Connect with us

News

States get 30-day deadline for constitution amendment

Published

on

The National Assembly has transmitted the 2026 Constitution alteration bill to the 36 state Houses of Assembly for consideration, asking them to communicate their resolutions within 30 days.

It also clarified that the timeframe is administrative and not a constitutional deadline.

The transmission, effected on Wednesday by the Clerk to the National Assembly, Kamoru Ogunlana, followed a directive from the leadership of the National Assembly.

The development marks the commencement of the next critical phase of the constitutional amendment process, with the proposed alterations now before the state legislatures whose approval is constitutionally required before the exercise can proceed.

In a statement issued on Wednesday, Ogunlana said the transmission was made pursuant to Section 9 of the 1999 Constitution, as amended.

He said, “The National Assembly has commenced the next stage of the constitutional alteration process with the transmission of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (Sixth Alteration) Bill, 2026 to the Houses of Assembly of the 36 States of the Federation for their consideration and approval.”

Section 9 requires a constitutional alteration bill to secure the approval of not less than two-thirds of the 36 State Houses of Assembly.

Ogunlana stated, “Section 9 of the Constitution provides, among other requirements, that either House of the National Assembly shall not pass a Bill for the purpose of altering the provisions of the Constitution unless it is approved by resolution of not less than two-thirds of the Houses of Assembly of the 36 States of the Federation.”

Build-up to transmission

The transmission followed the passage of the proposed alterations by both chambers of the National Assembly.

See also  Nigeria grants asylum to Guinea-Bissau opposition candidate

Under the constitutional procedure, an alteration bill must be considered and passed by at least a two-thirds majority of all members of both the Senate and House of Representatives. Where a bill originates in one chamber, it must be transmitted to the other for concurrence, with both chambers required to agree on the same text before it can be sent to the state legislatures.

At least 24 of the 36 state Houses of Assembly must subsequently approve a constitutional alteration before the process can advance.

The state legislatures are now expected to consider the proposals in accordance with their respective legislative procedures and communicate their resolutions to the National Assembly.

Although the state legislatures have been given an expected 30-day period to respond, the Clerk stressed that the period was not prescribed by the Constitution.

He said, “The Clerk to the National Assembly has requested the state Houses of Assembly to give the Bill the requisite consideration in accordance with their respective legislative procedures and to communicate their resolutions to the National Assembly upon conclusion of their consideration.

“It is noted that the Constitution does not prescribe a specific period within which the state Houses of Assembly are required to communicate their resolutions on a constitutional alteration Bill.

“Nevertheless, in the interest of an orderly, coordinated and timely conclusion of the constitutional alteration process, the state Houses of Assembly are expected to consider the Bill and communicate their respective resolutions to the National Assembly within 30 days of receipt.

“For clarity, the 30-day period is an expected administrative timeframe and does not constitute a constitutional deadline,” the statement added.

See also  Opposition slams govt as states’ IGR soars by 50%

The National Assembly also stressed that the transmission was not intended to influence or dictate how the state legislatures should consider the proposals.

“The National Assembly recognises the constitutional responsibility vested in the state Houses of Assembly and respects their independence in the consideration of the Bill. The transmission is intended to facilitate the orderly discharge of their constitutional role in the process.”

Ogunlana said the National Assembly remained committed to complying with the constitutional requirements governing the alteration exercise.

He said, “The National Assembly remains committed to ensuring that the constitutional alteration process is conducted in strict compliance with the Constitution and in accordance with the principles of due process, institutional cooperation and respect for the legislative responsibilities of all tiers of the legislature.”

He added, “Upon receipt of the resolutions of the State Houses of Assembly, the National Assembly will proceed with the necessary steps in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution.”

2027 deadline concerns

The transmission comes about two weeks after the Senate assured Nigerians that the constitutional amendment process would be completed before the expiration of the 10th National Assembly in June 2027.

The assurance followed concerns that the review could be overtaken by preparations for the 2027 general elections and suffer the fate of previous constitutional reform exercises that failed to secure the required legislative support.

Critics have also questioned the resources committed to previous amendment exercises and raised concerns over the possibility of another unsuccessful attempt at constitutional reform.

However, the Chairman of the Senate Committee on Media and Publicity, Yemi Adaramodu, told The PUNCH that the Senate leadership was determined to conclude the process within the lifespan of the current Assembly.

See also  ‘I will kill any terrorist who enters P’Harcourt,’ says Asari-Dokubo

Adaramodu said, “The proposed constitution amendments, already started by the 10th National Assembly, shall be passed in the life of this current Assembly.

“However, January is not the terminal date of the 10th National Assembly, but June 2027.

“The Electoral Act, recently passed, has taken care of the January 2027 general elections.”

The Senate President, Godswill Akpabio, had also assured that preparations for the 2027 elections would not prevent the National Assembly from performing its legislative responsibilities.

Akpabio said lawmakers had the capacity to balance their political activities with their constitutional duties.

