Awake9ja: Any goody who says that fashola is right is really not honest. Sincerely speaking let's turn the table the other way, "what if that statement is coming out from babangida or sarduana of sokoto " will my bros from the west ever blv it's right.

Fashola is totally wrong and obi with Clark is right to me:
1) how do you teach people morality without a moral law?
2) how long do you think it going to take us to change the mentality of our people? So do we expect people to wait till then before there will be equality and equity?
3)


Agreed with obi and Clark:equity
1) two can never work together unless they agree, which is mutual understanding. We need it above everything.
2) the amendment is very much necessary to build fairness and equity.
3) we need to make a law that takes away immunity.
4) laws has two face
a) what one must not do or face the punishment if you do it,
b) what you must do and the benefit of obeying it.
5) law will help to curtail the excesses of any religion and tribe, and will empower the government to punish any that breaks it without fear or favor.
6) we need that law to end superior vs inferior mentality in our soiety.
7) it will encourage patriotism without suspicions .
then we shall have the oneness we have been looking for .
9) make every region equal state or do away with states and let us have only six regions so that people will feel secure and not been marginalized .

Conclusion:
What fashola is saying makes us more vulnerable than ever.
Tell me who may build a house with out a foundation .

KINGwax: now my friend, i see you're jes a fashola-asss-kicker! I respect d man though, and also a lagosian but he is fuckin stagnant there!
We need ds law to move it..
1. A constitution dt removes immunity
2. A constitution dt allow u remit your account quarterly or less
3. A constitution dt kills u if u embezzle
4. One dt submits your assets auditing before and after office
5. One dt allow u removed if d masses say u fail them
****
my friend, dt alone, will make u a better person without choice. Biliv me. No one wanted to do it right. We need to be forced.

Awake9ja: Anybody who says that fashola is right is really not honest. Sincerely speaking let's turn the table the other way, "what if that statement is coming out from babangida or sarduana of sokoto " will my bros from the west ever blv it's right.

Fashola is totally wrong and obi with Clark is right to me:
1) how do you teach people morality without a moral law?
2) how long do you think it going to take us to change the mentality of our people? So do we expect people to wait till then before there will be equality and equity?
3)


Agreed with obi and Clark:
1) two can never work together unless they agree, which is mutual understanding. We need it first above every other thing.
2) the amendment is very much necessary to build fairness and equity.
3) we need to make a law that takes away immunity.
4) laws has two face
a) what one must not do or face the punishment if you do it,
b) what you must do and the benefit of obeying it.
5) law will help to curtail the excesses of any religion and tribe, and will empower the government to punish any that breaks it without fear or favor.
6) we need that law to end superior vs inferior mentality in our soiety.
7) it will encourage patriotism without suspicions .
then we shall have the oneness we have been looking for .
9) make every region equal state or do away with states and let us have only six regions so that people will feel secure and not been marginalized .

Conclusion:
What fashola is saying makes us more vulnerable than ever.
Tell me who may build a house with out a foundation .

Slizbeat: The two governors aint Wrong. Fashola's Opinion should come second after Obi's. The fact is that the Sincerety fashola wants from Nigeria would only be realised if all Nigerians agree to the constitution and for We Nigerians to agree to it, it must be based on equity and fairness. No one would want to be in a relationship where they both are regarded as equals but yet one eats only beans all the time and the other eats friedrice and salad. Its simple logic.
BTW, Fashola never said he disagreed with the amendment but his opinion should av been tabled later. Obi never disagreed with the sincerety Fashola wants but he just asked how will they get the sincerety when the constitution is nt based on equity n fairness.
Meanwhile, the topic is misleading.

Omo_Tier1:
How can you have an agreed constitution if the people do not even realize in themselves that "fairness" to others is "justice" in itself? Is it not the lack of these moral values such as "fairness" that gave birth to the so called non-working constitution as acclaimed by Peter Obi? I my own opinion, Fashola is spot on, change your moral code before changing the letters of the law because if the 'spirit of the thinking' of the people is not right, the law may well be pronounced dead on arrival!

