The idea of establishing further affirms a definitive way of government while appointing relates to a governmental ideal of delegating leadership into different sectors, often led by appointed representatives. A brief history of Nigerian constitutionalism is worth looking at. Implementing Islamic law as in all Nigerian courts also presented other challenges:.
Southern Nigeria was stronger, based purely on the luck of geographic advantage. With a massive natural resource—oil—at its fingertips, the South was able to gain monetary strength and boost its own economy and thereby grow disproportionately compared to the North.
As time progressed, citizens in the same country preferred being endowed with the same rights and be subject to the same regulations. Thus, the constitution needed to evolve as well to meet the demands of a non-homogenous nation. Thus, it was recommended that Muslims retain their own separate courts to address personal matters as the moral code overlaps with that of the legal code, both of which could not be applied to the population at large. After, following two articles implemented in the constitution, the next development seemed to be no surprise:.
Article : 'An appeal shall lie from decisions of a Sharia Court of Appeal to the Court of Appeal as of right in any civil proceedings before the Sharia Court of Appeal with respect to any question of Islamic personal law which the Sharia Court of Appeal is competent to decide. Article 'The Sharia Court of Appeal shall, in addition to such other jurisdiction as may be conferred upon it by an Act of the National Assembly, exercise such appellate and supervisory jurisdiction in civil proceedings involving questions of Islamic personal law.
The wording of the constitution is as just as important as the specific clauses used to distinguish the State as a whole. Throughout its constitution, on the surface, the state sought to preserve the idea that Nigeria would remain a secular state. In deciding the future of the country, the constitution remains the first legal starting point — as it provides a set of conduct for citizens, and all public and private bodies.
This version of the constitution also allows one to appreciate how the Nigerian has evolved into what it is today. Indeed, any constitution should be amenable and acceptable to the population as a whole, especially in a society as fragmented as Nigeria.
Thus, the CDC needed to make decisions, concurrent with the press, in order to evade major criticism from the population. Indeed, an incensed population staging an uprising would provide greater apprehension for the ruling class. Furthermore, the respect afforded to a given constitution is a shared value consistent in Ireland, the United States of America, and Nigeria, among other nations. The constitution is the ultimate source of the rule of law and its supremacy determines the political and legal system.
This importance highlights why there is a need for a constitution that applies to all citizens and their needs; but this is far from the case in Nigeria. This inconsistency has led to a discrepancy in the law, and arguably the need for a solution to address reality. When the British arrived in Nigeria, there were multiple tribal groups, who were not unified or subject to any consensus.
Notwithstanding, starkly different societies cannot be swept under the rug, and citizens and government leaders have so far remained on edge about this clash. This will help us to understand better, how previous constitutions have been fashioned for Nigeria and will go a great length in making us understand the source of our present constitution from the looking glass of constitutional history.
After the annexation of Lagos by the British in , a legislative and executive council was constituted for it. However, they each had separate legislative councils. In , the Gold coast and Lagos were formed into a separate colony with a governor and legislative council based in the Gold coast. In , Lagos became a separate political entity with its own Governor, executive and legislative councils. In , the protectorate of Southern Nigeria and the colony of Lagos were amalgamated and called the colony and protectorate of Southern Nigeria.
In , the Colony and Protectorate of Southern Nigeria was merged with the Protectorate of Northern Nigeria and they were referred to as the Colony and protectorate of Nigeria. The legislative council was this time allowed to make law for only the colony. The governor made laws for the protectorates. This was due to the large size of the country.
In place of a legislative council for the country, there was established an advisory body called the Nigerian council. It had 30 members of whom 17 were officials and 13 non-officials. Of the non-officials, four were nominated by the governor to represent commercial, shipping, mining and banking interests. The remaining members were Nigerians appointed by the governor. On assuming office in , Sir Hugh Clifford, the governor, was pressured by the then West African congress, led by Caseley Hayford, to provide constitutions in West African subject states.
