Constitution review: Issues as Reps kick out pro-women bills

It was protest galore following the rejection by the National Assembly, of specific affirmation action bills, seeking to encourage more women inclusiveness in governance. JOSHUA EGBODO reviews the issues as they emanated from the House of Representatives
Dashed hopes
With preparations for voting on report of the special Ad hoc committee for the review of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), thickened, there were high hopes that the much talked about increased inclusiveness of women in governance would be a success.
A boost to that optimism in the views of many followers of the agitations was the special visit of wife of President Muhammadu Buhari, Aisha, who penultimate week was in the chamber of the House of Representatives in an advocacy move to ensure the bills sailed through. The visit was to the day Deputy Speaker Idris Wase whose review Ad hoc committee was to lay the report.
But with all the moves, the Bills failed as members voted in majority of “no”, dashing the hopes of promoters of the special proposals, chief amongst which was a call for reserved seats for women in both the national and state legislative houses.
The Bills
The bills popularly dubbed affirmative action bills as presented in the report was one to earmark some offices in the political parties’ hierarchy exclusive for women. There were also the one to confer automatic citizenship on foreign spouse of any Nigerian woman, the indigeneship Bill that was intended to make women eligible to contest election in their husbands’ states after about five years of marriage, and the last one seeking a percentage for women in the ministerial appointments, as well as occupy the position of a commissioner in the states. 
Early signs
With the House of Representatives in session last Tuesday, what was perceived as initial signs that members might say nay to those Bills was the repeated members’ shouts of “no”, when Speaker Femi Gbajabiamila called for a motion to the effect that relevant rules of the House be suspended to allow wife of the Vice President, Dolapo Osinbajo, enter the chamber to monitor the plenary. She was, like Aisha Buhari, on advocacy visit to see the concerned bills scale through. 
Most impactful fail
To many analysts, the most painful rejection that spurred anger was the bill seeking 111 additional seats for the National Assembly, specially reserved for women, and also for reserved seats, each from the senatorial zones into the state Houses of Assembly.
The bill was presented at the first reading stage on April 22, 2021 on the floor of the House of the House of Representatives, seeking to create 37 additional seats in the Senate and 74 in the House of Representatives, specially to be occupied by women. The proposed constitution alteration bill was sponsored by Deputy Chief Whip, Hon. Nkiruka Onyejiocha, who represents the Isikwuato/Umunneochi federal constituency of Abia state.
Advocacy
With the understanding that a lot of intrigues on floor of the parliament could lead to death of any legislative instrument, especially, this time with a gender bias, Onyejiocha devised a strategy by getting a good number of male colleagues, including Speaker Gbajabiamila to co-sponsor the proposal. This was to serve as catalyst to its supposed wide acceptance, even at the zonal public hearings of the Wase-led committee. The bill made it through to be one of 68 listed for consideration and to be voted on, after both panels of the House and the Senate met in Abuja to harmonise all differences.
On Tuesday, March 1, 2022 on which the House sat to vote on the proposals, a two-third majority of 240 votes out of the 360 members as required by law could not be secured on the bill, as only 88 members voted in favour.
And the drama on Bill 68th
When the House got to last of Bills it was voting on last Tuesday, the Speaker and some members appeared worried on the image and possible backlash of having the last one, with a proposal that women be offered special percentage representation in ministerial appointments. The Constitution provided that the cabinet must have at least a representation from each of the 36 states of the federation.
Using the electronic voting which the House adopted for the review exercise that day, the Bill could not secure the minimum required 240 votes to make it scale through, as only 226 members pressed the “yes” button.
On that note, an in a manner akin to shifting the goal post in the middle of a match, Speaker Gbajabiamila opted for voice votes on the last Bill, explaining that the system had developed some technical faults. In spite of the overwhelming thunderous nay voices, however, he ruled in favour of the ayes. Spokesman of the House, Benjamin Kalu was later to defend the action that the parliament had powers to regulate itself as backed by the Constitution, and its own rules.
Protests
The morning after voting on the Bills had ended, a group of over 50 women-based CSOs stormed the National Assembly, blocking the main entrance in protest, demanding immediate re-introduction of the rejected Bills in both chambers of the National Assembly, and this was in addition to several reactions in the media. The protest continued on Thursday, making movement into and out of the National Assembly a herculean task.
Why did they fail?
With the manner of lobbying adopted, including the special visits by Aisha Buhari, and Dolapo Osinbajo, experts have continued to wonder why the bills were in such brazen manner, rejected.
Many have argued that Nigeria is an extraction of Africa, where certain practices and beliefs are held on to, with absolute sacredness. It is, therefore, the feeling of such pundits that religious and cultural issues may have played the clog role against success of the bills. In such submissions, the woman should naturally be under the man, leaving demands for equality with suspicion of rebellious tendencies. 
However, promoters of women inclusiveness in political leadership have insisted that they (women) may not be asking for equality as being erroneously perceived, but a chance to contribute their quota to societal development. 
Such analysts were quick to point out the excellent performances of the likes of Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, Dora Akunyili, amongst many more amazons, who have demonstrated that women can do a lot, if the opportunities are provided. 
Onyejiocha thinks differently
Amidst raging protests by women groups, lead sponsor of the bill seeking special seats for women in parliamentary houses, and Deputy Majority Whip of the House of Representatives, Nkiruka Onyejiocha had a contrary opinion to the belief that cultural and religious considerations played a great role in failure of the bills. It was widely believed that members of the northern extraction may have gone against the bills, more for religious purposes. 
But Hon Onyejiocha said, “It has nothing to do with north. They say it is northerners. It’s not true. The northerners that sat with me voted yes to women representation, and I can call the names; all the northerners that sat with me voted yes. So, nobody should deceive us that it is north. It’s not about north. It’s about individuals who do not want women to be included for reasons best known to them. And I don’t want anybody to come and say it’s a northern issue, it’s a northern issue, please.   
“It is about us, Nigerians. It is Nigerian men. But these men are using their knee on our neck and I think it’s got to stop but we are waiting. Nigerian women are waiting for them to tell us their reasons because I have researched and I can’t find any justifiable reason”.
What next?
In the thinking of many, the protests should be more advocacy, and not picketing. For instance, spokesman of the House of Representatives, Kalu blamed the women for starting late in the advocacy, stressing that the current exercise can never be the last in constitution review, and so more energy should be directed at early advocacy.
The protests have remained undeniably real, but will the women be offered some measure of succour soon? Only time will tell