By Sebastine Chukwuebuka Okafor, Ph.D.
On the first of October 1960, Nigeria became an independent state and adopted the Independence Constitution, discarding the Lyttleton Constitution of 1954, which had earlier established federalism in the country. Prior to independence, Nigeria had operated under five other constitutions: Sir Frederick Lugard’s Constitution of 1914, the Clifford Constitution of 1922, the Richards Constitution of 1946, the Macpherson Constitution of 1951, and the Lyttleton Constitution of 1954. Each of these shaped the foundation of Nigeria’s political journey.
These constitutions introduced various changes in the way Nigerians lived together and managed national affairs. The 1914 framework brought about amalgamation. The 1922 Clifford Constitution introduced elective principles in Lagos and Calabar. The Richards Constitution of 1946 ushered in regional representation. The Macpherson Constitution of 1951 expanded regional autonomy and exhibited federal tendencies. The Lyttleton Constitution of 1954 then brought Nigeria closer to full federalism before independence arrived.
After independence, Nigeria entered another phase of constitutional experimentation. The Republican Constitution of 1963 replaced the Queen of England with a Nigerian President as Head of State. The 1979 Constitution introduced a presidential system of government modeled after that of the United States. The 1989 Constitution was drafted but never fully implemented due to the political crisis following the annulled June 12 election. The short-lived 1993 Constitution also failed to stand the test of time. Finally, the 1999 Constitution ushered Nigeria into the Fourth Republic, which remains in effect today.
When we consider both the pre- and post-independence documents, it becomes clear that Nigeria has had a total of eleven constitutions: 1914, 1922, 1946, 1951, 1954, 1960, 1963, 1979, 1989, 1993, and 1999. Each came with its own strengths and weaknesses, reflecting the country’s ongoing search for a system that suits its diverse population.
Today, many Nigerians are asking whether the 1999 Constitution is truly serving the people. Some argue that it has helped stabilize democracy since 1999 by ensuring regular elections and continuous civilian rule without military interference. Others contend that it remains flawed, retaining too much influence from the military era and lacking a truly people-centered foundation.
One of the Constitution’s strengths is its clear definition of the separation of powers among the executive, legislature, and judiciary. It also guarantees fundamental rights for citizens and provides a framework for elections through INEC, elements that have helped democracy endure for over two decades.
However, its weaknesses cannot be ignored. The Constitution grants excessive power to the Federal Government, leaving states with limited control over resources and security. The immunity clause has often been abused by leaders who use it to shield themselves from accountability. Many Nigerians also believe that local governments lack true autonomy under the current structure.
Another concern is the rigidity of the Constitution. For a law meant to serve the people, it is far too difficult to amend. Even when changes are made, as in 2010, 2011, 2018, and 2023, many feel these amendments fall short of addressing the country’s core governance and development challenges.
So, is the Constitution working or not? In some respects, yes, it has kept Nigeria under uninterrupted civilian rule for 26 years. But in many other ways, it falls short, as too many citizens still feel excluded from the system, and too many everyday issues remain unresolved under the current constitutional framework.
What Nigeria needs is not just another piecemeal amendment, but a more inclusive process where the people have a stronger voice in shaping the rules that govern them. Until that happens, the Constitution will remain a blend of progress and problems, leaving the question of whether it is truly working open for debate.