The constitutional review is expected to cover proposals relating to governance, political restructuring and other aspects of Nigeria’s constitutional framework.

Unlike ordinary legislation, constitutional alteration requires compliance with the special procedure prescribed by Section 9, including approval by both chambers of the National Assembly and endorsement by at least two-thirds of the state Houses of Assembly.

Previous constitutional amendment exercises have generated extensive public debate, with several proposals failing to secure the required legislative support despite the time and resources committed to them.

The transmission has now placed the 36 state Houses of Assembly at the centre of the next phase of the process, with their resolutions expected to determine whether the proposed amendments can advance before the 10th National Assembly winds down in June 2027.

Source: punchng.com

FOLLOW US ON:

FACEBOOK

TWITTER

PINTEREST

TIKTOK

YOUTUBE

LINKEDIN

INSTAGRAM

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

News

SEE FULL LIST: NJC recommends 28 candidates for judicial appointments

Published

on

The National Judicial Council (NJC) has recommended 28 candidates for appointment as judicial officers across six states, including 24 candidates for various State High Courts.

The recommendations cover the High Courts of Kano, Ebonyi, Edo, Adamawa and Ogun states, the Plateau State Sharia Court of Appeal, Adamawa State Sharia Court of Appeal and Adamawa State Customary Court of Appeal.

The Council announced the recommendations in a statement issued on Wednesday by its Deputy Director of Information, Kemi Babalola-Ogedengbe.

It said the decisions were taken at its 112th meeting held on November 3, 2026, under the chairmanship of the Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Kudirat Motonmori Olatokunbo Kekere-Ekun.

According to the Council, one candidate was recommended as Grand Kadi of the Plateau State Sharia Court of Appeal, while another was recommended as Kadi of the Adamawa State Sharia Court of Appeal.

Two others were recommended as judges of the Adamawa State Customary Court of Appeal.

The appointment includes “24 High Court candidates and four candidates for the Sharia and Customary Courts of Appeal.”

The full list of the 28 recommended candidates is as follows:

PLATEAU STATE SHARIA COURT OF APPEAL (GRAND KADI)

1. Tijjani Jibrin Zololo

KANO STATE HIGH COURT

2. Nafisah Yusuf Hassan
3. Halima Yahuza Ahmad
4. Abdullahi Abdulsalam Bature
5. Musa Ibrahim Umar

EBONYI STATE HIGH COURT

6. Dickson Edmund Amaga

EDO STATE HIGH COURT

7. Benson Osagie Osawaru
8. Taiye Osayanmon Omoruyi
9. Dorothy Ibhade Adamaigbo
10. Festus Osagie Usiobaifo
11. Pius Idemudia Oiwoh
12. Majebi Samuel Amune
13. Emike Jessica Imuekemhe

See also  Trump tells European leaders their countries are ‘going to hell’ over immigration

ADAMAWA STATE HIGH COURT

14. Aminu Sa’ad
15. Ibrahim Ulenda Musa
16. Sadiq Giwa
17. Musa Bala Mijinyawa
18. Japhet Ibrahim
19. Aliyu Bakari
20. Yakubu Ahmadu

OGUN STATE HIGH COURT

21. Olakulehin Luqman Abiola Oke
22. Adebimpe Folusho Obienu
23. Fatimat Adeola Daudu
24. Rafiat Bolanle Kadiri
25. Oludotun Olaniyi Osho

ADAMAWA STATE SHARIA COURT OF APPEAL (KADI)

26. Abubakar Ishaku

ADAMAWA STATE CUSTOMARY COURT OF APPEAL

27. Elshama Gwama Dimas
28. David Benjamin Pembi

The NJC said all the recommended candidates were expected to be sworn in by their respective state governors without delay.

Source: punchng.com

FOLLOW US ON:

FACEBOOK

WHATSAPP CHANNEL

TWITTER

PINTEREST

TIKTOK

YOUTUBE

LINKEDIN

INSTAGRAM

Continue Reading

News

JD Vance reveals Iran war cost Republicans midterm elections, read details

Published

on

United States Vice President JD Vance has blamed the Iran war for the Republican Party’s poor performance in the 2026 midterm elections, saying many supporters of President Donald Trump switched allegiance to Democrats over dissatisfaction with the conflict.

Vance said this in a post on his X handle on Wednesday, arguing that the party’s defeat was not primarily caused by poor voter turnout but by the defection of voters who supported the Trump-Vance ticket in 2024.

He said data analysis conducted by his team before the elections had shown that Republican supporters were turning out in significant numbers, despite opinion polls predicting a major Democratic victory.

“One of the things the data analysts on our side obsessed over was ‘composition’—whether the electorate looked close enough to 2024 for Republicans to win,” he said.

Vance explained that although turnout was encouraging in several states, a member of his data team had warned him that many Republican voters were angry and might not vote for the party.