This led to the making of the Clifford constitution of It introduced the first electoral system in Nigeria. The first election was conducted into the legislative council with four slots:3 for Lagos while 1 for Calabar.
However, the election was based on limited franchise which restricted the election to those that earned a minimum of pounds annually, which was very expensive for most Nigerians. It also introduced a legislative council which replaced the Nigerian council. It consisted of 46 members with the governor as the head. Out of the 46, 23 were official members and 19 were unofficial members.
The remaining four were elected as previously stated. However, the council could only legislate for the South. The governor legislated for the North via proclamation. There was also an executive council, however, it had no Nigerians. It consisted of the governor, chief secretary, lieutenant governors, an administrator for Lagos, attorney — general, commandant of the Nigerian regiment,director of medical service, Comptroller general and Secretary for native affairs.
This was the bedrock for future regionalism. Before, the end of , the then governor, Sir Arthur Richards provided a new proposal for constitutional amendment.
This was as a result of pressure being mounted on him by the educated elites. They felt that the Clifford Constitution did not represent the indigenous population. Therefore, the governor introduced the constitution which had the following aims:. The constitution provided for a new legislative council, it had: The governor, 16 official members, and 28 unofficial members. Of the 28, two were nominated by the governor while 4 were elected. The North had 11 members, the West had 8 members while the East had 6 members.
The elected 4 were from Lagos and Calabar. Also, the constitution made the council legislate for the whole country. The constitution also provided for regional houses of assembly. The members of the regional assembly were nominated by the native authority. They were just grounds for discussing national issues. Also, it was from the house of assembly that members were nominated to the legislative council. The East and West had unicameral legislature while the North, in addition to a house of assembly, had a house of chiefs.
Also, the constitution reduced the amount of the limited franchise from pounds to 50 pounds. This is considered as a plus because more people could vote and be voted for. However, it was still too expensive for most Nigerians. The executive council in Lagos also had for the first time,Nigerians. Despite all these improvements compared to the Clifford constitution, the constitution still had some defects.
First, it limited franchise to only Lagos and Calabar. Also, the money required for the right to vote was still too expensive for most Nigerians. Also,the regional houses of assemblies could not make laws, they were merely grounds for public discussion. The constitution also did not include the elites.
This is because those nominated into the regional houses of assembly and the legislative council were nominated by the native authority. Due to the above criticism of the Richard constitution, it was felt that a new constitution was needed. The governor, Sir John Macpherson, not wanting to make the mistake his predecessor made, decided to include Nigerian in the constitutional making process.
There was wide consultation of Nigerians even to the village levels. Also, there was the Ibadan conference of The result of all these was that it led to the creation of the Macpherson constitution. The constitution provided for a federal legislature called the house of representatives. It had elected representatives, 6 ex-officio members and 6 nominated by the governor.
It also provided for regional legislatures that could make laws for their regions. The legislatures in the West and North were bi-cameral, each having a house of chiefs alongside the regional legislature. In the East, it was a unicameral legislature. It was also from the regional legislatures that members were nominated to the legislative council.
Despite, the improvements in the Macpherson constitution, it could not keep Nigerians united. Governors appoint more special advisers than the areas where advice is genuinely needed.
No one believes anything the government says and everybody agrees that African politicians are among the most corrupt and unscrupulous in the world. There is also a disappearance of basic state functions that serve the people, including collapsed infrastructure, total paralysis of the health sector at all levels, constant nationwide power failure and the attendant negative effects on all sectors of the economy; pervasive unemployment, thereby generating increased armed robbery cutting across all ages of our people, debilitating homelessness; retrogressive educational programmes and policies.
Also using the state apparatus for agencies that serve the ruling elites, such as the security forces, presidential staff, central bank, diplomatic services, customs and collection agencies. These are currently the norm in many countries in Africa. There are more policemen protecting politicians in Africa than are available for normal police duties. The civil service has been destroyed by turning it into an instrument in the hands of politicians by making the top post political appointment.
