The National Assembly has categorically denied any association with a purported bill that proposes a return to regional government in Nigeria. This denial comes in the wake of a document titled “A Bill for an Act to Substitute the Annexure to Decree 24 of 1999 with a New Governance Model for the Federal Republic of Nigeria” which surfaced online on Friday, sparking an intense debate over the country’s governance structure.
The document, which has been circulating on social media, outlines significant constitutional changes aimed at transitioning Nigeria from its current presidential system to a regional government model. According to the leaked draft, the bill is intended to be passed into law before October 1, 2024, and would be cited as the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria’s New Governance Model for Nigeria Act 2024.
Copies of the purported bill stirred fierce debate over Nigeria’s current leadership. Parts of the draft bill seen by Tekedia reads in part:
PART I – Preliminaries:
“WHEREAS Nigeria, its Peoples, and Government have been governed under Decree 24 of 1999 that was handed down by the then Military Government without the express consent of the people despite the preamble of ‘We the people.’
“WHEREAS the said Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as Amended) is not autochthonous as it does not evolve from the deliberations and consensus of the Nigerian People.
“WHEREAS the Peoples of Nigeria now desire and effectively demand for a change to a Constitution based on Federal/Regional System of Government.
“WHEREAS the Federal and Regional governments are to operate within the provisions of this Constitution, it is within the discretion of the ethnic blocs within the States that constitutes a given region to aggregate or disaggregate as Provinces, Divisions, and Districts, while being in control of their affairs without let or hindrance at whatever level of governance.
“Whereas the 1999 Constitution as amended is a schedule of a military decree now deemed to be an Act of the National Assembly for which the National Assembly have the powers to amend and/or abrogate as expedient.
“Whereas the National Assembly where so necessary and expedient can invoke the doctrine of necessity to resolve any point of law for the good governance of the country Nigeria.”
Key Provisions of the Draft Bill
The draft bill highlights several foundational changes, including:
PART II – Substitution Clause:
The drafters propose that the National Assembly shall invoke its inherent powers to expunge the schedule attached to Decree 24 of 1999, often referred to as the 1999 Constitution as amended, from the decree. This document is now deemed to be an Act of the National Assembly, which the Assembly has the powers to amend and replace with a new governance model for Nigeria effective no later than October 1, 2024.
“This amendment is subject to a yes or no vote in a Referendum by the people of the Federal Republic of Nigeria,” the bill proposed.
PART III – Stipulations for Federal Administration:
The sponsors proposed that: “(1) Nigeria shall be a Federation comprising of Regional Territories and a Federal Capital Territory and shall be a Republic to be known by the name of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.
“(2) The territorial jurisdiction of Nigeria shall comprise the territory of the Regional members of the Federation and its boundaries shall be as determined by international agreement.
3.2 Basis of the Federation:
“(1) Every Ethnic Nationality and People in Nigeria has an unconditional right to self-determination within here delineated territories.
“(2) The sovereignty, powers, and authority to formulate the articles of association towards any reform of the Central Federal Government of Nigeria, at any other time shall lie jointly and severally with all the ethnic nationalities occupying their respective territories.
“(3) Every Ethnic Nationality and People in Nigeria has the right to a full measure of self-government which includes the right to establish institutions of government in the territory that it inhabits and to equitable representation in the Federal and Regional Governments.
“(4) An ‘Ethnic Nationality or People’ for the purpose of this Constitution, is a group of people who have or share a large measure of a common culture or similar customs, mutual intelligibility of language, belief in a common or related identity, a common psychological make-up, and who inhabit.”
National Assembly Denies the Bill
In response to the viral document, key officials from the National Assembly have distanced themselves from the bill.
Sadiya Adaramodu, a spokesperson for the National Assembly, told The Cable: “Such a bill is not with us. And who is sponsoring the bill? The National Assembly plenary is always held openly with the media in the chambers. In which order paper has such been reflected?”
Akin Rotimi, spokesperson for the House of Representatives, echoed this denial: “The committees on rules and business and constitution review have confirmed that there is no such bill before them,” he told THE PUNCH.
Regional System or Third-Term Agenda
The emergence of this bill has reignited discussions about the most suitable governance model for Nigeria. Advocates of regional government argue that it could better address the ethnocentric challenges that the current presidential system exacerbates.
However, there are also concerns about the potential implications of such a significant shift. Some Nigerians suspect that the bill could be a maneuver to extend the tenure of the current president, Bola Tinubu.
Human rights activist and lawyer Chidi Odinkalu said the only way to tinker with presidential term limits in Nigeria for it to make sense is to explicitly make it futuristic by prohibiting the incumbent from benefiting from any change in tenure or term limits.
“This is transparently a #ThirdTerm kite flown early. 1st, existing presidential term will not count. 2nd, it’ll be 6 years & a maximum of 2 terms. 4 years + 12 years = 16 years. That’s double the 8 permitted now. Even if 4+6 years, that’s still 10 years, 25% longer than now,” he said, urging the public to resist any attempts to alter presidential term limits in a way that could benefit the incumbent.
Nigeria practiced a regional system of government following its independence in 1960 until the onset of military rule, which led to the adoption of a presidential system in 1979. The country has maintained this system to date.
The regional system, some argue, allowed for greater autonomy and development within the regions, whereas the presidential system has faced criticism for centralizing power and exacerbating ethnic tensions.
The controversy over the purported bill and the National Assembly’s strong denial highlights deeper issues within Nigeria’s political landscape. The current constitution, a legacy of military rule, has long been criticized for its lack of inclusiveness and representation of the Nigerian people’s will.
The call for a constitution that truly reflects the consensus of the Nigerian people is not new but has gained renewed urgency with the surfacing of this draft bill.
Proponents of the bill argue that a return to regional governance would better manage Nigeria’s diverse ethnic composition by allowing more localized governance. This, they claim, could foster development tailored to regional needs and reduce the central government’s bureaucratic burden. Critics, however, worry about the potential for increased regionalism to fuel separatist sentiments and undermine national unity.
However, as the debate continues, the National Assembly’s clear disassociation from the bill leaves the future of this proposed constitutional change uncertain. Nigerians await further developments with keen interest, mindful of the profound implications such a transformation could have on the nation’s governance and stability.
The broader conversation about Nigeria’s governance model touches on fundamental questions about democracy, representation, and the balance of power. Whether this bill represents a genuine attempt to address these issues or a politically motivated maneuver remains a subject of intense public scrutiny.
