters were seen chasing away the pro-Buhari protesters at the Abuja House, London.

If President Buhari had been promoting the welfare of the people in the last years the people would not have organized protests last Saturday to demand that he must quit power. As far as about 85% of Nigerians are concerned, the Buhari government is synonymous with failure, under-performance and cluelessness. At least under the Jonathan government the people could eke out a living. Now under the present Buhari government the living condition of the average Nigerian has been appalling. Small wonder the people are clamouring that President Buhari should quit power so that there will be a new dawn of peace, stability, security and economic prosperity in Nigeria. If you listen carefully as you read this you will hear the following prayers of frustrated Nigerians to the Almighty God. “The Buhari government has failed us. Hear us, O! Lord ! Take this yoke away from us. Listen to your Nigerian children mobbed and murdered by Fulani herdsmen, bandits, unknown gun men, kidnappers and hired assassins. We raise our shackled hand and charge Thee amid the tears of our murdered heroes. Save us, Oh Lord. Make haste and hearken to the assistance of your children drowning in the rivers of blood flowing down the city streets and alleyways of Nigeria. Sit no longer blind, Lord. Lord, let not our cries sink in silence in the midnight. God, thou are the undoer of evil deeds. ‘Vengeance is mine; I will repay’, said the Lord of Host!”.

A successful administration is one with a strong presidential leadership. Weak leadership-or no leadership is often a disaster. One of the great responsibilities and opportunities of the President under Presidential democracy is to lead and inspire the people and public opinion. The words of a President carry great weight. Of course, his acts carry weight. For example, the words of former U.S. President D Roosevelt in his inaugural address did so much to revive the waning spirit of Americans who were at that time of Roosevelt’s Presidency struggling through the depths of an American depression. Roosevelt said; “ the only thing we have to fear is fear itself”. Those words, backed up later by action, restored the faith of Americans in the Roosevelt government.

But unfortunately the present Buhari government is a big disaster. The words of President Buhari do not carry weights. There is no dispute anymore that President Buhari doesn’t inspire anybody. Whenever the President speaks he annoys the people. This is why Nigerians are no longer looking up to him for leadership inspiration. Right from the very day he took power as President of Nigeria he has been performing below expectation. Mr. President lacks the soundness of mind to respond to questions put across to him. If you ask him one question he would disregard it and start talking about something else unrelated to the question. For example, last Thursday Mr. President was asked a question relating to foreign investors in Nigeria and he veered off the question and started quibbling with the last #EndSARS protests and plans to dislodge him from power. The sad aspect is that our dear President is not in touch with reality. For example, Mr. President does not tackle the hydra-headed problems imperiling the country with the urgency and seriousness that they demand. He does not listen to the voice of the people. Whereas about 89% of Nigerians are clamouring for outright restructuring of Nigeria, Mr. President is insisting that only the National Assembly should shoulder the responsibility of restructuring Nigeria and enthroning true federalism and devolution of power of Nigeria in its on-gong Constitutional Review exercise.

Those surrounding Mr. President should let him know that the voice of the people is the voice of Allah. Whoever does not listen to the people does not listen to Allah. The Holy Qur’an itself contains a number of injunctions and warnings on good manners and various aspects of social behavior and attitudes. In their book entitled: Islamic Manners & Social Conduct, Abdullahi Orire, B. Aisha Lemu and Asiya Rodrigo write that the obligation to avoid inflicting either physical or psychological; harm on others is a primary ethical principle in Islam. The Prophet said, “There should be no harming or reciprocating harm” (Sunam Ibn Majah), for “He who causes harm will be harmed by Allah and he who acts in a hostile manner will be treated in a hostile manner by Allah”. (Jami’ al-Tirmidhi No. 1306). One of the wrong assumptions about democracy is that the political officer holders have enough wisdom and virtue to pursue the end of democracy-promotion of the welfare of the people. But viewed against the backdrop of the reign of the Buhari government in the last six years, the political leaders do not have enough wisdom and virtue to pursue the end of democracy. The Buhari democracy attests that democracy is challenged from within by sheer ignorance and pursuit of personal interests at the expense of the common good and welfare of the people.

Jonas Odocha

Human sanity and sincerity of purpose must be predicated on actions and reactions to events and circumstances. It is therefore noteworthy that laughter and tears, sadness and joy, silence and voice, all act as safety valves of human sanity. In safety management therefore, it is admonished to speak up when one encounters unsafe acts or unsafe conditions to prevent harm or injury. In the same manner, as security ensures elimination of risks to loss of life and physical assets, conventional wisdom dictates that voice must accompany threats to life and property.
In Nigeria today insecurity has assumed unprecedented dimensions that we must not play the ostrich but speak up to tackle the root causes, since you cannot conquer what you fail to or cannot confront. Sincerity is the watchword. Today the Southeast region of Nigeria, particularly Imo State, is in the news with regard to insecurity. The decade-long Boko Haram insurgency in the Northeast, the banditry and kidnapping associated with illegal gold mining in the Northwest and the heinous crimes of Fulani herdsmen in the North-central and areas of the South; all these have suddenly taken a convenient back seat. But the news on Channels TV 8pm and 10pm broadcast, Tuesday June 15, 2021; depicting a large number of northern youths, apprehended in Benue State, headed to Imo State, aware of the nebulous situation there, must call for serious interrogation by the Imo State government, the Federal government and the Security agencies.
How were these youths organized and by whom, for this clandestine journey to “security-troubled” Imo State? Who provided them with all the motorcycles, as they claim to wish to begin “Okada business” in the State? Who are stationed there to receive them, and where is the rendezvous, since this wouldn’t have been a “blind date.” It is germane that the Governor of Imo State should assure the people that he has their security concerns as top priority in the face of current happenings in the state.
It is indeed mind-boggling that when States are grappling with the menace of herdsmen invasion of farmlands and the attendant atrocities, that this type of northern youth invasion can be contemplated. But one must not fail to read the body language and utterances of the government at the centre. The Southern governors’ rejection of archaic open grazing for cattle ranching was mischievously regarded as rejecting spare parts trade in the north. The veiled target audience is of course well known. Again their reference to constitutional freedom of movement and the usage of age-old grazing routes must come to all as ingrained mindset on this vexatious invasion of farmlands and territories. He who wears the shoe knows best where it pinches.
SILENCE CAN NO LONGER BE GOLDEN!!!