Slizbeat:

Dont reason it on sentiments like the thread wants to put it but with simple logic. Ok let me make it simpler.
In a school where the law is "dont flog the prefects for coming late" but late coming is punishable with flogging. Now, a normal student comes late alongside a prefect and the student was flogged while the prefect was allowed to go in2 duh class. Without you reversing that law, you cant stop the prefect 4rm coming late since he wont be punished and if u punish him/her, u av gone against the law. Simple.

Omo_Tier1:
Again your example buttress my point. If those that drafted that law were living by the moral code of fairness and justice, then they would have known rightly that such a law is wicked as it discredit one and approves of another's wrong.
Put it in another way, even if that flaw was written in the law and the prefect never comes in late, if at all, the law in itself will be redundant -simple

RIGHT ATTITUDE is the watch word.

Slizbeat:

Not that i dont agree with the ATTITUDE thing but we all know that the constitution is not based on Equity and fairness. But wait o0, guy u harsh o0, u wud make a good lawyer fa.

ndu_chucks: How can Fashola or anyone who hopes to rule Nigeria have any problem whatsoever with amending our constitution or even rewriting it? Is it not senseless to call for social engineering which could take generations for its effect to be actualized, instead of amending the constitution or rewriting it?

I am beginning to feel that Fashola may not have what it takes to move Nigeria forward. His talents are probably limited to managing entities such as cities and small states.

Obi is on point here and even the old coot Edwin Clark, is making more sense than Fashola.

Omo_Tier1:
Constitutions, historically has never been based on fairness and Equity, why? because those on claim equity must come with clean hands = right moral compass and I am sorry to say, humanity barely possesses that and is hugely lacking in Nigeria, and that is what Fashola is espousing.

Awake9ja: the topic of the post is wrong and deceiving.

let it be something like " elites disagree in constitution amendment "

because fashola and obi are not the only people in the meeting. otherwise the poster wants to play yoruba fight again here

but on my own veiw fashola was wrong. the constitution that give a acceptance to sharia and did not permit other religous commandment has to be changed.

in a country that i am a citizen which does not prohibit selling and drinking of alchohol why should somebody say that i should nof sell it or destroys my comodity and still have constitutional backing.

men we need amendments in that constitution.

Sealeddeal: Fashola and Obi didnt disagree.Fashola was actually trying to make the leader know that constitution does not stop them from working and providing for their people.he called constitution an agreement.Equally,Obi call constitution an agreement but said that ours ridden by injustice and need an amendment.so i think Fashola is right and Obi is right as well.

naptu2:

Mind you, Fashola stated clearly that he is not against constitutional change, but he believes that this should go hand in hand with behavioural change.

ndu_chucks:

This is a bunch of crap. Governors and politicians are now social engineers, abi? Pray tell, how are they going to force a behavioral change in people? I hope you are not suggesting that we use the Chinese system of forcing certain behavior on the masses. The kind of behavioral change Fashola is talking about will take quite some time and possibly a generation or 2.

Constitutional amendments or a restructuring should not be contingent upon the success of social (re)engineering. Fashola is simply wrong and ill-advised in this case. Lets call a spade a spade.

ndu_chucks:

This is a bunch of crap. Governors and politicians are now social engineers, abi? Pray tell, how are they going to force a behavioral change in people? The kind of behavioral change Fashola is talking about will take quite some time and possibly a generation or 2.

Constitutional amendments or a restructuring should not be contingent upon the success of social (re)engineering. Fashola is simply wrong and ill-advised in this case. Lets call a spade a spade.

naptu2: They didn't exactly disagree. I think the disagreement part was just a bid by the journalist to hype the story. I agree with both of them.

1) I agree with Fashola. We might have the best constitution in the world, but it would be pointless if we don't change the behaviour of the people.

Constitutions are not perfect documents and there is no perfect constitution, because constitutions are made by humans who are imperfect. No matter what constitution we have, people will still find a loophole in it with which they'll do whatever they want. Should we obey the spirit or the letter of the constitution?

Furthermore, a constitution is a document that does not enforce itself. How will the people charged with interpreting and enforcing the constitution behave?

Mind you, Fashola stated clearly that he is not against constitutional change, but he believes that this should go hand in hand with behavioural change.


2) I also agree with Obi. In order to
secure compliance with the constitution and to foster peace and unity, the people must have confidence in the constitution and believe that it is fair and protects their rights and interests.

