ONE of the biggest achievements of the House of Representatives – involving the people – in the constitution-making process is passing unnoticed because many Nigerians keep focusing on daily issues.

The Constitution Review Adhoc Committee which Hon. Emeka Ihedioha, Deputy Speaker of the House chaired raised a 43-item template on which Nigerians voted on 10 November 2012, a referendum of sorts. The issues ranged from liberties to creation of States and local government councils, the judiciary, state police, aspects of federalism and electoral commissions.

More than 200 memoranda from diverse interest groups and the public formed the core of 43 items that were tested at 10am throughout the 360 federal constituencies. Even places with persistent securities challenges participated in the process that was reported in details for each constituency.

At different stages, the transparency of the process was enhanced. From Ihedioha declaring his non-interference, to the people having copies of decisions reached at their sessions, benchmarks for checking the sanctity of the processes were set.

Were the processes perfect? They were not. The inequality in the sizes of federal constituencies, differences in interests in the constituencies, produced results that reflected the diversities of the constituencies. What remained constant was the involvement of organised labour groups, professional bodies, civil society organisations, women and youth groups to ensure the fidelity of the process.

“This process may not be perfect, but I dare say, that it is the first time in the history of this country that Nigerians at the grassroots have been made part of the constitution review process in a practical and transparent manner,” Ihedioha admitted.

Efforts to protect the process included the collation of the results before the media and the various groups that had monitored it from the beginning. The openness, transparency and accountability limited chances of its manipulation.

It is possibly the most thorough work the House of Representatives has done. The presentation of the collated report was delayed until 18 April for members to cross-check with their constituents that the results reflected their voting at the sessions. The House and its leadership deserve commendation for deepening the peoples’ involvement in its work.

More remains to be done. Members’ convictions would be tasked during debates and voting on the issues. Would they vote against views that their constituents have expressed on certain issues? How would the collated results influence the harmonisation sessions of the House of Representatives and the Senate that would amend the Constitution?

If the public’s views are in the amended Constitution, the document would have become true to its opening words, “We the people of the Federal Republic of Nigeria

… Do hereby make, enact and give to ourselves the following Constitution”.