In a bold legislative push aimed at transforming Nigeria’s governance landscape, the House of Representatives has taken a significant step toward stripping the Vice President, state governors, and their deputies of the immunity they currently enjoy under the 1999 Constitution. On March 26, 2025, a constitutional amendment bill sponsored by Solomon Bob, a People's Democratic Party (PDP) lawmaker from Rivers State, passed its second reading during a plenary session presided over by Deputy Speaker Benjamin Kalu. This move, part of a broader wave of 42 constitutional reform bills considered that day, signals a potential shift in how accountability is enforced among Nigeria’s top public officials, sparking debates about its implications for corruption, governance, and political stability.
The Bill: Targeting Immunity to Curb Corruption
The proposed legislation seeks to amend Section 308 of the 1999 Constitution, which grants the President, Vice President, governors, and deputy governors immunity from civil and criminal prosecution while in office. Under the current framework, these officials are shielded from legal proceedings, a provision intended to allow them to focus on governance without the distraction of lawsuits. However, critics, including Bob, argue that this protection has fostered a culture of impunity, enabling corruption and abuse of power to flourish unchecked.
Bob’s bill, titled “A Bill for an Act to Alter the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 to Qualify the Immunity Conferred on the President, Remove the Immunity Conferred on the Vice President, the Governors and Their Deputies, in Order to Curb Corruption, Eradicate Impunity and Enhance Accountability in Public Office and for Related Matters,” proposes a nuanced approach. It retains immunity for the President but limits it to official duties, while completely removing it for the Vice President (except when acting as President under Section 145), governors, and their deputies. The amendment further specifies that immunity would not apply if the official’s conduct exceeds their authority or involves criminal acts, aiming to hold these leaders accountable in real time rather than after their terms end.
During the plenary debate, Bob emphasized that the immunity clause has too often served as a shield for recklessness. “It’s illogical to wait until these officials leave office to address their actions,” he argued, pointing to countries like the United States, where leaders face legal scrutiny without derailing governance. He dismissed concerns that litigation would hinder public service, asserting that baseless claims could be swiftly dismissed by courts, while legitimate cases would ensure justice.
A Wave of Reform: Context and Companion Bills
The immunity bill was one of 42 constitutional amendments passed for second reading on March 26, following 39 others approved the previous day, bringing the total to 81 under review. This flurry of legislative activity reflects a concerted effort by the House to address longstanding governance challenges. Among the companion proposals are bills to separate the offices of the Attorney-General and Minister of Justice at both federal and state levels, grant citizenship rights to foreign spouses of Nigerian women, and establish quotas for youth and women in government appointments. Another notable bill seeks to formalize advisory roles for traditional rulers, signaling a holistic approach to restructuring Nigeria’s political framework.
The immunity amendment, however, stands out for its direct challenge to entrenched power. If enacted, it would mark a seismic shift, exposing the Vice President, governors, and deputies to prosecution during their tenure—a prospect that could deter malfeasance but also invite politically motivated lawsuits. The bill has now been referred to the House Committee on Constitution Review for further deliberation, a process that will involve public hearings and input from state assemblies, given the requirement for two-thirds approval from both federal chambers and 24 state legislatures to amend the constitution.
Supporters vs. Skeptics: A Divided Reaction
Proponents of the bill hail it as a game-changer in the fight against corruption. Advocates argue that removing immunity would dismantle the perception of untouchability among top officials, compelling them to act with greater integrity. “Nobody should be above the law,” said civil rights activist Shehu Sani, though he criticized the bill’s exclusion of the President from the immunity rollback, calling for uniform accountability. Political analysts suggest that real-time legal consequences could deter the kind of brazen corruption that has plagued Nigeria, from misappropriation of funds to election rigging.
Yet, opposition is already mounting. State governments, through voices like Ogun State’s Attorney-General, have expressed alarm, warning that stripping immunity could destabilize administrations by opening governors to a flood of frivolous litigation. “Why spare the President but target governors?” the Ogun AG questioned, echoing sentiments that the bill’s selective approach undermines its fairness. Legal experts caution that without robust judicial safeguards, the amendment could be weaponized for political vendettas, distracting leaders from their duties and eroding public trust further.
Posts on X reflect this polarization, with some users praising the move as a step toward transparency, while others predict fierce resistance from the Governors’ Forum, which wields considerable influence. “By 2027, align or get hunted down,” one user quipped, hinting at the high stakes as the next election cycle nears.
Rivers State’s Role: A Political Subtext?
The bill’s sponsor, Solomon Bob, hails from Rivers State, a hotbed of political rivalry between Governor Siminalayi Fubara and his predecessor, Nyesom Wike, now FCT Minister. This context adds a layer of intrigue. Could the proposal be a salvo in the ongoing Fubara-Wike feud, aimed at weakening governors’ legal protections in factional battles? While Bob frames it as a national anti-corruption measure, the timing—amid Rivers’ recent demand for local government financial reports—suggests local dynamics may be at play, amplifying speculation of a targeted agenda.
The Road Ahead: Challenges and Possibilities
The bill’s passage through second reading is just the beginning. Its journey to becoming law faces formidable hurdles, including Senate concurrence and state-level approval, where governors hold sway. Historical attempts to curb immunity, like a 2020 Senate bill by Ovie Omo-Agege, have faltered, underscoring the entrenched interests at stake. Yet, the current momentum, backed by a proactive House, offers hope to reformers.
If successful, the amendment could redefine Nigeria’s political accountability, aligning it with global norms where leaders face scrutiny without delay. For now, the nation watches as this legislative gamble unfolds, poised between the promise of justice and the peril of chaos.
Post a Comment
0Comments