By Ikechukwu Amaechi

I had no personal relationship with Abba Kyari, a lawyer trained at Cambridge University in England, who amassed more power than any of his predecessors as the Chief of Staff to President Muhammadu Buhari.

So, after his death last year, I reached out to a close friend of his to make sense of all that had been written and said about him.

Was he a victim of blind loyalty, as his friends claimed, or a villain, as popularly believed, who took advantage of the manifest handicaps of Buhari for narrow political gains?

His friend, a power broker in his own right, who had just written a moving tribute to him, gave an unambiguous answer. Kyari, he said, was a good man who, sadly, opted to be servile to a sadist.

If Kyari was such a positive influence, why was he unable to moderate the toxic policies of the government, I probed further.

He was likened to a man who went for a dinner with the devil, leaving his long spoon behind. A damning charge against Buhari, as reflected in my article on April 22, 2020 titled, “Abba Kyari, victim of blind loyalty?”

His friend said: “If you knew Abba, you will understand what I am talking about. The man just couldn’t do anything against the wishes of his boss even if he felt otherwise.

“Take this to the bank, he never did anything without the clearance or directive of the president. The man did nothing that Buhari didn’t ask him to do. He never did anything without the president’s say so or approval.

“The truth is that Buhari is just inherently wicked but Abba was ready to take the bullet for him and he finally did.”

Buhari came back to power in 2015 with an agenda deleterious to the common good. A man with a long list of grudges, he is up to no good. Contrary to the belief in some quarters that he is a puppet, he is, indeed, the puppeteer – a man on top of his game, effectively in charge.

His interview on Arise Television on June 10, another defining moment in this nightmare, confirmed my worst fears. Strategic in its timing and import, the interview was meant to send a clear message to those who challenge his Fulani supremacist agenda, particularly the “troublesome” Igbos.

His acute intellectual vacuity on parade notwithstanding, what came through, most forcefully, is that Buhari does not care a hoot about public opinion and his pathological hatred and frightening disdain for Ndigbo.

The interview provided a window into the dark recesses of his soul. On display was his single-minded determination to consolidate an overt Fulani supremacist agenda clothed in an illusory Northern superiority complex.

His ethnocentric prattle was as benumbing as his nepotistic gobbledygook was frightening, evidenced in his prioritisation of cows over citizens.

This was the reason he told his Attorney General, Abubakar Malami, to dig up a phantom First Republic gazette which purportedly delineated cattle routes and grazing areas across the country.

When the matter has to do with the welfare of cows, Buhari is eloquent and bubbly, just as when discussing the good of his kith and kin in Niger Republic, where his father came from.

On some other issues, he waffles, playing to the hilt his reputation as a Teflon president who never takes responsibility for anything.

But when the issue has to do with his bête noire – Ndigbo – he becomes melancholic. Asked in the interview how the problem in the South East, which he largely created, will be resolved, he immediately adorned his genocidal apparel.

“I was encouraged by what I heard, nobody told me,” he replied.

“Two statements from the South South. One by elderly people. They said, this time around, there will be no access to the sea. I am sure you will understand what they mean. Again, the youths made the same statement. That encouraged me.”

Buhari was happy that Ndigbo are isolated and encircled once again, reminiscent of the Civil War days.

But he wasn’t done with his genocidal taunt.

“So, that IPOB, it is just like a dot in a circle. If they want to exit, there will be no access to anywhere and the way they are spread all over the country, having businesses, having property,” Buhari said.

“I think IPOB doesn’t know what they are talking about. In any case, we said we will talk to them in the language they will understand. We will organise the police and the military to pursue them. That is what we can do and we will do it.”

Buhari’s apologists say he was talking about IPOB and not the Igbos. How disingenuous. The truth remains that in his warped mind, every Igbo is IPOB. And none should be spared in his genocidal onslaught.

I doubt if Buhari ever discussed with any South South leader as he claimed. My guess is that he was simply hallucinating. But assuming he did, what actually was he discussing with them to elicit such a weighty pledge? And what did he promise in return? Since he has less than two years in office, do we take it that these purported negotiations signal effective preparation by the Buhari regime for another ruthless scorched-earth assault against Alaigbo before May 29, 2023? Time will tell!

But while he gloats thinking that he insulted Ndigbo by describing the South East as a dot in a circle, he only manifests his ignorance.

Singapore, a far smaller dot, is one of the greatest success stories in history. Its economic development is the stuff legends are made of, so much so that it is the only Asian country with a higher per capita Gross Domestic Product (GDP) than the United States.

Ndigbo are proud to be the dot in the Nigerian circle. And what a productive, significant dot that space is. Why shouldn’t I be proud when this dot, which has the highest literacy rate and per capital income within the circle called Nigeria, is my heritage?

The only thing stopping this dot, the land of the rising sun, from replicating the Singaporean miracle is that the circle where it is hedged in is ruled by medieval emperors who flaunt brawn as a leadership skill in the age of knowledge.

I don’t know what Buhari intends to achieve by making that sacrilegious comment. But if it is to cow Ndigbo into submission, he has failed, because, rather than being cowed, even those hitherto indifferent are now daring the bully in Aso Rock.

In the last one week, the refrain in the dot has been: Buhari, do your worst.

What else can be worse than the ongoing carnage? The fact that he sees nothing wrong in joining his Northern brethren to remind Ndigbo that they have properties and businesses up north is, indeed, a new low.

