2023 and Zoning’s Ecosystem

As 2023 election fever rises; and as redundant as the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended) (the Constitution) seems to have become, it is still our grundnorm and the main document that governs elections in Nigeria. See Section 1(1) & (3) thereof and AGF v Abubakar 2007 8 N.W.L.R. Part 1035 Page 117 at 144 on the supremacy of the Constitution. We must therefore, not lose sight of its provisions, especially with regard to election related issues like qualification to run for elective offices. Due to space constraints, I will limit this discussion to qualification for election to the office of President, which is principally provided for by Section 131 of the Constitution, as it is one election which seems to be of utmost interest to all.
Sections 131 & 137 of the Constitution

The four qualifications to be met for election into office of President, are listed in Section 131 of the Constitution thus: a) citizen of Nigeria by birth (see Section 25 of the Constitution); b) at least 35 years of age; c) membership of a political party and sponsorship of the candidate by that political party; and d) education up to at least School Certificate level or its equivalent (see Section 318 of the Constitution, that is, the Interpretation Clause for further clarification of this).

Section 137(1) of the Constitution goes on to provide for those things that disqualify an individual for election to the office of President; inter alia, if such individual is adjudged to be a lunatic or of unsound mind under the law in any part of Nigeria; or an undischarged bankrupt; a member of a secret society; or has been convicted or sentenced for an offence involving dishonesty, less than 10 years before the date of the election (does this suffice?); or has presented a forged certificate to INEC – see the case of PDP, Senator Douye Diri, Senator Lawrence Ewhrudjakpo v Biobarakuma Devi-Eremienyo, Lyon David-Pereworimin, APC, INEC & Ors SC.1/2020 delivered on the 13th day of February, 2020 per Honourable Ejembi Eko, JSC.

Extraneous Qualifications and Disqualifications

However, as the debate about candidates for President in 2023 rages on, other extraneous qualifications and disqualifications which are not included in the Constitution, have been added on; and they do not seem to be as clear cut as the provisions of the aforementioned Sections 131 and 137. They include, but are not limited to:

1. Zoning

First, is the zoning of the Presidency to alternate zones, that is, South/North North/South every eight years (after two terms have been served by one zone). Aside from the time when President Jonathan breached the agreement by running for election after he completed late President Yar’Adua’s term, this gentleman’s agreement has been adhered to since the coming of the Fourth Republic. In fact, so important was the issue of zoning to Northern politicians when President Yar’Adua was sick, that many didn’t want Jonathan to be sworn in as Acting President. And when Yar’Adua died, some even suggested that since it was still the turn of the North to have the Presidency, Section 146(1) of the Constitution which provides inter alia that the Vice President ‘shall’ (mandatory) hold the office of President should the position become vacant by reason of death, should be by-passed, so that a Northerner could take over, instead of then Vice President Jonathan from the South South zone assuming the Presidency; and certainly, a Northerner should run for office come 2011 (in accordance with the zoning agreement).

Today, some of those same politicians are happy to dump the zoning agreement, keep the Presidency in the North instead of it going to the South, having had two terms of a President from the Northwest zone. I have heard the argument that Nigeria needs rescuing, and what is most important is the individual with the capacity to do so, and not which zone he/she comes from. My response? There are individuals from all the various Nigerian zones, who are extremely capable of undertaking Nigeria’s rescue mission.

In 1999, at the inception of the Fourth Republic, the Presidency was micro-zoned to the Southwest, to compensate for the injustice done to late Chief M.K.O. Abiola GCFR who was prevented from assuming his mandate after winning the June 12, 1992 election; today, many hopefuls from the North are trying to conveniently limit the zoning agreement to this particular incident, denying the fact that it certainly goes beyond it. But, then again, many from the North argue that not only did President Jonathan take their slot in 2011, he ran again in 2015, further breaching the zoning agreement – that what is good for the goose, is also good for the gander Certainly, if zoning had been expressly provided for in the Constitution, President Jonathan would not have been able to run for office in 2011, nor would we be having this pre-2023 debate now.

Zoning is not expressly provided for in the Constitution. But, still, can this zoning arrangement be implied from the Constitution, which in its preamble states inter alia that, “……promoting good government and welfare of all persons in our country, on the principles of freedom, equality and justice, and for the purpose of consolidating the unity of our people:…”? The answer is, Possibly.

A community reading of the Preamble, Sections 14(3) & (4), 15(1), (2) & (4), and 42 of the Constitution, indicates that these provisions desire equality, equal opportunity, equity, happiness, inclusion and justice for all Nigerians. A pertinent question then to ask at this juncture, is whether this laudable goal of unity, equality and equity can be achieved, if the Presidency of the country is concentrated in only one umbrella zone of the country (the North and the South being the two umbrella zones)? I think the answer is obvious – No.

The next question is, should this zoning system be replicated within the smaller sub-divisions under the two large umbrella zones, on the same principles of equity, fairness, and even minority rights? That is, each time the Presidency returns to a zone, it shouldn’t return to the sub-division that held it last, but should go to the next one, turn by turn; that is, should it be micro-zoned from one sub-division to the other? Or beyond zoning to the umbrella zones of North or South, should it be elements like freedom of association and choice (Sections 38(1) & 40 of the Constitution) that come into play, in the spirit of democracy?

