In a significant recent announcement, Prince Lateef Fagbemi, SAN, the Honourable Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, revealed the establishment of a new Committee dedicated to reviewing the nation’s laws, the last update of which occurred in 2004. This initiative, chaired by former Ekiti State Attorney-General Olawale Fapohunda, SAN, is not just timely; it is critical, considering how many existing laws have become outdated. For example, some laws still impose laughably low fines, such as a N20 penalty for certain offenses—an amount that hardly buys a piece of candy today.
As our society continues to evolve, many of these laws no longer align with the current 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. One notable example is the Stamp Duties Act (SDA), which still maintains penalties that feel antiquated. Section 25 of the SDA imposes a mere N20 fine for obstructing authorized Inspectors during document examinations. Additionally, the National Youth Service Corps Act (NYSC Act) only levies a N2,000 fine for those who don’t meet their NYSC obligations. These outdated regulations demand a thorough reevaluation; some may even need to be removed from our legal framework entirely.
There are also serious inconsistencies between certain laws and constitutional provisions. Recently, I engaged in a discussion about the conflicts arising from Section 396(7) of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act 2015 and provisions outlined in Sections 253, 258, and 273 of the Constitution. This section allows a judge promoted to a higher court to finalize criminal cases that were previously heard, which contradicts constitutional requirements and has come under judicial examination. It is crucial for the Law Review Committee to investigate these inconsistencies as it embarks on its comprehensive review.
Even if a complete overhaul of the Constitution isn’t on the agenda right now, certain amendments may be necessary to better align the Constitution with current statutory laws. For instance, Section 179(2) defines qualifications for gubernatorial candidates, yet the potential for inconclusive elections raises questions about the interpretive authority of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) regarding constitutional mandates. The 2018 Osun Gubernatorial election, which was deemed inconclusive despite candidates fulfilling constitutional criteria, illustrates the confusion that can occur in such scenarios.
Regarding Ministerial appointments, the recent discussion surrounding Hanatu Musawa, the Minister of Arts and Culture, highlighted concerns about her incomplete NYSC. However, a closer look at Section 147(5) of the Constitution shows that completing NYSC is not a constitutional requirement for Ministerial roles. Furthermore, Sections 65 and 66 do not mention NYSC at all, raising questions about its relevance in today’s democratic landscape.
Ultimately, the goal must be for laws to uphold good governance in Nigeria. The Law Review Committee’s findings will eventually be presented to the Federal Executive Council and the National Assembly for legislative action, which could provide an excellent opportunity to reassess qualifications for elected offices. Ensuring that capable individuals hold positions of power is essential for effective governance.
It’s concerning that the National Assembly sometimes fails to fulfill its constitutional duty to create laws that benefit the public good. Often, recent legislation seems to prioritize narrow interests over the welfare of citizens, as seen in the recent Electoral Act and amendments to the Central Bank of Nigeria Act.
When examining laws like those in the Nigeria Police Act, contradictions regarding the Inspector General of Police’s retirement age and tenure highlight the need for clarity and consistency. While some adjustments have been made, it raises the question of whether these changes truly serve the nation’s best interests or are simply reflections of self-serving legislative agendas.
In conclusion, if the Law Review Committee focuses not only on updating fines but also on auditing the core effectiveness of our laws, it could pave the way for substantial and meaningful reforms. The committee will especially need to address delicate topics, such as the Same Sex Marriage (Prohibition) Act 2013, which touches on fundamental rights enshrined in our Constitution, including privacy and freedom of expression. Advocates for the law provide moral reasoning for its existence, indicating that the Fapohunda Committee faces a challenging path ahead. We wish them success as they undertake this critical task.