Yet, these are the same people who turn around to accuse Ndigbo of all manner of atrocities without any evidence.

Between May and October 1966, more than 30,000 Easterners were massacred in the North. Between October 1966 and June 1967, over 100,000 more were murdered. Pregnant women were killed, and babies pulled out of their wombs and murdered.

Ndigbo are not reputed for such bestiality. So, on what basis are Northerners giving Ndigbo quit notice?

If the killings of the 1960s were a revenge for the January 15, 1966 coup as claimed, what about the pogrom in Jos on June 22, 1945, the first reported genocide against Ndigbo in the North? Did Nzeogwu lead a band of idealistic young military officers to execute a coup then?

What about the mass killings in Kano in 1953, the second recorded genocide in Nigeria. What precipitated it against the Igbos?

So, what charge will Buhari and other Northern elders baying for Igbo blood bring against them this time? Ndigbo are peace loving. They do not conspire to murder their hosts or guests.

Since this herders/farmers conflict engineered by Buhari started, there has not been any premeditated killing of Northerners by Ndigbo. Instead, it is the same Fulani herdsmen that are butchering Ndigbo within their dot in the circle, while Buhari looks away.

Throughout Nigeria’s chequered history, there has never been any incident of lorry loads of corpses of Northerners murdered in Alaigbo parceled back to the North for burial as it is always the case with Ndigbo living in the North.

So, what is this noise about Ndigbo all about? Why is Buhari, whose first cousins from the Sahel have chased away – literally, from his home state of Katsina – vehemently determined to annihilate Ndigbo?

Why would a president who eviscerates governors for not providing security for their people exhume a dead grazing route gazette rather than support Governor Samuel Ortom’s anti-open grazing law, Benue State’s antidote to the menace of herdsmen?

Why would Buhari admonish Benue people to live in peace with their neighbours (their killers) rather than prosecute the terrorists he acknowledges are not Nigerians?

Why is he up in arms against Southern governors for banning open grazing? Why has he not sent soldiers to kill and maim Northerners on the streets as he is doing in the South East since – to borrow his logic – every Northerner ought to be a bandit, the same way all Igbos are IPOB?

Security personnel have been killed in greater numbers in the North than in the South East. And security facilities and other national infrastructure have been attacked in the North.

So, why does Buhari, a tough cookie when dealing with Ndigbo, become a jelly, conciliatory and even apologetic, when confronted with the atrocities of Fulani bandits?  

Nigeria has a president who values his affinity with “first cousins” in a foreign country than with fellow citizens – the reason he is arrogantly deploying Nigeria’s scarce resources to develop infrastructure in Niger Republic. This is perhaps the biggest tragedy that has befallen Nigeria since independence in 1960.

It is only in a Buhari enclave this malady can happen with impunity. In any other country, such a president would have been kicked out.

Imagine an Olusegun Obasanjo plunging Nigeria into debt to develop Benin Republic since many Yorubas have first cousins there, or a President Barack Obama deploying U.S. wealth in Kenya because it is his biological father’s country.

Buhari is Nigeria’s biggest existential threat. But one thing is certain. Nigerians generally, and Ndigbo in particular, will outlive his malevolence.

I have just read, to my utmost chagrin and dismay, a release authored by Prof. Auwalu Yadudu and currently trending in the social media. Yadudu titled his piece (which apparently represents his memorandum to the NASS Committee on the Review of the Constitution), “AVOID TAKING THE SLIPPERY SLOPE PATH TO CONSTITUTIONAL REVIEW”. Although, I have submitted my personal memorandum to the Constitutional Review Committee after my ex tempore interaction with the chairman and members of the Constitutional Review Committee at the International Conference Centre, Abuja, on Friday 4^th June, 2021, I have decided to do this rejoinder to Prof  Yadudu’s poor treatise to set the records straight.

Prof. Yadudu (Yadudu’s) memo is nothing short of a deliberate subterfuge, red-herring and scare mongering carefully designed to frighten the NASS from critically examining the near descent of Nigeria into a failed state, and retrieving her from the nadir under agreed and negotiated terms of co-existence through the promulgation of a new Constitution. By this rejoinder, I hereby call on the NASS to maximally reject and ignore Yadudu and his incoherent thesis. His submissions are neither grounded in law, logic nor in morality and constitutionalism. I have not seen any “slippery slope on the current constitutional review exercise, except in Yadudu’s fertile imagination. The NASS should therefore, discard his recommendations in their entirety. They are meant to nurture the current repressive system of unitarism, social injustice and faulty lines of our fumbling, dawdling and groggy country.

WHY THE FEAR OF A NEW CONSTITUTION AND REFERENDUM?

If I may ask, why is Yadudu, like some people of his ideological persuasion, afraid of a brand new Constitution and a peoples’ Referendum? The three important words that appear to frighten them most are “New Constitution” and “Referendum”. Why do these words frighten them? Do you know? I will tell you anon.Let me therefore regretfully announce to Yududu that he cannot run away from these indispensable words if Nigeria must stay indissoluble and indivisible.

PROF YADUDU WAS A NORTH WEST DELEGATE AT THE 2014 CONFAB

Prof. Yadudu, had represented the North West geopolitical Zone at the 2014 National Conference convoked by the then President Dr Goodluck Ebele Jonathan.

Let me shock Nigerians more.

Prof Auwalu Yadudu was not only a North West delegate to the 2014 National Conference (Confab; National Confab), he was indeed the Deputy Chairman of the Committee on Law, Judiciary, Human Rights and Legal Reforms. I also belonged to this Committee. The Hon Justice George Oguntade, Justice of the Supreme Court (rtd) and erstwhile High Commissioner to the UK, was the Chairman of the Committee.

