Nigeria urgently requires a completely new and indigenous constitution that genuinely embodies the collective aspirations of its citizens and reflects the nation’s diversity, rather than continuing to rely on piecemeal amendments to the current document.
This was the firm position expressed by Chief Wole Olanipekun (SAN), former President of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), while delivering a thought-provoking lecture at the 13th Convocation Ceremony of Afe Babalola University, Ado-Ekiti, on Tuesday.
The lecture, titled “Nigeria yesterday, today and tomorrow: imperative of a sober and definitive recalibration,” provided deep reflections on the country’s constitutional deficiencies and outlined the path to national renewal.
Olanipekun called on the National Assembly to immediately halt all ongoing and future constitutional amendment exercises.
He argued that the 1999 Constitution, which was introduced by the military regime of General Abdulsalami Abubakar without broad-based public consultation or endorsement, had long outlived its purpose.
According to him, the current Constitution represents little more than a “military albatross” that “tells lies against itself,” failing to capture the essence of Nigeria’s federal structure, cultural plurality, and fundamental values.
He said, “The National Assembly should, for the time being, stay action on any ongoing or future amendment to the 1999 Constitution.
“This Constitution needs a new rebranding, a complete overhaul—a substitution altogether.
“It has to be a negotiated document that will pave the way for a new social order.”
He noted that the National Assembly had commenced a process to amend the Constitution, which had already passed second reading in both the Senate and the House of Representatives.
Olanipekun identified the root of Nigeria’s persistent challenges as the concentration of excessive power at the centre, which he described as a major constitutional flaw.
This centralised structure, he stated, weakens the states, undermines their autonomy, and perpetuates inequality across the federation.
Among the most troubling provisions, he cited the Land Use Act, the arbitrary creation of local government areas without public consultation, and the over-centralisation of the judiciary.
He argued that these elements collectively stifle development, fairness, and justice, since the current Constitution neither reflects the people’s will nor aligns with Nigeria’s federal character and cultural diversity.
Reflecting on past efforts since the 1999 Constitution was “midwifed” under General Abubakar’s rule, Olanipekun said he had consistently championed the call for a participatory, people-driven constitution created through nationwide consultation and referendum.
He recalled that during his tenure as NBA President in 2002, he had confronted former President Olusegun Obasanjo over the document’s inadequacies.
At the time, Obasanjo dismissed calls for a comprehensive review but has since acknowledged the need and now supports the call for a new Constitution.
Olanipekun proposed a transitional period between now and 2031 during which the country would collect, review, and harmonise previous constitutional reports and recommendations to build the foundation for a new national charter.
“During this transitional period, elections will continue and elected officials will serve their terms, but with the understanding that, come May 29, 2031, Nigeria will operate under a new constitution, a new structure, and begin a fresh dawn,” he said.
He further stressed the need for a national referendum as a critical democratic mechanism, describing it as “a solemn act by which people collectively speak in unison to decide matters of grave national importance.”
Olanipekun drew parallels with landmark referendums across the world, such as Italy’s 1946 referendum that abolished the monarchy, Britain’s 2016 Brexit vote, and Equatorial Guinea’s 2025 constitutional referendum, which recorded over 90 per cent voter approval.
He reminded the audience that referendums are not alien to Nigeria, referring to the 1961 plebiscite that allowed the Southern Cameroons to decide whether to join Nigeria or Cameroon and the 1963 referendum that resulted in the creation of the Mid-Western Region.
Olanipekun underlined the concept of popular sovereignty enshrined in Section 14(2)(a) of the 1999 Constitution, stressing that ultimate authority resides with the people, who possess the inalienable right to determine their system of governance.
He argued that decisions regarding the composition, structure, and conditions of service of the National Assembly—such as whether it should be full-time or part-time and the remuneration of members—should not be left to lawmakers but determined through a national referendum.
According to him, the National Assembly cannot fairly make decisions concerning itself, as no one should be a judge in their own case.
He said the federating units should take responsibility for conducting the referendum, setting its guidelines, and managing its procedures.
Turning to security, Olanipekun condemned the current centralised policing system in Nigeria, where governors are designated as “chief security officers” of their states but lack control over the police force within their jurisdictions.
He stated that this arrangement limits effective security management at the state level.
Citing examples from countries such as the United States, Germany, Canada, and Switzerland, he said state and community policing better align with the principles of federalism and promote quicker responses to local security threats.
He called for the restructuring of Nigeria’s federal framework to empower geopolitical zones to drive national revival and balanced development.
Olanipekun observed that the six geopolitical zones introduced under General Sani Abacha had gained practical relevance under President Bola Ahmed Tinubu through the establishment of regional development commissions.
He emphasised that the states, rather than the Federal Government, should determine the structure of national governance since the states predate and gave rise to the federal system.
He lamented that states have lost their constitutional influence and authority within the federation.
He warned, “Surprisingly, although not unexpectedly, people are still clamouring for the creation of more states.
“It is submitted that it is not the more the merrier, but the more states are created, the more weakened the so-called federating units become and the more imperious the centre.”
Olanipekun praised President Bola Ahmed Tinubu for his resilience and steadfastness during years in opposition, describing him as a key figure in safeguarding Nigeria’s democracy from collapse.
He recounted his experience as President Tinubu’s lead counsel during his trial before the Code of Conduct Tribunal, where he witnessed intense political pressure on Tinubu for refusing to align with the then-ruling Peoples Democratic Party (PDP).
He said, “Had Tinubu succumbed to harassment and intimidation, Nigeria might have become a one-party state long ago.
“His perseverance helped preserve our multiparty democracy when it was on the brink of collapse.”
Olanipekun expressed concern over the decline of political ideology and internal discipline among Nigeria’s political parties, which he identified as a major hindrance to democratic consolidation.
He examined the evolution of party politics in Nigeria, contrasting the ideologically based parties of the First and Second Republics with the personality-driven alliances that now dominate the scene.
He pointed out that early parties such as the Action Group (AG), Northern People’s Congress (NPC), National Council of Nigerian Citizens (NCNC), Unity Party of Nigeria (UPN), and National Party of Nigeria (NPN) were guided by clear philosophies and policy visions that mirrored the aspirations of their members and the nation at large.
These parties, he said, maintained ideological discipline, coherent manifestoes, and policy continuity, allowing citizens to identify with them based on shared beliefs rather than personal interest.
In contrast, he noted that modern political parties have largely abandoned ideological commitment and now operate mainly as “vehicles for personal ambition and opportunism”.
He criticised the frequent defections by politicians seeking access to power or patronage, which, he said, undermine democratic values and turn politics into a marketplace of convenience.
Olanipekun called for a return to ideological politics rooted in values, policy coherence, and genuine internal democracy.
He praised President Tinubu’s political journey as a model of steadfastness, loyalty to ideals, and courage under adversity—qualities that he said were becoming rare in Nigeria’s political environment.
He warned that indiscriminate party-switching weakens democratic institutions and erodes public trust by blurring distinctions between ruling and opposition parties.
He urged political parties to uphold their founding ideologies, ensure internal democracy, and use ideological consistency as a standard for leadership selection.
Afe Babalola University founder, Chief Afe Babalola (SAN), commended Olanipekun for his intellectually stimulating lecture but lamented Nigeria’s deepening socio-economic problems, which he said pose serious threats to national progress.
He pledged to forward the lecture and a formal letter to President Tinubu and the National Assembly.
Babalola also called for urgent action to tackle the nation’s worsening crises.
