INTRODUCTION The controversy around the proper interpretation of Section 16  of the 1999 Constitution as to the lawful participants within the major sector of the economy,  has continued to take a pride of place since the year 1979 during the days of the then 1979 Constitution in Nigeria. However, the source of controversy is largely due to the question that has been consistently asked as to whom can actually participate within the major sectors of the economy_ the Government or individual or both,  within the framework of Section 16 of the 1999 Constitution ? Sequel to the forgoing, this writer seeks to briefly re-examine the provision of Section 16 of the Constitution. Accordingly, it will  be  submitted that no inconsistency exists and that both Government and individual can “participate”  within the major sector of the economy. AN EXAMINATION OF SECTION 16 OF THE 1999 CONSTITUTION The Crux of the article is Section 16 of the 1999 Constitution which provides : 16(1)The State shall, within the context of the ideals and objectives for which provisions are made in this Constitution-

  1.  harness the resources of the nation and promote national prosperity and an efficient, a dynamic and self- reliant economy;
  2. control the national economy in such manner as to secure the maximum welfare, freedom and happiness of every citizen on the basis of social justice and equality of status and opportunity;
  3. without prejudice to its right to operate or participate in areas of the economy, other than the major sectors of the economy, manage and operate the major sectors of the economy;
  4. without prejudice to the right of any person to participate in areas of the economy within the major sector of the economy, protect the right of every citizen to engage in any economic activities outside the major sectors of the economy.
(4) For the purposes of subsection (1) of this section- (a) the reference to the “major sectors of the economy” shall be construed as a reference to such economic activities as may, from time to time, be declared by a resolution of each House of the National Assembly to be managed and operated exclusively by the Government of the Federation, and until a resolution to the contrary is made by the National Assembly, economic activities being operated exclusively by the Government of the Federation on the date immediately preceding the day when this section comes into force, whether directly or through the agencies of a statutory or other corporation or company, shall be deemed to be major sectors of the economy;
  1. “economic activities” includes activities directly concerned with the production, distribution and exchange of weather or of goods and services; and
  2. “participate” includes the rendering of services and supplying of goods.
A sharp perusal of the above constitutional provision may seem to reveal that there is conflict in the  provision, particularly  between Section 16(1)(c), (d) and (4)(a) to the extent that paragraph (d) had imported a confusion against the earlier paragraphs that gave  exclusive rights to the Government of the Federation in the major sector of the economy while paragraph (d) equally gives an individual a similar right. However, a careful appraisal of the Section in  its entirety would bring to the fore that the intention if the framers of the Constitution is clear and unambiguous because no inconsistency had arisen within  the Section. It is imperatively urged that high consideration and regard must be given to the words “operate”, “manage” and “participate” within the Section as they appear in different paragraphs with regards to either Government, individual or both. On this note,  Per Nnaemeka-Agu JCA (as he then was)  in a concurring judgement grappled with the proper construction of Section 16 in the then 1979 Constitution  in the case of Okogie v. Attorney General of Lagos State (1981) 2 NCLR 337 at page 357 thus: “So there is clearly a conflict between the provisions of Section 16(1)(c) on the one hand and Section 16(1)(b) and 16(4)(a) on the other hand. But such a conflict ought to be resolved by applying the latter provision of the Constitution in this case Section 14(4)(a): See Maxwell (on Interpretation of Statutes(12th Edn.)) P.199 & 228. An application of this principle in this case necessarily implies that Section 16(1)(c) {sic: (d)} ought to be construed as if the phrase “without prejudice to the right of any person to participate in areas of the economy within the major sector of the economy’ never existed. To do otherwise will make the whole of Section 16 of the Constitution meaningless.” However, I hold the considered view that Per Nnaemeka-Agu JCA was in error to have opined that inconsistency exists therein, while he was agreeing with the submissions of Chief F.R.A Williams (SAN) (of blessed memory) without being  conscious with the three key words, namely  “manage”, “operate” and “participate” employed by the framers of the Constitution within Section 16. Are these words the same ? It is humbly submitted in the negative. It is a settled principle of interpretation as stated in the book of HALSBURY’S LAWS OF ENGLAND, 4th Edn, volume 44 thus: “PRESUMPTION THAT WORDS ARE NOT USED UNNECESSARILY: “It may be presumed that words are not used in a statute without a meaning and are not tautologous or superfulous, and so effect must be given, if possible, to all the words used, for the legislature is deemed not to waste its words or say anything in vain”. Pg 525 See the cases of  R V. BERCHET(1690) I Show 106 at 108; DAYMOND V. SOUTH WEST WATER AUTHORITY (1976)AC 609 at 651,(1976)1 ALL ER 39 at 58,  QUEBEC RAILWAY, LIGHT, HEAT AND POWER CO V. VANDRY(1920) AC 662 at 676 ,PC, HILL V. WILLIAM HILL (PARK LANE) LTD (1949) AC 530 at 549,(1949) 2 ALL ER 452 at 461, HL Therefore, I hold the position that the framers do not intend those words  to be taken as one and the same.  The word “manage” means “to direct or be in charge,  to handle or control” while “participate” means “to join in, to take part, to involve oneself” while “operate” means : to use and control (something)” {Mini Dictionary} However, since the hurdle of defining these words have been removed, a fall back on  Section 16 of the Constitution is necessary at this point. From the provision, the following interpretation come into light:
  1. By Section 16 (1)(c), the State shall have the right to “participate” and “operate” outside the major sector of the economy but the major sector of the economy shall be exclusively “manage” and “operated” by the State (not participate)
  2. By Section 16(1)(d), the citizens or any person shall have the right to merely “participate” within the major sector of the economy, but he cannot “operate” and “manage” the major sector of the economy as this is exclusively preserved for the Government and also, the State must preserve the rights of citizens to engage in any economic activities outside the major sector of the economy.
  3. Section 16 (4) is to the effect that the National Assembly may by Law declare what economic activities are to be considered as the “major sector of the economy” or the ones before the coming into force of the Constitution shall continue to remain as such.
  4. Furthermore, Section 16 (4) provides the meaning of the word “participate” to include the rendering of services and supplying of goods. Hence, it means private individuals can supply and render services within the major sector of the economy but they cannot “manage or operate” it.
The above is the literal interpretation of Section 16 of the 1999 Constitution, on this note, the Law is settled that as stated in the case of  OMATSEYE v. FRN  (2017) LPELR-42719(CA) thus: “However, the general rule of the thumb in interpretation of statutes is that when the language, terms, intent, or words used in any enactment are clear and unambiguous, they must be given their ordinary meaning unless this would led to absurdity or be in conflict with some other provisions thereof. And where the interpretation will result in defeating the objective of the statute, the Court will not lend its weight to such interpretation. The language of a statute must not be stretched to defeat the aim of the statute, see ANSALDO NIGERIA LIMITED V. NATIONAL PROVIDENT FUND MANAGEMENT BOARD (1991) LPELR-498(SC).” See also the cases of NCC & ORS v. MUSICAL COPYRIGHT SOCIETY OF (NIG) LTD GTE & ORS (2016) LPELR-42264(CA), IBRAHIM V. JUDICIAL SERVICE COMMITTEE(1998) LPELR-SC.130/1990,(1998) 14 NWLR (Pt. 584) 1, and ANIMASHAUN & ANOR v. OGUNDIMU & ORS (2015) LPELR-25979(CA). Consequently, it is on this note that the reasoning of Per Nnaemeka-Agu JCA (as he then was) is laced with fault and error  because caution is not taken with the use of these words. The learned jurist  stated in the case of Okogie v. Attorney General of Lagos State (supra) that: “…An application of this principle in this case necessarily implies that Section 16(1)(c) {sic: (d)} ought to be construed as if the phrase “without prejudice to the right of any person to participate in areas of the economy within the major sector of the economy’ never existed….” This writer humbly holds the view that Section 16 does not need any rule of interpretation except the literal rule of interpretation  and by  strictly giving effect to each words as used in the Section,  as we have demonstrated above.  The Supreme Court in the case of IBRAHIM V. JUDICIAL SERVICE COMMITTEE(1998) LPELR-SC.130/1990,(1998) 14 NWLR (Pt. 584) 1 stated this: “And where such words of an Act of Parliament are plain and clear, there will not arise any room for applying any of the principles of interpretation which, incidentally, are merely presumptions that are applied in cases of ambiguity in a statute. Moreover, the Supreme Court through Per Nnaemeka-Agu JSC in  ANIMASHAUN & ANOR v. OGUNDIMU & ORS (2015) LPELR-25979(CA) held that: “The primary rule of construction is the literal construction which requires that we give the words used in the statute, and only those words, their ordinary and natural meaning, omitting no words and adding none. Nwakire v. C.O.P. (1992) NWLR (Pt.241) 289” Hence, it is respectfully submitted that since the words “operate”, “manage” and “participate” are not intended to mean the same thing within the context of Section 16 of the Constitution by the framers of the Constitution, therefore, there is no room for ambiguity as Per Nnaemeka-Agu JCA (as he then was) and other learned writers posited. Taking those words to mean the same is the main source of the confusion, which is  not within the contemplation of the framers. CONCLUSION Having carefully examined the provision of Section 16 of the 1999 Constitution, that there is no conflict therein, it goes without saying that the Government has the right to “operate”, “manage” and “participate” within and outside the major sectors  of the economy, while the citizens or any individual do(es) not have the right to “manage” or “operate” within the major sector of the economy but however, the citizens can freely  participate, operate and manage economic activities  outside the major sectors of the economy, while they  can merely  “participate” (only)  within the major sectors of the economy , i.e either by supplying goods or rendering services therein.]]>

"Exciting news! TheNigeriaLawyer is now on WhatsApp Channels 🚀 Subscribe today by clicking the link and stay updated with the latest legal insights!" Click here! ....................................................................................................................... Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material and other digital content on this website, in whole or in part, without express and written permission from TheNigeriaLawyer, is strictly prohibited _________________________________________________________________ [Register Now] ILA Nigeria Branch Marks 10 Years With Infrastructure Financing As Theme For 7th Annual Conference The International Law Association - Nigeria Branch 7th annual conference on public-private partnerships for sustainable infrastructure financing, April 4-5 in Abuja. Details: https://ilanigeria.org.ng/conference _________________________________________________________________

NIALS' Compendia Series: Your One-Stop Solution For Navigating Nigerian Laws (2004-2023)

Email: info@nials.edu.ng, tugomak@yahoo.co.uk, Contact: For Inquiry and information, kindly contact, NIALS Director of Marketing: +2348074128732, +2348100363602.