THE 2014 CONFAB RECOMMENDATION ON LEGAL FRAMEWORK

Yadudu specifically presided on the very day when the modus operandi (Legal framework) of operationalising the entire over 600 recommendations of the 2014 National Conference was hotly debated and agreed upon. Justice Oguntade was unavoidably absent on that particular occasion. I had been appointed to head a compact sub-committee to draft the legal frame work of implementing the entire Confab report. And I did. We debated it. Ideas for ideas. Logic for logic. Wit for wit. We finally arrived at the way forward by proposing a Legal frame work for plenary’s debate and adoption at pages 19 to 20 of our Committee’s report. Pursuant to this, the plenary wholly accepted our committee’s report at pages 230-231 (paragraph 5.8.16) as follows:

“LEGAL FRAME WORK

• “Policy recommendations arising from the Conference should be implemented by the presidency.

• Recommendations requiring abrogation or amendment of existing Laws other than the Constitution should be initiated/carried out by the relevant Authorities, Ministerial Departments and Agencies.

• On recommendations requiring amendments to certain Sections of the Constitution or the emergence of an entirely new Constitution, Conference resolved to draft a Bill to that effect for the president to forward to the National Assembly for further actions. In this regard, a form of interface with the National Assembly  should be initiated by the President; and

• Conference recommendations should be taken to the Court of public opinion/Referendum, if the need arises”. (Underline supplied for emphasis).

In chapter 7 of the Confab Report (at pages 897-898), critical issues bordering on people’s sovereignty, a new Constitution and referendum of the people were further emphasised by the conference report as follows:

“THE EXERCISE OF PEOPLE’S SOVEREIGNTY

“Delivering his Inaugural Address at the National Conference on 17^th March, 2014, President Goodluck Jonathan, GCFR, touched on the inter-relationship between constitution-making and referendum in the following words:

Let me at this point thank the National Assembly for introducing the provision for a referendum in the proposed amendment of the Constitution. This should be relevant for this Conference if at the end of the deliberations, the need for a referendum arises. I therefore urge the National Assembly and the State Houses of Assembly to speed up the Constitutional amendment process especially with regard to the subject of referendum.

“According to section 14(2)(a) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, sovereignty belongs to the people. The conduct of a referendum, if the need arises, on the Resolutions of the National Conference can only serve to obtain the approval or endorsement (imprimatur) of the entire citizenry of Nigeria. Notable examples of referendums in Africa include South Africa (1992), Tunisia (2002), Kenya (2005) and Egypt (2011)”.

CHAPTER 7, CONFAB REPORT (PAGES 897-898) CONTINUES:

“DEBATE ON MODALITIES FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF CONFERENCE RESOLUTIONS

“In the course of determining the modalities for the implementation of Conference Resolutions, different shades of opinion emerged from the Delegates, to wit:

• Amendments to the Constitution which are proposed by the Conference should be embedded into the 1999 Constitution and the resultant document should be regarded as the 1999 Constitution (as amended):
• The Volume of Amendments embedded in the 1999 Constitution would make it a new document which should be regarded as making it a new constitution.

“If Conference decides that it is a 1999 Constitution (as amended), then the process of bringing it into being will be through the normal constitutional process as envisaged in the 1999 Constitution.

“However, if Conference decides that the resultant document is a brand new constitution, then to bring it into existence will necessitate a referendum.

Conference is still to take a decision on whether it will be a 1999 Constitution (as amended) or a brand new Constitution at the close of plenary on Thursday, 10^th July, 2014.” (Underline supplied for emphasis).

Consequent upon its very volatile nature, the above matter was therefore pushed to the NASS whose critical role in the birthing of a new Constitution has never been doubted by me, or any reasonable person. From the foregoing, how could Yadudu so unfairly claim that some “separatist” elements or “some clever chaps” “surreptitiously cooked” up and called for “the adoption of a new Constitution”? Haba!

Indeed, pursuant to paragraph 7.2.2 of plenary decision as stated above, the Conference adopted an annexure titled “The Nigeria charter for Nation Reconciliation and Integration”.

This could be found at pages, 716-721 of the Conference report. Article 18, page 720 of this Conference report Charter provides, “The consent to live together in unity and harmony and the principles and purpose of our national co-existence stated heretofore in this charter shall be incorporated into our Constitution upon adoption by the Nigerian people through a referendum”. (Underline supplied for emphasis).

THE COMPOSITION OF THE 2014 CONFAB

There were 492 delegates at this Conference, specially elected or selected by their own people drawn from across Nigeria. Such delegates were put forward directly by the various ethnic nationalities, youth, students, traditional rulers, market women and men, Religious leaders, members of the Military and Police and other security agencies (serving and retired); FIDA, civil society, labour, Diplomatic corps, Nigerians in Diaspora, professional bodies, Elder Statesmen and women, people living with disabilities, private sector, the media, the Academia, State Governments, Social political and cultural groups, geopolitical zones, Federal Government, the Judiciary, present and former political office holders, former LG Chairmen, Political parties, Retired Civil Servants, etc. Yadudu was only one of these distinguished Nigerians. I was also one of them. We all agreed with the above Confab recommendations. These eminent Nigerians converged in Abuja for the Confab which was presided over by late Hon. Justice Idris Legbo Kutigi (a Northerner like Yadudu), who now fights so unfairly diminish the Confab by terming it a “confab whose members lack popular mandate and whose composition is undemocratic having been assembled in a very skewed manner by the use of a template of dubious legal or constitutional basis”.  How unfair and immoral? The Deputy Chairman was renowned Diplomat, Prof Bolaji Akinyemi; with Dr (Mrs) Valerie Azinge, SAN, the Secretary. Yadudu did not object to their positions.

PROF YADUDU LACKS MORAL RIGHT TO QUESTION THE 2014 NATIONAL CONFAB AND ITS RECOMMENDATIONS

It is most heart-rending that Yadudu could question the validity and legitimacy, not only of the 2014 Conference itself, but also its very outcome and recommendations as clearly stated above.

