When Nnadubem Moghalu, Senior Special Assistant to the President on Planning and Research, argued that criticism of the proposed National Policing Bill has focused more on process than content, he implied that the substance of the reforms has remained largely uncontested.
That conclusion is difficult to sustain.
The fundamental problem is not simply whether the legislative process is open or closed. It is whether Nigerians have meaningful access to the actual legislative text before being asked to participate in consultations about it.
A consultation without access to the document under discussion is not genuine public participation. It is public relations.
You Cannot Debate What You Cannot Read
Public consultation assumes that citizens, civil society organisations, lawyers, academics, journalists, governors, traditional rulers, and security experts can examine the exact wording of proposed legislation.
That is how democracies improve laws.
Every clause can be questioned.
Every definition can be challenged.
Every safeguard can be strengthened.
If the complete legislative text is not readily available for public scrutiny, then it becomes impossible to have an informed national conversation about its merits or weaknesses.
The result is that discussion shifts away from substance and toward procedure—not because Nigerians are uninterested in the content, but because they cannot adequately examine it.
Process and Content Cannot Be Separated
The suggestion that criticism has focused on process rather than content creates a false distinction.
Process determines whether content can be scrutinized.
A transparent process is what allows citizens to identify drafting errors, constitutional conflicts, unintended consequences, and potential abuses of power before a bill becomes law.
Without transparency, claims that the content has not been challenged prove very little. They may simply reflect limited public access to the text.
Silence should not be mistaken for consensus.
Consultation Requires Information
Governments frequently promise consultation during constitutional reforms.
But consultation is meaningful only when participants possess sufficient information to contribute.
Publishing summaries, press statements, or policy objectives is not enough.
Citizens should be able to review the proposed provisions themselves, compare them with existing laws, and offer detailed recommendations.
Anything less risks reducing consultation to a symbolic exercise.
State Police Is Too Important for Limited Debate
Whether one supports or opposes state police, few would dispute that the proposal represents one of Nigeria's most significant constitutional reforms in decades.
It touches on federalism, security, civil liberties, intergovernmental relations, funding, accountability, recruitment, command structures, and oversight.
These are not technical details that can be left exclusively to political officeholders.
They affect every Nigerian.
That is precisely why transparency matters.
Trust Is Built Through Openness
Nigeria's history has left many citizens skeptical of major constitutional reforms.
Public confidence grows when governments publish draft legislation early, invite criticism, respond publicly to recommendations, and explain why certain proposals are accepted or rejected.
Transparency does not weaken legislation.
It strengthens it.
If a proposal cannot withstand public scrutiny before enactment, questions naturally arise about how it will withstand constitutional and judicial scrutiny afterward.
Democracy Requires More Than Hearings
Legislative hearings alone do not guarantee openness.
True transparency means that ordinary Nigerians—not only invited stakeholders—can access the proposed legislation, understand its implications, and participate meaningfully in shaping it.
Democracy is not measured by the number of consultations held.
It is measured by whether citizens have the information necessary to engage in those consultations on equal footing.
The Real Question
The debate should therefore move beyond whether criticism is about process or content.
The more important question is straightforward:
Have Nigerians been given sufficient access to the complete legislative proposals to evaluate, criticize, and improve them before they become law?
If the answer is no, then both the process and the public debate remain incomplete.
Meaningful participation begins not with consultation, but with transparency. Citizens cannot debate the substance of legislation they have not been allowed to fully examine. Until the proposed National Policing Bill is made broadly accessible and subjected to robust public scrutiny, claims that its content has gone largely unchallenged risk confusing a lack of access with a lack of disagreement.
Comments
Post a Comment