AVOIDING THE TRAP IN SECOND AMENDMENT TO 1999 CONSTITUTION

The second amendment to the 1999 constitution [2010] process being undertaken by the national and states houses of assembly, seems to be facing a lot of challenges and problems, either from those that question the legality of the whole process or rather those that only question who the proclamation authority should be. The contention of the former view being that as a process that is sub-judice, having proceeded the first amendment to the 1999 constitution, that is subject to ongoing judicial review thus undergoing a judicial procedure, it would be legally unwise to continue with the whole process, the latter contention is however of the view that the only problem with the legislative activity is the question over the authority empowered to acclaim the effect of the amended 1999 constitution.

These confusing scene or situation and the evident need for legal clarification, led the former national president of the Nigerian bar association chief Olisa Agbakogba, to seek in the constitutional courts the interpretation of the relevant provisions of the 1999 constitution, on the responsible party that gives effect to the amendment of the provision of 1999 constitution. However as the process is going through the rigors of judicial process, a grave necessity arisen for the starting of another review of the provision of the 1999 constitution, thus a fundamental threat of rendering an ongoing judicial process a nullity arises, because to have allowed the second amendment to the 1999 constitution to subsist would led to a grave constitutional crisis.

The procedural law guiding the administration of justice in Nigeria, empowered the courts to issue injunctions that helps to preserve the status quo and ensure that no harm is done to the subsisting legal position of a litigant, that could and would render the final position of the court to be ineffectual, thus in the instant case an interlocutory injunction was issued to preserve latent positions. However such a position have opened and created the possibility of an imminent constitutional crisis, because of the lack of time for the conduct of the 2011 elections, little or no time for judicial review of the results of the elections and the proximity of the elections to the eventual handover date of may 29^th 2011.

The position of the senate of the federal republic of Nigeria, stating that the rules of the chamber bars it from abiding to interlocutory injunctions, in issues pertaining to constitutional amendment, have created a circumstance that could create the 1993 challenging scenery, were the ignoring of an interlocutory injunction by the national electoral commission of professor Humprey Nwosu, sought and obtained by the infamous association for better Nigeria from the chambers of former Justice Bassey Ikpeme, led to the judicial cover that was used by the military administration of general Ibrahim Babangida to annul the June 12th presidential elections.

Thus the danger lurking at the constitutional order of Nigeria's democracy, lie in the fact that indeed all actions pertaining to 2011 elections stand to be rendered a nullity, should the courts seek a judicial of all the processes that led to the elections.