In questioning the legitimacy and legality of the 2014 Confab representatives, Yadudu said, inter alia:

“While we are it, one needs not be reminded that the National Conference comprised unelected members – however dignified or experienced they may be in their individual capacities – and, consequently, it lacked the powers of a constituent assembly, in the exercise of which it may propose or adopt a new constitution. In other words, the Confab, being unelected, does not derive its mandate from the sovereign will of the people and cannot claim to be speaking for them. For such a defective Confab to assume such a role or purport to adopt a new constitution, as representatives of the people or under any guise, would amount to the usurpation of powers it does not possess. It cannot discharge or exercise a mandate not conferred on it by law”

SOME PERTINENT QUESTIONS FOR YADUDU

What was Yadudu doing at the 2014 conference for six months, earning his fat monthly allowances? I had, on my part, told the whole world that I would not reject my allowances, but would use such earnings to help the less privileged and hoi poloi. And I did just that (see the following links of 24^th March, 2014 – https://premiumtimes.com; https://www.vanguard.com; https://www.247reports.com; https://peoplesdaily.ng.com). The last time I checked, I was never told that Yadudu returned to government coffers any of his monthly earnings he took during the Confab period. Prof Musa Yakubu, now INEC Chairman, was the Assistant Secretary (Finance Administration) at the Confab. He has not told Nigerians that Yadudu ever returned his earnings. My personal checks with relevant government departments did not also show that he returned his huge earnings to the Nigerian people. Upon what basis can he then question a Conference that he voluntarily attended, fully participated in, drew income from, and was actually Deputy Chairman of its very strategic spinal cord Committee that designed the roadmap (Legal framework) for implementing the entire Conference recommendations?

If I may ask, who appointed, elected or sponsored Yadudu to represent the North West geopolitical zone State as a Confab delegate? How did he get there? Who was he representing? On what terms was he representing his zone? If he did not believe in the Conference, its representation and the likely usefulness of its outcome, why did he not do what honourable men normally do in such circumstances by simply declining participation? How can he approbate and reprobate? How can he blow hot and cold simultaneously? Yadudu must be reminded of the doctrine of “collective Responsibility”. If he disagreed, he should have resigned quietly, or even noisily. He also did not, as he was entitled to do, write a minority report as did late cerebral Rights Activist, Oronto Douglas, at the 2005 National Political Reform Conference convoked by the then President, Chief Olusegun Obasanjo.

Yadudu not only participated fully at the 2014 Confab and took its financial benefits, he, actually presided over the debates and recommendations of our sensitive Committee (Law, Judiciary, Human Rights and Legal Reforms). Plenary bought into these critical decisions and based its final recommendations on same. Yadudu does not therefore have the moral, ethical, legal or any other known right howsoever, to publicly denounce and repudiate, through his submission before the Constitutional Review Committee, recommendations he personally facilitated and also helped to midwife and author. It is grossly immoral to do so.

Having said so, let me now tackle him headlong, on some of his fallacious postulations which he adorns with the fake garment of constitutional validity, lest the Constitutional Review Committee gets hoodwinked and misled. I will not bother myself about the issue of State Police and Community Policing, as I believe every Nigerian knows my over four decades of crusading for same. They are not only desirable, but must be provided for immediately in the new constitutional dispensation.

ON LOCAL GOVERNMENT COUNCILS (LGCs)

Prof Yadudu in his memo strongly opposed the deletion of LGCs from the Constitution. Why will he not? He knows that section 162(5), (6), (7), and (8) of the 1999 Constitution partly predicate Nigeria’s distributable account (revenue and income) on the number of LGCs in Nigeria. Yadudu fights to retain the unweildy 774 LGCs under section 3(6) of the Constitution, rather than allow Nigeria to be a two-tier system of government, with the states empowered to merge or create LGCs according to their needs and financial capacity and remove the burden from the Federal Government. After all, there are over 89,000 Local Government Units in America. But, do you know why? I will tell you. Kano State, part of the North West geopolitical zone he represented at the 2014 Confab (a Confab he now surprisingly demonises), has a whopping 44 LGCs and 19 members in the House of Representatives.

Jigawa State alone which was excised from Kano State has 27 LGCs and 11 House of Representatives members. So, as between Jigawa and Kano State (old Kano State), there are 71 LGCs and 40 House of Representatives members at the NASS. This State, while in the old Northern Region (up to January 15, 1966) produced, consumed and sold its famous Kano groundnut pyramids, cotton, hides and skin, according to her needs. Regions at that time paid 30% royalty to the Federal Government under section 140 of the 1963 Republican Constitution for minerals, mining, rents, mineral oils, or other resources extracted from the soil of each region. Such payments by the Federalion to regions were charged on the consolidated Revenue Fund. Nigeria at that time practised true fiscal federalism thus, enabling regions own their resources and pay tax to the Federal Government. Meanwhile, the said distributable revenue (sharing formula under the 1999 Unitary Constitution is now based partly on these 71 LGCs from only one state alone. Yet, Kano and Jigawa do not afford Nigerians any revenue to share. They do not care to know how the National cake is baked, they only share from it. This is the kind of federation Yadudu glamourizes!.

Compare and contrast this with Bayelsa State. Poor Bayelsa, one of the few states from which our monolith product (oil and gas) is derived has only 8 LGCs and 5 Representatives at the NASS. Since oil was discovered in 1956, at Oloibiri (in the present day Bayelsa), the state has been held down by more powerful states whose indigenes (like a rampaging Army of conquest) beat their chest arrogantly to proclaim superiority and a divinely-ordained mandate of expansionism and irredentism. So, while Bayelsa with 8 LGCs takes pittance revenue from the oil she produces, non-product Kano and Jigawa States with 71 LGCs smile to the banks with lion share. Thus, Bayelsa suffers and wallows in self-pity. I cannot remember Kano groundnuts, cotton, hides and skin being shipped through pipelines or trailers to the Niger Delta Region to enhance one Nation. Or, can you? The North today has 19 States, 419 LGCs and 191 Representatives. The South has 17 States, 357 LGCs and 169 Representatives. So, the South has 62 LGCs and 22 Representatives respectively less than North. The entire geopolitical zone of the South East has 95 LGCs, only 24 more than Kano and Jigawa States alone; and 41 Representatives; only 15 more than Kano and Jigawa alone. Thus, any bill that comes before the NASS, no matter how inequitable and unfair to the South South, will easily be resolved in favour of the North once they so decide. You do not run a Federal system that way.

