By
Kayode Ketefe
This
piece is conceived as a sequel to my last week theme on the policy of the
Senate retaining the provision that encourages child marriage in the
constitution. The hullabaloo that is generated by the refusal of the Senate to
excise the offensive section 29 (4) (b) from our grundnorm is still
reverberating through the length and breadth of the country and Senate itself
has shamefacedly said it would revisit its earlier unpopular stance on the
issue.
What
I however discovered is that many people expressed shock that a provision like
section 29 (4) (b) which indirectly encourages child marriage has been lurking
safely all this while in the 1999 Constitution. They had been under the
misconception that the whole noise about child marriage as reported in the
media has to do with a new bill being sponsored specifically to support child
marriage and not just about controversy over an amendment of a pre-existing
constitutional provision.
In
the light of the foregoing therefore, what I intend to do in this piece is to
highlight still other areas in the 1999 Constitution, which like the child
marriage issue, are gender- biased. After all, a good constitution should
safeguard the interests of all the people in the country and leave no room for
unfair discrimination against any person institution.
To
start with, one may say the discrimination against women under the present
constitution began from the process of making the constitution itself. An ideal
constitution should have inputs of every shade of public opinion, every segment
of the society and every sphere of distinct natural or convectional divides
that constitute the eclectic mix of the country.
Unfortunately,
the 1999 constitution was made without the inputs of women who constitute about
half the population of Nigeria. The 1999 constitution was made by
Constitutional Debating Committee comprising 25 members headed by Justice
Niki Tobi, which was set up by General Abdusalami Abubakar on November 11,
1998.The committee did not make adequate consultations with all segments of
peoples and shades of opinions required in a country as complex as
Nigeria.
The
draft constitution itself was promulgated into law by the Provisional Ruling
Council comprising 26 military officers-all of them male.
Therefore, as we embark on another processes of constitutional amendment we must start making amend by making women part of the process from the outset.
Now regarding the specific provisions of the constitution itself, Section 26 of the 1999 constitution introduces a very palpable discrimination against women on spouse’s right to Nigerian citizenship.
Under that section, a foreign woman
married to a Nigerian man is eligible to Nigerian citizenship by registration
but the section fails to make the same right available to a foreign man who
married a Nigerian woman.
This
is classical case of discrimination that is at variance with section 42 of the
constitution which provides right to freedom from discrimination on the bases
of SEX, religion, ethnicity, political affiliation etc. when you combine
that with the section 29 we have been talking about, it would appear as if the
discrimination is not just an oversight but deliberate. One may also cite the
language of the constitution itself which obviously is gender-biased.
There
is inordinate use of male pronouns like "He" "His" and
"Him" to the total exclusion of female pronouns. The male pronouns appear
about 253 times in the 1999 constitution. While this may appear innocuous
especially in the light of the Interpretation Act which makes all male pronouns
used in statutes applicable to women as well, yet the fact still remains that
most modern constitutions (e.g. South Africa) have moved away from the
patriarchal mentality of using exclusive male pronouns in the constitution to
the gender neutral of using " a person" instead of "he" or
to the gender-sensitive of using "He or She" instead of exclusive use
of "he".
An
example of subtle disadvantages suffered by women is afforded by section 131 of
the constitution which makes provisions on the qualification to the office of
the President of Nigeria. In that section alone the word "He" is used
four times. If no other thing, there is some sort of psychological suggestion
inherent in this; as if it is only a male that is fit or expected to occupy
that office.
Furthermore,
the 1999 constitution, apart from making a general provision forbidding
discrimination against any person on the bases of sex and other factors,
completely shies away from making gender-specific provisions to protect women
from discrimination.
Given
the nature and scope of abuse of women right in the country, this almost
amounts to a criminal omission. An example of such specific provisions is
contained under section 3 [1] of the Ugandan constitution which provides
"Women shall be accorded full and equal dignity of the person with men,
while subsection 4 provides "Women shall have the right to equal treatment
with men and that right shall include equal opportunities in political economic
and social activities".
We
would do well to include such specific provisions in our own constitution too.
No comments:
Post a Comment