Every change in the civil service has been to increase the power of politicians over civil servants and bring them under their control to remove the valuable role they play in checking corruption and maintaining probity in public offices.
Lack of Adequate Security is another area where constitution without constitutionalism has taken toll on Africa. The machinery of law enforcement is definitely weak and as long as the police force is weak in terms of workforce and training, violence and insecurity will continue to thrive. Furthermore, where security agents are taking sides, compromising their position, violence will be inevitable because people will lose confidence in them to protect their interest and therefore take laws into their hands.
The situation in most African countries is so worst to the extent that the violence is being perpetrated in the presence of military and police personnel or by the military and police personnel themselves.
They aid and abet well placed individual in the society who committed political violence and go unpunished while punishing others who committed the same crime but are less powerful members of the society, thereby increasing the problem of political violence in the society.
Instances of brutal killings in election period are numerous. The most tragic and disturbing aspect of the incidents is that these incidents in most cases either happened in the presence of policemen and soldiers or immediately reported to them, we just discovered that no arrest would be made and no investigations would be carried out.
The scenario created from the various incidents recorded so far gave the impression that some persons were ceasing the opportunity of this unconstitutionality to destroy lives and properties of most Africans. Lack of adherence to the rule and regulation laid down in the constitution has led to the emergence of ethnic militias in some countries in Africa, for example in Nigeria; the ethnic militias converse verbally and even openly on the state of nation.
Some even went to the extent of engaging in confrontation with the state security forces in pursuance of their goals and objectives; they have different goals and aspirations. For example, the movement for the survival of Ogoni people MOSSOP is out to protect the interest of the Ogoni, most especially the oil exploitation and environmental degradation of their land. The Egbesu boys of Africa came up to fight the environmental degradation and exploitation of the Niger Delta by the multinational oil corporations.
The failure of the police to check the menace of armed robbery in the south-east led to the formation of Bakassi Boys. But because the ruling government failed to do the right thing the next thing for the rebel is to take arms against the ruling power. This has resulted into serious war in many countries in Africa.
The aggrieved individuals felt marginalized and they thought that the best way to make their grievances known to the public is through violence. In Africa, years of economic exploitation, mal-development and bad governance have continued to fan the ember of conflicts and crises in the continent. The violence they spawn comes from manmade barriers on the part of smooth electoral processes. Beyond constraints of funds, manpower and other logistics, obstacles to health electoral processes emanate from the inordinate ambition of the political elite to win elections at all cost.
To achieve their goal, they manipulate the constitutive and regulative instruments for credible electoral contest. All institutions and agencies of government are used by those in possession of state power and authority to remain in government. Because of the premium on power everything is mobilized to remain in power against the will of the electorates.
Where the ballot box containing the preference of the governed, cannot bring about the transfer of political power from one party to another in a peaceful manner, then democracy liberal or not is in grave danger. A political system whether it has a formal constitution or not, will reflect the principles of constitutionalism only when its powers and institutions are limited to the terms of the constitution which reflect the foundational principles of commission and trusteeship.
To implement this standard, a constitution that reflects the principles of constitutionalism will serve as a higher law. This higher law establishes and limits government in order to protect individual rights. So, the value of a constitution with constitutionalism lies in the fact that it gives meaning to the relationship between the state and the citizens and this invariably brings about the much needed social order.
Thus, the foundation of a sustainable social order in any society is based on the cordial relationship between the state and the citizens as established by the constitution. When the enabling environment is visible, there will be an efficient social contract. It provides a situation, where people are more tolerant of one another to live happily. It is a transformational agreement built on trust, providing a place where citizens can become fully human by having an identity that is rooted in respect for others.
In this regard, any constitution without constitutionalism may create a disconnection between the state and the citizens, making it increasingly difficult for the citizens to rely on the state.
