Constitution making in developing countries

FURTHERMORE, if one or more of the nations in the multi-national state had, for a long period of time, lived as geographically separate and autonomous groups, the constitution of the state must, efortiori, be federal, and the constituent states must be organised on the dual basis of language and separate nationality.

Four principles or law emerge clearly from what I have said under this heading, and ( would like to state them. They are:

2019 : 61 Political parties rejects INEC draft election guidelines

ONE: If a country is uni-lingual and uni-national, the constitution must be unitary.

TWO: If a country is uni-lingual or bi-lingual or multi-lingual, and also consists of communities which, though, belonging to the same nation, had, over a period of years, developed divergent and autonomous nationalities, the constitution must be federal, and the constituent states must be organised on the dual basis of language and separate nationality.

THREE: If a country is bi-lingual or multi-lingual, the constitution must be federal, and the constituent states must be organised on a linguistic basis.

FOUR: Any experiment with a unitary constitution in a bi-lingual or multi-lingual or multi-national country must fail, in the long run.

I would like to add that I have arrived at these principles after very careful study and analysis of the constitutional evolution of every state in the world. I, therefore, regard the principles as conclusive, because the method which I have adopted is that of summative induction.

. According to John Stuart Mill, induction is: ‘that operation of the mind, by which we infer that what we know to be true in a particular case or cases, will be true in all cases which resemble the former in certain assignable respects’.

More than two thousand years earlier, Aristotle had, described induction as: ‘a passage from individuals to universals’.

It will be seen, therefore, that I have done much more than is required by the rules of induction. I have employed the summative method of induction, because I am aware that I am dealing with human institutions which are very liable to substantial variations, and because it is both possible-and much safer, to employ this method, in the present instance. The phenomena under investigation are not only all of them ascertainable but are also all open to direct study and analysis.

I have set out as fully as possible in Thoughts On Nigerian Constitution the facts from which the principles I have just enunciated have been deduced. And I make bold to declare that these principles will hold good as long as the hearts of the vast majority of human beings continue to be ruled more by passions, emotions and individual wills and self-interests, than by objective reason and the pursuit of generally beneficial common goals, Indeed, these principles will continue to hold good as long as mankind remains divided, as at present, by language, culture and disparate social objectives.

As I have emphasised again and again there occasions, it is of exceeding importance for practical politicians and constitution-makers to bear in mind that more educated the people in a nation become, the more hardened and distinct are their language; and culture.

Since, as I have said, these principles are conclusive and inexorable in the long run, it is imperative that, in their own interests, developing’ countries should adhere to them most religiously. A nation groping more ‘or less’ in the dark, and striving for bare subsistence cannot afford to depart from laws and principles which, are sufficiently verified, and from routes which are well-charted, to embark on experiments which the empirical verdicts of history declare to be utterly ruinous. The strains’ and stresses. Which such experiments will generate are bound to worsen, excessively, .the already dismal economic and social plight of the country concerned.

3. AIMS AND OBJECTS: As we have seen, an association of human beings, which has no specified alms and objects for, keeping its members permanently together, may be a nation, or tribe, or family, but certainly cannot be a state, By definition, therefore, the existence of aims and objects to be pursued is an inseparable attribute of a state.

If the state and the nation are coextensive, the absence of aims and objects will lead to over-recurrent discontent, instability and public turmoil. The danger of disintegration and fragmentation will also be present, but the tendency to cohere among the various units I which compose the nation-state will prevent such disintegration from becoming permanent. In due course of ‘time, a Bismarck or a Garibaldi will appear to weld together and unify’ the ‘fragmented units, by infusing in them a sense of national purposes and direction.

On the  other hand, if the state is multi-national or multi-lingual, the want of specified aims ,and objects of,a sufficiently uniting character will lead to permanent disintegration among-the nations which constitute the state.