Yadudu does not mind an inequitable perpetuation of this skewed, roguish and extornist system that is alien to all known principles of federalism, because it benefits him and his people (See “Federal Government”, by K. C. Wheare (1946). He does not approve of a new Constitution that will bring about fresh air, true fiscal federalism, massive devolution of powers, egalitarianism, social justice, equity and fair play.

I am surprised he cannot see anything wrong in a lop-sided unitary system of government where the geese that lay the golden eggs (Southern States) have 357 LGCs, 62 LGCs less than the 419 LGCs (I don’t like this number) of the consumers of the already baked National cake (the Northern States). He is obviously not bothered by this sort of master-servant, Freema-vassal relationship, which a brand new Constitution driven by a people’s referendum desires to address and rectify once and for all. So, NASS, please, do not listen to his illusory rhetoric. The NASS should outrightly reject Yadudu’s half-baked postulations and discard the behemoth LGCs system in the Constitution through wholesome amendment.

MY SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS ON LGCs

1. To properly restructure, we need a fresh people’s Constitution anchored on a six-zonal federal structure; with the present states, still retained as federating units, thus, having a two-tier system of Government. LGCs shall not be a federating unit. While retaining section 7 which guarantees a system of democratically elected LGCs, sections 3 (6) and 162 (4) – (8) of the Constitution should be amended to scrap the State Joint LG Account and allow each state freedom to merge and collapse existing LGCs, or create fresh LGCs, through State Assemblies legislative action, depending on its peculiar needs and financial capacity. Such LGCs shall be made fully autonomous and not dependent on the Federal or State Governors. Their funding shall be derived directly from a percentage of the allocations due to them from their internally generated revenue (IGR). This shall be expressly guaranteed by the Constitution and placed on a first line charge, away from the predatory eyes of State Governors.

• LGCs shall themselves observe strict transparency, accountability and discipline and eschew corruption in their utilization of their constitutionally allocated percentage from their Internally Generated Revenue (IGR).

HOW TO PROMULGATE A NEW PEOPLE’S CONSTITUTION FOR NIGERIANS: MY SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS

Let me now give a blow-by-blow account on the making of a new Constitution and involving the Nigerian people through a Referendum.

1. Section 14(2) of the 1999 Constitution provides that sovereignty belongs to the Nigerian people. The present NASS, to abate their fears of being sidelined and rendered irrelevant, shall certainly be involved in igniting and facilitating the process of the emergence of a brand new Constitution and a referendum on same from its present constitutional review exercise.

• It is true that section 9 allows the NASS to amend the existing 1999 Constitution which provides for the mode of altering its provisions. However, the fundamental challenge here which Yadudu and his school of thought appear oblivious of is that the NASS can only, in futility, employ the said section 9 to amend an inherently illegal, illegitimate and irredeemably incurable militarily-imposed unitary document which falsely masquerades as the present 1999 Constitution. This is because the present Constitution (being merely a Schedule attached to a Military Decree No. 24 of 1999), is not owned by the Nigerian people. Some people may not want to hear about this; but this is the truth. The 1999 Constitution is illegitimate and thus lacks autochthony, credibility and acceptability of the people. Consequently, no amount of limitless amendments or alterations of this illegitimate document of dubious pedigree through the present exercise can cure it of its “original sin” of illegitimacy and imposition on the people; in the same way that you cannot put something upon nothing and expect it to say.

THE UNDOUBTED ROLE OF THE NASS

• Consequently, for us to create a more viable politically and economically functional country imbued with social justice, equity, unity, mutual respect, egalitarianism and prosperity, the NASS surely, through its present amendment exercise, has a crucial role to play. It has the power under section 4 to ignite and facilitate the process of having a brand new Constitution that is owned by the people with a specific provision for popular referendum of the people.How does the NASS do this? Quite simple: the NASS which is already in place shall resort to section 4 of the Constitution to enact a law that creates a Constituent Assembly of the people. Section 4 certainly gives the NASS Assembly power to make laws for the peace, order and good government of Nigeria or any part thereof. Enacting an Act to facilitate the process of having a Constituent Assembly that will midwife a new Constitution after a referendum is such a Law that will remove the present imbalances and mass disaffection in the Nigerian union.

• It is this Constituent Assembly thus provided for by an Act of the NASS using section 4 of the Constitution that will debate the collated recommendations of the present Constitutional Review exercise, some acceptable lofty 2014 National Confab recommendations and some relevant provisions of the 1963 Constitution that enthroned true fiscal federalism.

• This enactment shall also make provisions for a referendum of the people. What the NASS therefore does is to simply make a law that ignites, facilitates and popularizes the entire process of bringing about a Constituent Assembly of the Nigerian people, which will in turn midwife a draft new Constitution, and  which draft  Constitution will be subjected to a referendum of the Nigerian people. This is not rocket science.

• Provisions of a new draft Constitution shall be voted on by Nigerians in the form of “AYES” or “NAYS”, during a popular referendum. The draft thus becomes the outcome of the will of the people. The matters to be voted upon, the questions to be put, the mode of participation and the template of the entire referendum shall be matters of detail that shall be provided for in the law thus enacted by the NASS.

• With this credible, transparent and legal process, the new emergent draft Constitution becomes autochthonous, indigenous, legitimate, credible, respectable, believable and owned by the people.

