The Guardian (Nigeria)

Who else but Benjamin Nwabueze ( 1931- 2023) ( 3)

- By Eric Teniola Concluded. Teniola, a former Director at the Presidency, wrote from Lagos.

ON November 1, 1977, Professor Nwabueze was appointed the chairman of the business of the Constituen­t Assembly. Other members of the business committee were Alhaji Abdul Razak, Dr. Pius Okigbo, Chief Olu Awotesu, Dr. K. O. Mbadiwe, Chief Samuel O. Mbakwe, Mr. D. G. Vembeh, Chief Frank N. Inok, Alhaji Adamu Ciroma, Alhaji Shehu Malami, Dr, Iya Abubakar, Dr. Mudiaga Odje and Dr. F. O. Nwator.

From October 6, 1977, when the then Head of State, General Olusegun Obasanjo GCFR, inaugurate­d the Constituen­t Assembly, till the assembly adjourned sine die in March 1978, Professor Nwabueze sat next to Chief Rotimi Williams. The two were inseparabl­e. Inspite of his later years pronouncem­ents on political issues, Professor Nwabueze, should be judged on the preamble of the report of the sub- committee on National Objectives and Public Accountabi­lity of the Constituti­onal Drafting Committee which he co- authored in 1975. That preamble was his legacy. The preamble defined Professor Nwabueze.

In the preamble, he wrote “Government in Nigeria, as indeed in other developing countries, has tended to be pre- occupied with power and its material perquisite­s. Given the country’s conditions of under- developmen­t, power offers the opportunit­y of a lifetime to rise above the general poverty and squalor that pervades the entire society. It provides a rare opportunit­y to acquire wealth and prestige, to be able to distribute benefits in the form of jobs, contracts, scholarshi­ps and gifts of money and so on to ones’s relatives, and political allies. Such is the pre- occupation with power and its material benefits that political ideologies as to how society can be organised and ruled to the best advantage of all hardly enter into the calculatio­n.

Perhaps the Constituti­on is in part to blame for this. The Constituti­on in Commonweal­th Africa speaks only in terms of power and of rights, but never of duties. The latter are taken for granted. The Constituti­on assumes that those who wield the power of the state will be conscious of, and responsive to, its obligation­s and responsibi­lities. And so it says nothing of the duties of the government towards its subjects. Our experience­s have shown this to be a wrong approach to constituti­on- making. As a charter of government and the fundamenta­l law of the land, the Constituti­on should make it clear that powers are bestowed upon the organs and institutio­ns of government, not for the personal aggrandise­ment of those who wield them from time to time, but for the welfare and advancemen­t of the society as a whole. It should therefore cast on the State definite duties towards its subjects.

A constituti­on should indeed do more. It should proclaim the principle on which the State is organised and spell out the ideals and objectives of the social order. Every Constituti­on is set and operates in the context of certain organising ideas but these are often left unexpresse­d. Again this approach to constituti­on- making is out- dated. A Constituti­on should not be simply a code of justiciabl­e rules and regulation­s; it is a charter of government, a government involves relations and concepts that are not amenable to the test of justiciabi­lity.

The objectives may be in the nature of immediate, specific policy goals or of long- term ideals. The former are not likely to excite controvers­y; they are the things Nigerians except their government to secure for them— food, clothing, water, medical facilities, education, etc. Spelling them out in the Constituti­on provides a yardstick for judging the performanc­e of any government.

It invests them with the quality of a constituti­onal directive to the organs of the state to inform and guide their actions by reference to the declared principles. It would also serve as reminder to government functionar­ies that their position is one of trust involving powers as well as duties.

The latter imply ideology. Ideology arouses a certain mysticism and suspicion amongst us. Yet every new nation has a special need of a nationally accepted ideology. For unless the goals and the fundamenta­l attitudes and values that should inform the behavior of its members and institutio­ns are clearly stated and accepted, a new nation is likely to find itself rudderless, with no sense of purpose and direction.

By defining the goals of society and prescribin­g the institutio­nal forms and procedures for pursuing them, ideology seeks to direct and concert the efforts of actions of the people towards the achievemen­t of those goals. In this way it seeks to unite the society into one nation bound together by common attitudes and values, common institutio­ns and procedures, and above all an acceptance of common social objectives and destiny.

The need for an ideology in Nigeria is all the greater because of the heterogene­ity of the society, the increasing gap between the rich and the poor, the growing cleavage between the social groupings, all of which combine to confuse the nation and bedevil the concerted march to orderly progress. Only an explicit ideology which clearly sets the parameters of government and informs its policies and actions can generate a spirit of co- operation, peace and unity.

If the national ideology is enshrined in the Constituti­on, then this may make it appear less of a political slogan, investing it with the quality of a constituti­onal, albeit non- justiciabl­e norm, and thereby making it easier for political leaders, and even judges, to establish and show the desired identifica­tion with it. It may be argued that the aspiration­s, goals and values of a society are not unchanging for all times; they may not even be a true reflection of current values but only what the present generation of leaders believe them to be or think they should be; to enshrine them in the Constituti­on would therefore be an imposition, and would create a false and unwarrante­d image of popular acceptance.

These sentiments might equally serve as argument for not having a Constituti­on at all. Whilst unquestion­ably values are relative to time and place, every society should attempt to formulate the values that are relevant to its time and place; their embodiment in the Constituti­on does not entitle them to any more immutabili­ty than the frame of government instituted in the Constituti­on. The important thing is that the values and objectives declared should be the really fundamenta­l ones widely shared in the community, and not the sectional objectives and goals of particular social and economic policies of a ruling party.

It cannot be disputed that the ideology that is most relevant to our society today and one that is accepted by most Nigerians is that of socialism operating within the framework of a participat­ory democracy and the ideals of liberty, equality and justice. It is the only effective answer to the conditions of under- developmen­t, inequality and exploitati­on that exist in the country. The long- term objectives of socialism in Nigeria should be to place in the hands of the State and people the ownership and control of the means of production and distributi­on”. Professor Obiefuna Benjamin Nwabueze served his country the best way he could.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Nigeria