The House of Representatives on Tuesday rejected a constitutional amendment bill that sought to mandate the rotation of the offices of President and Vice President among Nigeria’s six geopolitical zones. The bill, which was part of a series of constitutional amendments scheduled for discussion, sparked intense debates and drew mixed reactions from lawmakers during the plenary session.
The proposal to introduce a rotational presidency system, aimed at addressing concerns of regional and ethnic equity, was one of the most contentious issues raised during the session. Deputy Speaker, Benjamin Kalu, presided over the sitting, which saw the rejection of all seven bills presented, including the controversial rotational presidency amendment.
The bill, if passed, would have required that the positions of President and Vice President be rotated among the six geopolitical zones: North-West, North-East, North-Central, South-West, South-East, and South-South. Advocates of the bill argued that it would ensure more equitable representation of Nigeria’s diverse ethnic groups in the country’s leadership structure.
However, the bill faced strong opposition from several lawmakers, including Deputy Minority Leader, Aliyu Madaki, who argued that Nigeria’s existing federal structure and the Federal Character Commission already address issues of equity in political representation. “The rotation of the presidency should not be embedded in the Constitution,” Madaki said. He further stated that political parties already have internal systems to ensure fair representation during elections, thus making constitutional enshrinement unnecessary.
On the other hand, Shina Oyedeji (PDP, Oyo) supported the proposal, asserting that it would address the historical grievances and political marginalization felt by Nigeria’s various ethnic groups. Despite his support, Oyedeji acknowledged the complexities the zoning system could introduce, particularly concerning which states would be eligible for the presidency when it rotates to a specific region.
Sada Soli (APC, Katsina) dismissed the rotational presidency proposal as “disingenuous,” claiming that it could fuel further regional and ethnic tensions. According to Soli, while the idea of equitable representation may seem appealing, its practical application could exacerbate the very divisions it seeks to resolve. He warned that the implementation of a rotational system would likely lead to rivalries between regions, which could undermine national unity.
Bello El-Rufai (APC, Kaduna) raised constitutional concerns, questioning what would happen if the sitting president were to die in office, as occurred with President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua in 2010. “Would the vice president be forced to vacate office to maintain the zoning arrangement?” El-Rufai asked, highlighting the potential legal and political complications that might arise from such a system.
El-Rufai also argued that introducing a constitutional rotation clause could infringe on Nigerians’ constitutional right to freely contest for any political office. He cautioned that, regardless of legal provisions, accusations of marginalization would likely continue, even under a rotational presidency framework.
While the proposal was rejected, some lawmakers, including Minority Whip Ali Isa, argued in favor of rotating the presidency among the six geopolitical zones. Isa suggested that such a system would ensure fairness and inclusivity in Nigerian politics. He even proposed extending the zoning principle to governorship positions at the state level, where rotation could occur among senatorial districts.
Clement Jimbo (APC, Akwa Ibom) supported the proposal as a means of addressing historical injustices faced by minority groups, urging that a sunset clause be included to end the rotation once all regions had had their turn. Jimbo emphasized that such a move would create a more balanced political landscape and foster national unity.
In addition to the rotational presidency bill, the House also rejected several other constitutional amendments. One bill proposed removing the power to register and regulate political parties from the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) and transferring it to the Office of the Registrar-General of Political Parties. Another bill seeking to increase the minimum number of Federal High Court judges to 100 was also rejected.
The House also dismissed proposals aimed at expanding the jurisdiction of the Federal High Court to cover admiralty matters and granting independence to the Offices of State Auditors-General for Local Governments and the Federal Capital Territory Area Councils. Additionally, the House turned down a bill seeking to create Ughelli East Local Government Area in Delta State and a proposal to empower the National Judicial Council to determine judicial officers’ salaries in collaboration with the National Salaries, Incomes, and Wages Commission.
While the rotational presidency bill was rejected, the House of Representatives decided to revisit these constitutional amendments individually in a future sitting. Lawmakers are expected to continue deliberations on other proposals, weighing their merits and potential impacts on the political and legal landscape of Nigeria.
The debate on the rotational presidency reflects the ongoing tension between regional interests and the desire for national unity. Whether or not the proposal will be revisited in the future remains to be seen, but the rejection of this bill has sparked important conversations about how Nigeria can best address the challenges of ethnic diversity and political fairness.