For Africa to move forward there is the need to move toward constitution with constitutionalism. The government take necessary action on any person that fail to comply with rules and regulations that may result in disorderly behavior and impunity within the state.
This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and build upon your work non-commercially. Withdrawal Guidlines. Publication Ethics. Withdrawal Policies Publication Ethics. Review Article Volume 2 Issue 5. Constitution and constitutionalism There is a distinction between a government with a constitution and constitutionalism and a government with constitution without constitutionalism.
The effect of constitution without constitutionalism Political problems: They relate to actions and in-action on the part of those who are in authority. Probabilistic integrated risk assessment of human exposure risk to environmental bisphenol A pollution sources. Environ Sci Pollut Res. Bila DM, Dezotti M. Bisphenol A exposure, effects, and policy: A wildlife perspective.
That is the exact analogy, and I am quite certain that none of the Scottish Peers who are listening to me would agree with that for one moment. I am sure they would have the strongest objection to cutting Edinburgh out of Scotland, placing it directly under the Federal Government from this point of view, in Edinburgh , and leaving it with nothing to do with Scottish government.
That is what the Secretary of State is in fact asking the Western Region people to do. In effect, he says that historically it is true that Lagos has been a Western Region town, that it has been a Yoruba town; but we must ignore history and look only to the future and at the benefit Nigeria would derive if Lagos were not part of the Western Region but were only part of, and with separate representation in, the Central Government.
We all know what our Scottish colleagues would say to that if it were proposed as regards Edinburgh. Why then should we expect the Western people, the Yorubas, who have had a far longer association with us than the people in the other regions—because Lagos was the first link, as it were, between this country and Nigeria—to agree to a matter of this kind?
I suggest that the position of the other regions is, as the noble Lord, Lord Milverton, has said, amply covered by the fact that ports, railways, trade, and so on, are all Federal subjects and not Regional subjects. If these matters of trade, commerce and transport are coming under the Federal Minister, then obviously the position of the other regions would be amply safeguarded, even though one, and only one, of the ports in Nigeria happens to be Lagos.
To-day one of the great gateways to a country is the airport, and the great airport of Nigeria is Kano. As your Lordships know, Kano is an international airport. I happened to be there two or three years ago, and I was told that I should be able to get The Times or the Daily Telegraph there on the day it was printed.
Kano is at the southern edge of the Sahara. That shows what close connection there is between Kano and London in these days. I cannot always get a London paper in some of the western parts of this country on the day it is printed; yet on the edge of the Sahara it is possible to do so.
Therefore, if we are going to make Lagos a Federal enclave there seem to be equally good reasons for making Kano one also. Finally, I would say that in my view this difficulty that we are having, months after the Report was published, when to some extent such public interest in the matter as there was has evaporated, does show the need for what I have long suggested to your Lordships—namely, the necessity for some better organisation of our affairs in the Commonwealth.
I have suggested a Council of Empire to consider these great and important matters. As yet that idea has not found favour with the Government, nor have they produced any alternative scheme. But I do think it is unsatisfactory to allow a great country like this and its affairs to dwindle away, as it were, in our consideration and in our interest; and I consider that we should make every effort to ensure that these problems have far more prompt and urgent attention than they are now getting in our public and Parliamentary life.
My Lords, I think we are all grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Milverton, equally for giving us this chance to debate this supremely important question and for what I sincerely believe to be the most interesting and constructive contribution which he personally has made to our debates.
This is a personal opinion, but I hope it is shared. I have tried to hear every speech the noble Lord has made—I do not say I have succeeded, but I have certainly heard most of them. The noble Lord speaks with greater authority on this subject than does any other member of either House of Parliament, and of course he is one who has played a distinguished part in the history of Nigeria.
