Ayodele Bamidele
A chieftain of the pan-Yoruba socio-political organisation, Afenifere, Senator Femi Okurounmu has described the 1999 constitution as “simply a decree which Abacha brought out and turned into a constitution for us.”
According to him, that is why the Constitution lacks democratic legitimacy, insisting that it was not a product of popular participation, but rather a document imposed by the military.
Okurounmu, a former senator who represented Ogun Central Senatorial District, pointed out that the Constitution structurally favours the northern region, warning that the imbalance has continued to shape governance outcomes and deepen political and economic challenges across the country.
Speaking during an exclusive interview on Frontline, a current affairs programme on Eagle 102.5 FM, Ilese-Ijebu, Ogun State on Wednesday, the elder statesman of the First Senate during the Fourth Republic, examined the relationship between democratic governance and economic policy while raising concerns about the foundation upon which Nigeria’s democracy is built.
He argued that without addressing these structural concerns, efforts at national development may continue to face significant setbacks.
Okurounmu, maintained that the current constitutional framework has created a system where political power is unevenly distributed, thereby affecting decision-making at the highest levels of government.
He stressed that this imbalance has not only shaped legislative outcomes but has also influenced policy direction and governance priorities over time.
“I will let you know that the problem is much more complicated than that. I told you, the 1999 constitution has more or less tilted all the structures of governance in favor of the north.
“The north has infiltrated the central government so much that whoever is the president does not matter. The north still controls the government. Whoever is the president of Nigeria at this stage with our present constitution and with the present structures of governance does not matter.”
According to him, the implications of such structural inequality are far-reaching, particularly in a diverse country like Nigeria where equitable representation is critical to unity and stability.
He traced origin of the constitution to the administration of former Head of State, General Sani Abacha, noting that the process leading to its adoption did not involve adequate consultation with Nigerians.
This, he said, has continued to raise questions about its credibility and acceptance among citizens.
“The 1999 constitution was simply a decree which Abacha brought out and turned into a constitution for us. And that so-called constitution was not even made known to the public until after the elections so that even the president, who was going to take over did not, was not aware of the constitution by which he was going to govern when he was contesting election.
“So, I would say it was not really a constitution, it was a decree and Abacha just brought it out and transmitted it into a constitution and gave it to the president after election.”
Okurounmu further argued that the 1979 and 1999 constitution share significant similarities, which he claimed also contained structural imbalances that have persisted into the present system.
He noted that these inherited features have continued to influence governance patterns in ways that are not entirely equitable.
“And a lot of the provisions are very similar to that of the 1979 constitution which, you know, was engineered by Murtala Muhammad and Obasanjo and most of the provisions in that constitution are very unequitable insofar as governance in Nigeria is concerned.
“The 1999 constitution which, as I have said, is a close relationship to the 1979 one virtually gives veto power to the north over how Nigeria will be governed. All the structures of governance are tilted to the north.” he added.
Butressing his position, Okurounmu pointed out that the current political structure gives the northern region a numerical advantage in the National Assembly, thereby shaping legislative outcomes.
He explained that the number of states and local government areas in the North translates directly into greater representation in both the Senate and the House of Representatives.
According to him, this imbalance has significant implications for lawmaking and national decision-making.
“The north has advantages in the number of states and which means it also has advantages in the number of senators in the national assembly.
“The north has advantages in the number of local governments which means it also has an overwhelming advantage in the number of members of the House of Representatives in the national assembly.
” So, when you look at our lawmakers, the Senate and the House of Representatives, in fact that house is a house where the north holds veto power because no decision can be taken in those houses unless the north is agreeable to it..”