Lawmakers argued that, if passed, the bill could set a dangerous precedent for the nation’s political structure.
Deputy Minority Leader Aliyu Madaki stated that existing institutions have already covered the issues the bill aims to address, according to The PUNCH.
Madaki said, “The issues this bill intends to cure have already been taken care of by the Federal Character Commission. The rotation issue should not be included in the Constitution but allowed to remain the way it is.”
Another lawmaker, Sada Soli (APC, Katsina), questioned the practicality of the proposal, warning that it could compromise leadership quality and promote ethnic and regional rivalry.”
Shina Peller Oyedeji (PDP, Oyo) noted that enshrining rotation in the Constitution could lead to further agitation, even within regions.
“If you adopt zoning and it comes to the South West, for example, which state will take the position? Is it Ogun or Oyo?” he asked.
Also speaking, Bello Mohammed El-Rufai cautioned that the amendment could infringe on the constitutional rights of citizens.
“Whatever you do in Nigeria, there will always be a cry of marginalisation. We should not engage in a dangerous precedent by putting it in the Constitution,” El-Rufai stated.
The debates reflect a sharp division among lawmakers, with many warning against institutionalising regional politics through constitutional means.
Despite the rejection, the House resolved to revisit the bills on Wednesday and assess each on its merits.
Currently, Nigeria does not have a constitutionally backed provision for the rotation of the President and Vice President’s offices