I think we shall all agree, also, about the very statesmanlike attitude of the Nigerian political leaders who attended the Conference at Lancaster House in August. They showed a reasonable and conciliatory spirit, without which the wide measure of agreement shown in the White Paper would have been quite impossible. As the noble Lord, Lord Milverton said, what matters now, and what will matter in the future, more than anything, in Nigeria, is that there shall be good will and tolerance between the personalities of the different political parties.
Both noble Lords who have just spoken did so on the assumption that this agreement was not provisional but final. I hope they were wrong, although I rather fear that they were right. I am sure the noble Earl will listen to my reasons for asking the Government to reconsider their decision, if this White Paper does represent something absolutely final as to the future Constitution of Nigeria.
In the first place I suggest that these changes are of such importance to the political future of Nigeria that they should not be finalised until Parliament here, in the United Kingdom, and the Legislatures in Nigeria have had an opportunity of discussing them; or at least it should be the duty of Her Majesty's Government to provide us with very strong reasons for going against the normal constitutional procedure.
There are four Legislatures in Nigeria, and surely the normal thing would be to allow them to debate and discuss these proposals. Your Lordships will remember that when the new Constitution was being drafted for Central Africa, the three Territories in Central Africa which were to belong to the new Federation, and which were drafting the new Constitution, were all given a chance, before any final decision was reached, to discuss the proposed Constitution in their Legislatures.
After all, the ultimate responsibility rests here in Parliament, with every one of your Lordships in his capacity as a Member of this Chamber, with every Member in another place; and it is surely our right to claim the chance of expressing our views about fundamental matters of this kind, unless there is some very strong reason to the contrary which we have not heard, before they are decided by Her Majesty's Government. Another reason, though not one of such importance, is this.
It seems to me that these matters were decided in too hasty a fashion. This Conference sat for only three weeks. There does not seem to have been any preparation at the official level for the discussions which took place at the Conference; that is to say the subjects which the delegates did discuss had not been examined by officials before discussion took place.
That examination is the normal procedure in connection with important conferences of this kind. I cannot help feeling, for example, that an inquiry into the effect of these constitutional changes on the Civil Service in Nigeria would have been desirable before the delegates took decisions making fundamental changes in the administration of the country. But so it was; these decisions were made. I cannot help feeling that the delegates were not aware of all the implications of their own views, because there had been insufficient preparation in advance for dealing with these important matters.
There is yet another reason, besides the two I have already mentioned, for treating these matters at this particular moment as being only tentative or provisional, rather than final.
If these proposed changes were acceptable to opinion here and in Nigeria, there would, of course, be a case for going ahead with the least possible delay.
Both the noble Lords who have spoken to-day have criticised very sharply some of the proposals in the White Paper, and I think we can assume safely, although there has been no discussion in another place, that these proposals are not by any means accepted on all sides in this country.
The position in Nigeria is far more important. There already, acute controversy has arisen. The Nigerian political leaders who will have to work this new Constitution surely cannot possibly be expected to work satisfactorily unless there is agreement on fundamentals between all the main Parties in Nigeria. Grave doubts and misgivings have been expressed in Nigeria, as noble Lords know.
What I would urge upon the Government, if they will reconsider this matter, is that they should give weight to the arguments which have been used here, and to the arguments that have been and will be used in Nigeria, about the merits of these proposals before they accept their ultimate responsibility of deciding what form this new Constitution should take.
May I express one or two of my own doubts? I wish I had not these doubts about some of these proposals, but they are obviously shared by both noble Lords who have spoken. I am doubtful about the wisdom of setting up a Federal Centre with a minimum of powers. Apart from a short concurrent list, to which Lord Milverton referred, everything else, all residual powers, are to go to the regions. Nigeria has been a united country for filly years, and so far there has been no serious threat to this unity; but I cannot help feeling that if too much authority goes too quickly to the regions, there is a danger that, sooner or later, the country will break up into separate racial groups.