• All these steps to bring about a people’s new Constitution can be embarked upon and completed within a space of a mere six months. It is known that the NASS had in the past taken drastic steps to carry out first, second and third readings and adoption as law within few days, matters very dear to its heart.

• The President thereafter PROCLAMS the draft Constitution into law (new Constitution), using his executive powers under section 5 of the 1999 Constitution.

1. With this, the new Constitution can truly proclaim that, ““WE THE PEOPLE OF THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA DO HEREBY MAKE AND GIVE TO OURSELVES the following Constitution”.

1. The NASS should therefore eschew fears of being side-lined or marginalized in the emerging scenario. The NASS is actually the main organ that originates, facilitates and drives the entire process of how a Constituent Assembly is birthed; and also how a referendum by the Nigerian people, leading to a brand new Constitution, is achieved.

SOME OTHER COUNTRIES THAT ENACTED NEW CONSTITUTIONS THROUGH THEIR PEOPLES’ REFERENDUM

Kenya (67% of Kenyans, August, 2010); Iraq (2005); South Africa (1999); Morocco (June, 2011); Iran (99.5%, December, 1979); Bangladesh (83.6%, 1991); Egypt (2012); Eritrea (1994); Tunisia (January, 2014); USA (September, 1787). So, dear Professor Auwala Yadudu, having a new Constitution and a referendum driven by the people in Government are not new. It has been done many times over the years. Nigeria also can do it.

ANY NEED TO RESORT TO THE DOCTRINE OF NECESSITY?

I have read some argument to the effect that the NASS should even invoke the “Doctrine of Necessity” to achieve a new Constitution because of Nigeria’s gradual dangerous slide towards balkanization. Such people mean quite well. As a Constitutional Lawyer, I have written severally on this Doctrine of Necessity over the years. So, I know about it very well. It was used in January, 1966 and given judicial imprimatur by the Supreme Court to legalize the relinquishment or obdication of powers by Dr Nwafor Orizu, the then Acting President of the Senate, to General J. T. U. Aguiyi Ironsi, from the Prime Minister Abubakar Tafawa Balewa Government (See LEKANMI V. A. G. (WEST) & ANOR (1970) NSCC 143. It was also invoked in February, 2010, to save Nigeria from the precipice by declaring the then Acting President, Dr Goodluck Ebele Jonathan, substantive President, after the then President, Umaru Yar’Adua had travelled to Saudi Arabia on health grounds without properly handing over to Jonathan in accordance with section 145 of the Constitution. See also the Pakistani case of STATE V. DOSSO (1958) 2 P.S.C.R. 289 AT 58; MADZIMBAMUTO V. EARDUER-BURKE (1969) 1 AC. 645; AND UGANDA V. COMMISSION OF PRISONS, EX PARTE MATOVU (1966) EAST ASWO REPORTS (EA). However, the NASS can surely rely on section 5 to under the present circumstances bring about a new Constitution through a people’s referendum. This extinguishes the existing Constitution; brings about new structures of Government (Legislature, Executive and Judiciary); conduct of fresh elections; introduction of new revenue allocation formula; massive devolution of powers; State ownership of resources and State Police; and indeed a totally new lease of life.

THE 1963 REPUBLICAN CONSTITUTION AND 2014 NATIONAL CONFAB RECOMMENDATIONS

I am not aware of anyone calling for wholesale adoption of the entire provisions of the 1963 Republican Constitution and the over 600 recommendations of the 2014 Confab report as Yadudu postulated. At least, not me. What I understand Nigerians to be saying (which is also my position), is that the best of these two important documents should be taken and merged with fresh thinking of Nigerians under the current Constitutional Review exercise and used as raw materials by an introduced Constituent Assembly. So, Yadudu’s belaboured argument on these two issues is a non-sequitur. He merely made a mountain out of a molehill.

ON REFERENDUM

Mercifully, Yadudu agreed that where the NASS is persuaded to use referendum for the future, then

“ an enabling Act to spell out what sort of questions to submit for resolution via referendum, who is invested with power to conduct it, using what voters’ register, who is eligible to participate in it etc”, need to be passed.

This is the point I have been making. The NASS can use section 5 to actualize it.

Surprisingly again, Yadudu, a Professor of Law, turned around and described Nigerians calling for such a referendum on a New Constitution as “separatist” elements. He even lied that “some clever chaps attempted to hoist the idea on the nation, by calling for the adoption of a new Constitution which they surreptitiously cooked during the National Conference of 2014”(underline supplied for emphasis).

I am alarmed by this infamous claim. As I have copiously shown above, this is, with due respect, a fat lie. No “clever chap” ever attempted what he falsely alleged. No one ever “surreptitiously cooked” up anything during the 2014 National Conference. This claim is therefore not only false and baseless, but also most unfortunate and unfair to the loving memory of all the 492 Nigerian patriots who participated at the 2014 Confab, and many of whom are now dead. May Almighty God rest eternally, the souls of some of these Confab memebers who have since transited to the great beyond- Hon. Justice Idris Legbo Kutigi (Confab Chairman), Prof. Dora Akunyili (former Minister, Hamman Misau, Prof Muhammed Jumare, Magaji Danbatta, Prof Muhammed Nur-Alkali (former VC, University of Maiduguri), Mamman Nasir (former president Court of Appeal),  Ibrahim Coomasie (former IGP), Chief Richard Akinjide (Ex Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice), etc, etc. 

LAST LINE

I humbly urge the NASS to please take a serious look at the above recommendations which are not merely theoretical, but based on solid practical experiences  over the years as drawn from Nigeria and from across the globe. The above have been done before. They can be done again. Now is the time, as you perch on the threshold of history.

May God guide you in your arduous task of restructuring, re-engineering and overhauling the weak fabric of our dear imperiled, wobbly, groggy and fumbling country called Nigeria.

