FROM experience from the process of amending the constitution is one that demands legitimacy, consensus, and broad-based support. The current rush by the government to push through constitutional amendments, despite opposition from the church and civil society, is a dangerous disregard for the principles of inclusivity and public participation.
While it is true that Parliament has the legislative authority to pass these amendments, the Constitution itself is founded on the premise that sovereignty belongs to the people. As the preamble clearly states, “We the people” bequeath ourselves the Constitution.
If these amendments are passed without broad consensus, they will lack legitimacy and undermine the very foundation of democratic governance.
A constitution is not an ordinary piece of legislation that can be altered at the whims of the political class. It is the supreme law of the land, a social contract that embodies the will and aspirations of the people.
Therefore, any attempt to change it must be guided by principles of transparency, inclusivity, and consensus-building. The current government’s approach—pushing amendments through Parliament without sufficient public engagement—raises serious concerns about its commitment to democratic values.
History provides ample evidence of the dangers of rushed constitutional amendments that lack popular legitimacy. In many nations, unilateral changes to the constitution have led to instability, public unrest, and a loss of trust in democratic institutions.
When a government bypasses the people in such a fundamental process, it breeds suspicion and deepens divisions within society. It is no surprise that the church and civil society have voiced their opposition to this process.
Their stance reflects the broader concern that constitutional changes should not be driven by political expediency but rather by the collective will of the people.
Moreover, legitimacy in constitution-making is not just a matter of procedural correctness; it is about moral and political authority. Even if the government secures the necessary votes in Parliament to pass the amendments, it will not erase the perception that the process was exclusionary and undemocratic.
Laws imposed without broad-based support often fail to withstand the test of time. A constitution that lacks legitimacy becomes a source of contention rather than a unifying framework for governance.
To safeguard the integrity of the Constitution, the government must embrace a more inclusive approach. This means engaging all stakeholders—political parties, religious institutions, civil society organizations, and ordinary citizens—in a genuine dialogue about the proposed amendments.
The process should be guided by the principles of participation, transparency, and national interest rather than narrow political calculations.
If the government persists in its current path, it risks not only legal challenges but also a crisis of legitimacy. The Constitution belongs to the people, and any amendments must reflect their collective will.
Without legitimacy and consensus, constitutional changes will remain mere political maneuvers—devoid of moral authority and destined to sow discord rather than unity. The government must slow down and listen to the people, lest it erodes the very democratic foundations it claims to uphold.