This danger is increased by the promise, contained in the White Paper, of regional self-government by I am not saying that it was not desirable to go a very long way towards satisfying Nigeria's desire for self-government at the earliest possible moment, but will this promise of regional self-government be the best way of satisfying the political aspirations of Nigeria? What exactly does this promise mean? I hope that it does not mean that Federal authority in the regions will be less than it would he under this Constitution, that it will be diminished and that regional autonomy will be increased at the expense of the Federation.
I wonder whether it means that the reserve powers of the Regional Governors will be removed. That is not stated in the White Paper. Is that the intention? Above all, it is important that people, both here and in Nigeria, should know—immense importance is attached to this in Nigeria—what regional self-government in really means. If there is misunderstanding, when the time comes.
Nigerians—probably quite wrongly—may feel that they have been grossly cheated; and in that event the situation would be very difficult indeed. Looking at the matter broadly, one cannot help feeling some regret that the emphasis in this distribution of powers was not placed upon a common Government which would be the focus of loyalty and respect for all races and religions in Nigeria. Emphasis, on the contrary, has been placed on separate Governments of the three regions.
Another matter which causes me considerable concern is the future of the Civil Service in Nigeria. This topic was touched upon by Lord Milverton, but I do not think he dealt with points which I should like to mention.
What will happen, it appears, is that the present unified service will be broken up into four separate public services—a Federal service and three Regional services. To this a fifth may be added, if the Southern Cameroons becomes a unit in the Federation I gather that that is probable. Will the Southern Cameroons have its own separate Government service? That would be another piece into which the unity of the Civil Service is going to be broken.
What alarms me about this decision is not only that the efficiency of a unified public service has had to be sacrificed to local patriotism—that is, perhaps, inevitable—but, still more, that a step of such importance as the fragmentation of the existing unified service should be taken without any expert inquiry into the practical and administrative consequences of the change.
May I give your Lordships a roughly parallel case—it is impossible to find an exact parallel. When federation was contemplated in the West Indies, as your Lordships will remember, a Commission of experts, the Holmes Commission, was appointed to advise the British Government about the future of the public service. In spite of the fact that, as your Lordships know, each territory in the West Indies now has a separate public service, the Commission recommended in favour of a unified public service for the whole of the British Caribbean.
I am not saying that there would have been a similar recommendation if a similar body had been appointed to deal with Nigeria. All I am saying is that it is clearly not incompatible with regional autonomy for a unified Civil Service to be maintained. At least, I should have thought the possibility of maintaining the unity and efficiency of the Civil Service, as well as all the probable consequences of the alternative which has now been adopted, would have been examined in advance before these political decisions were taken.
I should like now, my Lords, to ask the noble Earl who is to reply one or two questions about the position of the Civil Service. I have given him notice of these questions, but naturally I wish to put them in the course of the debate.
When these three Regional Administrations are set up, they will have their separate administrative, technical and judicial services and personnel, of course. Will the personnel in these services be transferable, whether they are expatriate officers or locally recruited officers, from one region to another? I think that matter is extremely important, because obviously efficiency will be much less if each region has to depend on its own people for recruiting the whole personnel for its Civil Service.
But even if the personnel is to be transferable as between regions, is there not a real danger that the public service in each region will develop on racial lines—that is to say, you will find Yorubas in the West and Ebus in the East, and in the North they will want to keep out both Yorubas and Ebus? Is there not a danger that we shall see the Civil Service growing up in this way? Another matter that causes me a good deal of concern it was dealt with at some length by the noble Lord, Lord Milverton is the decision to limit the new Federal Legislature to a single Chamber.
I think it would be true to say that almost every Federal Constitution in the world has a Central Legislature with two Chambers. That may not be a convincing argument in a particular case, but it is a fact as a general statement of the position. Incidentally, this is one of the few things that the United States and the Soviet Union have in common: it is rather interesting to note that they have anything in common nowadays.