By Ahuraka Yusuf Isah

On June 3, 2021, the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Hon. Justice Ibrahim Tanko Muhammad submitted some proposals to the National Assembly, ostensibly to alter some provisions of the Constitution concerning the Judiciary Arm of Government. The CJN made this submission in the paper he presented as recommendations of the Judiciary on the occasion of the National Public hearing by Senate Committee on review of the 1999 Constitution, held at the Africa Hall of the International Conference Centre, Abuja.

In a 17-page paper titled “Input by the Judiciary to the Proposed Alteration to the 1999 Constitution (as Amended)’’, the CJN’s submission to the Senate Committee contained 45 constitutional amendment proposals on reforms for the Nigerian Judiciary.

Some of the amendments the CJN proposed threw many stakeholders aback, especially on his reasons behind such a radical departure from the norm, and against positions of the Government that be. Let’s take cursory look at some of the proposals once more.

Pegging the Supreme Court Bench at 16

Section 230 states that the Supreme Court of Nigeria shall consist of the Chief Justice of Nigeria; and such number of Justices of the Supreme Court, not exceeding twenty-one.

Section 230 of the Constitution the CJN states, should be altered by ‘’(a) substituting paragraph (a) of the existing subsection (2) with a new paragraph (a); ‘’(a) The Chief Justice of Nigeria who shall be the head of the Judiciary of the Federation’’.

“(b) Substituting the words “not exceeding twenty-one’’ in lines 1 to 2 of paragraph (b) of the existing subsection (2) with words “not exceeding sixteen’’.

The reduction of the Apex Court Bench to 16, is followed by other proposals to reduce the workload of the Supreme Court. For instance, all the appeals to the Apex Court, would be by leave of the Apex Court. This is like creating toll gate to sieve appeals that can be heard by the Apex Court, invariably reducing several spurious appeals usually sponsored by Lawyers seeking to be elevated to the rank of Senior Advocate of Nigeria, and must appear before the Apex Court.

Again, three Justices of the Supreme Court sitting in the chamber, the CJN said could dispose the application for leave of the court. Besides, a single Justice of the Supreme Court sitting in chambers, could exercise power vested in the Apex Court in some instances. In addition, all the appeals from the Court of Appeal to the Supreme Court, should be by leave of the Supreme Court. No appeal shall lie to the Court of Appeal (and by extension to the Supreme Court) from any decision of an election tribunal, in respect of an interlocutory decision. By this insertions, the proposal for the reduction of the Apex Court Bench, is to larger extent justifiable.

Moreover, several stakeholders have viewed an attempt to appoint more Justices, possibly to make up the Supreme Court Bench to 21, as a drive to turn the Apex Court to Magistrates Court. Whereas, all that the Apex Court requires, is to streamline avalanche of appeals lying before it.

Besides, President Buhari neither increased the N110 billion budget allocation to the Judiciary for 2021 fiscal year, nor provided additional fund to the Supreme Court when he appointed eight justices to the Supreme Court.

However, if the CJN is named as the head of the Judiciary of the Federation in the Constitution, the Judiciary would perhaps assume its rightful position in the order of protocol in the nation. Many legal persons are irked with the CJN being called as the 5th person instead of the 3rd in the Order of the National Protocol. When the Constitution recognises him as the head of the Judiciary, he’s then the head of the Third Arm of the Government, with the President as the 1st, Senate President as 2nd and CJN the 3rd.

Fixing and Periodic Review of Judges’ Salaries

The CJN also asked the National Assembly to alter the Constitution, with the effect that the National Judicial Council (NJC) would fix and review Judges’ salaries every four years.

In item 38 of his submission, the CJN requested Part 1 of the Third Schedule Paragraph 21 to the Constitution be altered to include sub-paragraph ‘h’, to the effect that the NJC should ‘’fix, in conjunction with the Salaries and Wages Commission, Salaries and other emoluments of Judicial Staff; in the case of Judicial Officers, to review such salaries no later than four years from the last exercise’’.

By the dictates of Section 84 (1), the Revenue Mobilisation Allocation and Fiscal Commission (RMAFC) reviewed Judges’ salaries alongside some other public officers through the enactment of, ’’Certain Political, Public and Judicial Office Holders (Salaries and Allowances, etc.) (Amendment) Act, 2008’’ which came into force on February 1, 2007. Since this Act has not been reviewed since 2008, Judges’ salaries have remained the same for about 13 years, with attendant implications. The CJN who now wants to take the bull by the horn; he wants the lawmakers to separate the duty of fixing and reviewing of salaries of both Judges and Staffers in the Judiciary and be done by NJC, following the Salaries and Wages Commission laid down guidelines.

Of course, this is a far reaching instrument, for the Judiciary to take control of its affairs both at the Federal and State levels. Perhaps, this is why he called for the alteration of Section 84 of the Constitution, by deleting the words ‘’other than allowances’’ in line 2 of subsection (3). Ostensibly to protect Judges and the Judiciary Staff, the allowances cannot be altered downwards, once set.

Other Far Reaching Proposals

‘’A person shall not be qualified to hold the office of Chief Justice of Nigeria or a Justice of the Supreme Court, unless he is qualified to practice as a legal practitioner in ,Nigeria and has been so qualified for a period of not less than fifteen years’’.

Also, he called for the number of the Court of Appeal Justices the Constitution pegs at 49 under Section 237, to be amended such that they are not less than 100 Justices.

The NJC should collect, control and disburse all monies, capital and recurrent for the Judiciary.

The CJN said the Constitution should be amended, for the NJC Secretary seat to be at par with that of the Clerk of the National Assembly.

The Judiciary is now to exercise control over the Code of Conduct Tribunal, as the Federal Judicial Service Commission is to advice the NJC in nominating persons for appointment as the Chairman and members of the CCT. This is necessary since the CCT is of coordinate jurisdiction with the High Court. Appeals against its decision, should also lie to the Court of Appeal.

Ahuraka Yusuf Isah, Senior Special Assistant on Media to the Chief Justice of Nigeria