Zoning the Presidency specifically to the Southwest in 1999, shows that not only is it possible to zone, but to micro-zone. Can every nation not adopt or develop their own home grown brand of democracy, which has the basic tenets of democracy, but also its own peculiarities as well? What do you think about this issue of zoning, my dear Readers? Should it be formalised and included in the Constitution, in order to end this perennial debate and quarrel about zoning every election season? If so, should it also be extended to Gubernatorial, Legislature and intra-State elections? Some have even argued that not only should there be zoning and micro-zoning, the Presidency should be reduced to one five year term, to allow it to go round the different zones quicker. Or does the concept of zoning defeat the essence of constitutional democracy, and from here on out, should it be jettisoned for ‘may the best man win’ instead?

2. Religion

Lately, we have been hearing Christian/Muslim ticket and Muslim/ Christian ticket; but, no Muslim/Muslim ticket or Christian/Christian ticket. Again, can the issue of ‘religious zoning’ be implied from the Constitution? The answer to this question as far as I am concerned, is No, since we must take a cue from Section 10 of the Constitution, which prohibits the Federal or State Government from adopting any State religion. The Latin maxim “Expressio unius est exclusio alterius” comes to mind; that is, the rule that the inclusion of the one, is the exclusion of the other. In one of the few constitutional provisions that mentions religion, the secularity of Nigeria and its States, has been clearly stated in Section 10 thereof. What then, is this creation of politicians, about election tickets based on religion? It is unconstitutional, since Section 10 is clear that religion should not be brought into matters of State.

Again, the same way the Southeast say they have not yet produced a President, is the same way it can be argued that the Southern Muslims have not produced a President, nor have the Northern Christians. I have heard countless arguments of how the South must produce only a Christian candidate, because the North must have a Muslim candidate on the ticket. Since the time of General Yakubu Gowon who was a military Head of State, the North has not produced a Christian Presidential candidate, while the only Southern Muslim produced, Chief Abiola, who incidentally had a Northern Muslim as his running mate, was prevented from assuming office.

It is obvious that, what this country needs presently, especially with the mess that we find ourselves in by making the huge mistake of letting religion creep into governance, is leaders that are not particularly ‘religious’, whether Christian or Muslim. Is it not better to have two non-religious Muslims or Christians on a ticket, than distribute the ticket between two Muslim/Christian fanatics, just to have a religious spread? Throughout the military era, in which we had mostly Northern Muslim rulers, religion was not the issue it has become today. It seems to me that politicians/so-called thought leaders are utilising religion as an excuse; a means to push forward their own favoured candidates, while trying to exclude others!

3. Gender

Where do these extraneous considerations, which seem to cause more confusion than bring clarity into the electoral process end? Nigeria has never produced a female President, Vice President or elected Governor. And even though Section 42 of the Constitution prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex, women are not considered or taken seriously for these positions. If zoning is included in the Constitution, should gender affirmative action not also be made a part of the grundnorm?

4. Age, Physical & Mental Fitness

This issue of age, physical and mental fitness, has also been raised in many conversations. Section 131 of the Constitution does not set an upper limit as far as age is concerned, only an entry point of age 35 for the office of President; nor can one predict how the health of an individual will turn out to be. We only assume that, a younger person is healthier than an older person.

Late President Umaru Yar’Adua was relatively young when he assumed the Presidency, as he was a few months shy of his 56th birthday when he assumed office on May 29, 2007. But, there was already a rumour that he had passed on even before he was sworn in, so much so that a telephone recording in which he confirmed that he was still alive to then President, Olusegun Obasanjo, went viral! If my memory serves me right, the conversation went something like this: President Obasanjo: “Umaru, Umaru, are you dead?” Umaru Yar’Adua: “No, Sir!”.

Similarly, Section 137(1)(c) of the Constitution only disqualifies an adjudged lunatic or individual of unsound mind. However, there are many stages of mental unwellness, between lucidity and lunacy, which can certainly inhibit an individual’s capacity/performance; but, they are not considered in the Constitution, like Depression, Paranoia, Bipolar Affective Disorder, Narcissistic Personality Disorder, Alzheimer’s etc. Should it be made mandatory, that those vying for the office of President and Vice should undergo some form of mental and physical fitness for duty testing, and they must be of a certain physical and mental fitness, properly certified by a body of independent medical experts? This discussion also arose in the US during President Donald Trump’s tenure, when he frequently showed signs of a narcissistic personality and mental decline, and people became worried that he was too volatile to hold the codes that launched the nuclear weapons!

5. History of Performance and Corruption

Is it necessary that, whether in other governance positions or the private sector, the history of the candidate’s performance in previous roles should be a factor in qualification for office? Some say it should be.

Conclusion

This discourse leaves me with more questions, than answers. Nevertheless, there are certain conclusions that I can categorically draw from it: 1) it is time that religion is downplayed, ignored and excluded from public matters; 2) there should be affirmative action/legislation to include women in higher political office and governance. Enough of tokenism, as far as the female gender is concerned; 3) the state of the mental and physical health of key office holders like the President, Governors and their deputies should be known; 4) it is not the exclusive preserve of any particular zone to have the Presidency of Nigeria;
every zone has capable hands to lead this country.