Surely there is a particularly strong case for a Second Chamber in a Federation, as compared with a homogeneous country such as our own. If the Lower Chamber is elected on a population basis, as proposed here, the Federal units with the largest populations will greatly outnumber the other units. This general argument applies with exceptional force to Nigeria, because it is proposed that the Lower House shall have elected members—92 from the Northern Region and the balance from the other regions, Lagos and the Southern Cameroons.
It will be seen that the representatives of the Northern Region equal in number the whole of the rest of the elected membership. I hope it will work, as the noble Lord, Lord Milverton, thinks it will, and that there will not be a political "steamroller" operating on the representatives of other regions, as he expressed it. But the mere figures fill one with doubt. After all, if the North keep together, they can never lose a vote, and with a single ally their policy can never be challenged by any of the other regions.
Yet this preponderance in the Lower Chamber could be largely corrected by an Upper House, or Senate, with limited powers, but with equal representation of all the regions. As the noble Lord pointed out, this was actually favoured by the Conference, but its opinion altered later on, after one of the most important delegations had withdrawn.
One cannot help feeling that there is a particularly strong argument for reopening the question of the composition and structure of the Federal Legislature. The most worrying of all these proposals, in my view, is the proposal about the future of Lagos. My noble friend Lord Ogmore and the noble Lord, Lord Milverton, dealt with this question at great length, and I would add nothing much to what they have said.
Of course, it is a fact that the removal of Lagos from the Western Region, which is proposed in the White Paper, threatens to divide Nigeria. Awolowo, has said I am quoting his words that Unless this decision is modified, the unity of Nigeria which the Secretary of State intended to preserve would be seriously imperilled. That is a very serious statement, coming from the leader of the largest Party in the Western Region, and whatever the merits of this decision may be, and however strongly the parties to it may feel, I hope that the Secretary of State may be willing to reconsider it, in the light of the very strong feeling which has since been expressed in the Western Region of Nigeria.
Awolowo has proposed various alternatives, and the noble Earl opposite, with his usual constructive spirit, has also proposed an alternative. What we should like to ask the Government to do is to consider these alternatives and to reconsider the position in the light of public opinion in Nigeria, with a view to finding a solution to this question which will command the maximum possible agreement in Nigeria.
I am certain that we all wish the political leaders in Nigeria the utmost success with this great task of revising the Constitution. We all hope that it will help them forward towards self-government within the British Commonwealth at the earliest possible moment, and that whatever they decide, with the assistance of Her Majesty's Government, may be in the best interests of the peoples of the greatest territory amongst the dependencies of the British Commonwealth.
My Lords, before the noble Earl replies, may I intervene to say a few words? The noble Lord, Lord Ogmore, was good enough to ask for my opinion upon a certain point in such generous terms that it would be discourteous for me to say nothing. Although I cannot answer him as fully as I would have done had I had more ample opportunity for study, I think I can satisfy him upon the point on which he feels some difficulty.
It is surely an integral feature of any Federal system that there should be some body to determine whether or not the Federal power, on the one hand, and the provincial and state powers, on the other, have exceeded the authority given to them by the Constitution.
Always you will find—for instance, in the Australian Constitution and in the British North America Act —that wherever there is a Federal system, there is a list of legislative items in regard to which power is given to the Federal Centre, and a list of legislative items in regard to which authority is given to the states, provinces or regions, as the case may be.
It is often found in experience to be difficult to determine exactly where the line of demarcation lies, and it has always been found necessary to vest in a judicial body—the High Court of Australia, the Supreme Court of Canada the Supreme Court of the United States, in the case of the original North America Act —the power to determine whether or not, on the one hand, the Federal Centre or, on the other hand, a provincial or state body have exceeded their respective powers.
For that reason, so far as Nigeria is concerned, the final power has here beers given to the Supreme Court which is to be set up, having regard to the fact that legislative powers are given respectively to the centre and to the regions.
0コメント