CHESSBOARD: PLEASE POLITICAL MODERATORS CAN THIS BE ONE OF THE TOPICS OF OUR MONTHLY DEBATE. This is the first time I am reading a thread and I am at peace with the responses.

naptu2:

1) Fashola did not say behavioural change should come before constitutional change or vice versa. Rather, both should go hand in hand.

2) Public officials are supposed to be change agents (eg, Obama with his "yes we can" and "taking responsibility" campaign). I remember, a former police chief of New York, who implemented the broken glass theory, stated that the job of the police is basically about behavioural change. This change doesn't have to be implemented by force, but could also be done by education, public enlightenment and setting good examples.

musiwa7: . and there was no time in Nigeria that the people of Nigeria agree to 6 zone. Edo and delta state boycotted the conference .

You people should get it clear, the Yoruba people do not accept the 6 zones. And the day Goodluck dear to put that nonsense into the constitution of Nigeria. the Yorubas in the army will overthrow the govt and end the democracy and make all the governor jobless. And when they are Jobless they will all stop talking about nonsense.


look I honestly doubt Ekwueme as even caring for his fellow igbos.. Look Ekwueme does not love even the igbo, i doubt , igbos are the majority of river state.. Why on earth will Ekwueme put river state into a zone that the river state igbo will be minority in a state they are majority. Do you know where they please minority over majority in world. what does that tell you about Ekwueme?? even for drawing sure a map of 6 zones. it show Ekwueme is a bias man , who has no respect for other nigerian . and only interest in his own people selfishness. can you force things on others no.. i think we should call a spade, advocate of 6 zones are children of the devil. they are satanic people. you have to be satanic to even think of 6 zones.

Ekwueme is not a type of man who can draw up zones or region in Nigeria. base on his knowledge.. Sorry that i have to talk to the old man that way, but you have to learn to speak up in Nigeria and not be scare or respect anyone.. if they dear put that nonsense in the constitution. the army overthrown will the govt.

there will never been 6 zones over the dead of every yoruba man. We have petition the United nation already. but the time we vote at a united nation referendum, i will see how you will get 6 zone . Why dont you go and find out. You racist people. why you other nigerian very racist. this is black people been racist to other black people.

[img]http://wonderland1981.files./2012/06/samuel-doe-beach-execution1.jpg[/img]

ndu_chucks:

You points are well taken. We know what needs to be done in terms of the constitution. How do you propose that this behavioral change be forced on Nigerians and is it realistic to expect such a change in the next 5, 10, or even 20years without some sort of dictatorial authority such as they have in China and North Korea?

ndu_chucks: How can Fashola or anyone who hopes to rule Nigeria have any problem whatsoever with amending our constitution or even rewriting it? Is it not senseless to call for social engineering which could take generations for its effect to be actualized, instead of amending the constitution or rewriting it?

I am beginning to feel that Fashola may not have what it takes to move Nigeria forward. His talents are probably limited to managing entities such as cities and small states.

Obi is on point here and even the old coot Edwin Clark, is making more sense than Fashola.

“Those things that frustrate our people cannot be put at the doorstep of the Constitution. It lies in our diminishing values. I must not be mistaken that we don’t need a Constitution; what I am saying is that the Constitution cannot be driven by itself. It must be driven by people with values.”

naptu2:

Lagos has a high level of traffic accidents, therefore the government has set up road safety clubs in public schools to teach people basic road safety at an early age (remember, we've got laws regarding zebra crossings, but how many people obey them? How many people even know what a zebra crossing is? Is it enough to have the law? Don't you need behavioural change to ensure that the law is effective?). They've also set up a drivers institute, to make sure that people are properly trained before they get behind the wheels.

This is why I have always advocated that we need to teach civics in our schools. I don't want to type too much, I'll go find my civics post and repost it here.

ndu_chucks:

I'm more inclined to believe that we need to find a way to enforce our laws rather than become social engineers. When people know that there will be negative consequences for their illegal acts, their behaviors will be modified. I believe the right leadership can get us there. Fashola's successes are not due to any behavior modification grand plans, but to good leadership backed by the constitution.

Remember that another man's injustice maybe another's fairness and equity

naptu2:

Thank you for making my point. Once again, who will enforce the law and what will be the behaviour of the person that will enforce the law?

Options
1) Corrupt police

2) Corrupt politicians

3) Or who?