Under the 1954 Lyttelton Constitution of Nigeria, both the central legislature and regional houses of assembly were empowered to enact laws on items contained in the Concurrent Legislative List. In the event of a direct inconsistency between a central law and a regional law on a concurrent item, how was the conflict constitutionally resolved?
- The central law prevailed and the regional law became void to the extent of the inconsistency.Answer
- BThe regional law prevailed within that region because residual authority resided with regional governments.
- CBoth laws were automatically suspended until reviewed and approved by the Regional House of Chiefs.
- DThe central government was required to surrender its legislative competence on that item to the regional legislature.
Answer
The central law prevailed and the regional law became void to the extent of the inconsistency.
The 1954 Lyttelton Constitution formally introduced true federalism to Nigeria, establishing three legislative lists: Exclusive, Concurrent, and Residual. For subjects on the Concurrent List, both the Federal Central Legislature and Regional Legislatures had the power to make laws. However, to maintain federal cohesion, the constitution contained a supremacy clause dictating that if a regional law contradicted a central law on a concurrent matter, the central law prevailed and the regional law became void to the extent of that inconsistency.
Step-by-Step Solution
Key Concept
Division of Legislative Powers and Federal Supremacy in the 1954 Lyttelton Constitution
Estimated Time:1m 0s