“Well, that looks prophetic now. Our voters did show up. In Florida, for example, the electorate was nine points more Republican than Democrat, just a couple points worse than 2024,” he said.

“But the main problem is not turnout. The main problem is that many people who voted for Trump/Vance in 2024 voted for Democrats in 2026.”

The Vice President acknowledged that the party might have failed to communicate its economic policies effectively, particularly on the cost of living and inflation.

However, he said the major reasons voters abandoned the Republicans were concerns about the war, economic hardship, America’s foreign policy priorities and its relationship with Israel.

See also  ICE detains Nigerian man in Los Angeles, begins deportation process

According to Vance, a pollster who accurately predicted the election outcome identified four major demands among former Republican supporters who switched to the Democrats.

The demands were to end the war, prioritise the cost of living and inflation, put America first and change the country’s relationship with Israel.

“The reason we lost is the war. The president himself said so last night,” Vance stated.

He also defended television personality Rachel Campos-Duffy, saying her earlier call for a diplomatic resolution to the conflict had proved politically sound.

Vance warned against attempts by Republican establishment figures to attribute the party’s electoral setback to other issues, particularly immigration policy.

He said he was open to reviewing immigration enforcement strategies, including targeting businesses that employ undocumented workers, but rejected calls for amnesty.

“Anyone pushing amnesty is lying to you,” he said.

The Vice President challenged those who believed the war was worth the political cost to defend that position openly, noting that the defeat could cost Republicans control of the Senate for the next six years.

“If you’d like to argue it was worth it, that losing the Senate for the next six years was worth it, then do so. Argue it was a worthwhile cost to pay,” he said.

“Agree or disagree, that’s at least honest.”

Despite the setback, Vance expressed optimism about the country’s future, urging disappointed Republican supporters to channel their anger into rebuilding the party and electing candidates who share their political views.

“Let’s take that anger and get back to the work of saving our country,” he added.

See also  Opposition slams govt as states’ IGR soars by 50%

Source: punchng.com

FOLLOW US ON:

FACEBOOK

WHATSAPP CHANNEL

TWITTER

PINTEREST

TIKTOK

YOUTUBE

LINKEDIN

INSTAGRAM

Continue Reading

News

UK to strengthen immigration enforcement with facial recognition

Published

on

The United Kingdom government plans to expand live facial recognition technology to strengthen immigration enforcement and identify individuals who have violated immigration rules.

The initiative, being developed by the Home Office, could see facial recognition cameras deployed at transport hubs and public events to help immigration officers identify people who have overstayed their visas, entered the country unlawfully or breached their immigration conditions.

According to policy documents published in October and sighted by PUNCH Online on Thursday, the proposed expansion could extend the technology’s use to general immigration enforcement, including civil immigration violations that do not necessarily involve criminal offences.

The development comes as Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood seeks to intensify immigration enforcement through increased funding, additional personnel and expanded deportation operations.

The Home Office said the technology would help officers identify individuals subject to removal proceedings and those attempting to re-enter the UK unlawfully.

The policy documents also suggest that facial recognition could reduce the need for repeated enforcement visits to residential properties and workplaces.

Authorities have already conducted three trials of the technology at Holyhead port in north Wales between November 2025 and February 2026. The trials focused on identifying individuals travelling from Ireland who were subject to deportation orders or wanted over immigration-related criminal offences.

The programme has now entered its formal delivery phase, with officials considering wider deployments at transport hubs and large public gatherings.

A Home Office spokesperson confirmed that further trials were being considered while the government examined the potential benefits and implications of the technology.

See also  American Bar Association condemns intimidation of judges

U K Home Secretary, Shabana Mahmood, said: “Facial recognition technology has been the biggest breakthrough for catching criminals since DNA matching, already helping police take thousands of dangerous criminals off our streets.

“The benefits are clear, but we must ensure that its use is fair, safe and proportionate.

“It is right we put in place clear laws to ensure that the use of this technology is watertight, so the public can have confidence that these tools, which are vital to our safety, are used responsibly too.”

However, the proposed expansion has raised concerns among civil liberties organisations and migrant rights advocates over privacy, surveillance and the possibility of inaccurate identification.

The Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants described the development as a significant escalation of immigration enforcement powers, while the Open Rights Group questioned the transparency of the plans, public consent and the absence of comprehensive legislation governing facial recognition.

Critics have also warned that the technology could disproportionately affect people of colour because of concerns about identification accuracy.

Meanwhile, Biometrics and Surveillance Camera Commissioner William Webster has questioned whether existing regulatory arrangements are sufficient to oversee the expanding use of facial recognition across government agencies.

Under the proposed policy, individuals under 18 will not be included on facial recognition watchlists.

Source: punchng.com

FOLLOW US ON:

FACEBOOK

WHATSAPP CHANNEL

TWITTER

PINTEREST

TIKTOK

YOUTUBE

LINKEDIN

INSTAGRAM

Continue Reading

Trending