Nigeria at 66: From the first Republic Parliament to the 10th National Assembly

By Musa Baba Adamu

As Nigeria marks 66 years of independence, the country’s democratic journey provides an important opportunity to examine one of the institutions at the center of that journey: the federal legislature.

From the parliamentary system of the First Republic to the presidential legislatures of the Second, Third and Fourth Republics, Nigeria’s Parliament has experienced periods of institutional growth, political confrontation, military interruption, reform and renewed democratic experimentation. The story of the legislature is, therefore, inseparable from the story of Nigeria’s democracy, independence and sovereignty.

The Parliament inherited at independence in 1960 operated under a Westminster-style parliamentary system. The Federal Parliament consisted of the Senate and House of Representatives, while executive authority was exercised through a parliamentary government headed by the late Prime Minister Abubakar Tafawa Balewa. The 1963 Republican Constitution retained the parliamentary executive but replaced the British monarch with a Nigerian President as ceremonial head of state.

The First Republic Parliament was consequently operating in an environment where political parties had strong regional identities and where the federal structure gave considerable authority to the regions. Its period was characterized by vigorous political competition and parliamentary debate, but also by disputes over elections, census figures, regional power and inter-party relations. Historical scholarship associates the eventual collapse of the First Republic in 1966 partly with the inability of political elites to manage inter-party, inter-ethnic and intra-party tensions.

That collapse represented more than the end of a particular Parliament. It demonstrated how fragile democratic institutions can become when political competition overwhelms constitutional restraint and national consensus.

Nigeria returned to civilian government in 1979, but under a fundamentally different constitutional arrangement. The 1979 Constitution replaced the parliamentary model with a presidential system, creating a legislature comprising the Senate and House of Representatives.

The Second Republic Parliament therefore operated within a system in which the President was separately elected and the legislature had a constitutionally defined role in lawmaking, appropriation and oversight. Yet the republic lasted only four years. The December 1983 military coup again terminated constitutional government. The 1983 elections had been accompanied by allegations of widespread electoral malpractice and violence, although the results were contested.

The Third Republic offers another lesson. A bicameral National Assembly was elected in 1992 as part of the military government’s programme for a return to civilian rule. The legislature was inaugurated, but the transition was interrupted by the military regime, and the annulment of the June 12, 1993 presidential election ultimately prevented the emergence of a stable Third Republic.

Between 1983 and 1999, military governments repeatedly suspended or dissolved legislative institutions. The consequence was profound- for much of that period, there was no elected federal Parliament performing the essential democratic function of scrutinizing the executive on behalf of citizens.

Since 1999, Nigeria has enjoyed its longest uninterrupted period of constitutional democracy. The National Assembly has operated continuously under the 1999 Constitution, comprising 109 senators and 360 members of the House of Representatives. Its constitutional responsibilities include legislation, representation, appropriation and oversight.

The Fourth Republic Parliament has produced important legislation, constitutional amendments and electoral reforms. Academic assessments have also found that legislative oversight has, at various times, compelled government agencies to provide information, investigated alleged misuse of public resources and contributed to the reversal of some unpopular policies.

Yet, the record is mixed. A major academic assessment describes the Fourth Republic National Assembly as simultaneously capable of important constitutional and electoral reforms and vulnerable to weaknesses in legislation, oversight, representation and constituency engagement.

This contradiction remains central to the question of parliamentary quality in Nigeria. A Parliament may pass hundreds of laws, conduct numerous investigations and approve annual budgets, but democracy ultimately depends on whether those activities translate into accountable government, effective institutions and improved public welfare.

The present 10th National Assembly, inaugurated in June 2023, is led by Senate President Godswill Akpabio and Speaker Tajudeen Abbas. Its stated legislative responsibilities include lawmaking, oversight and representation, while the House adopted an eight-point legislative agenda covering governance, security, economic development, social development, inclusion, foreign policy and environmental sustainability.

There is evidence of substantial legislative activity. The National Assembly’s official legislative dashboard reported, as of April 2026, 1,033 bills at first reading in the Senate, with 106 having completed passage. The House leadership has separately reported that 2,747 bills were introduced in the chamber during the first three years, with 363 completing the legislative process.

The Assembly has also considered major economic legislation, annual appropriations and constitutional reform proposals. Its supporters therefore point to legislative productivity and cooperation between the two chambers and the executive as evidence of institutional stability. A publication of the National Assembly Legislative Digest described the 10th Assembly as having focused on economic revitalization, social welfare, security and institutional reforms.

But the quantity of legislation is not necessarily the same as legislative quality. Recent independent reporting has raised questions about the gap between the number of bills introduced or passed and their measurable impact on citizens, while also highlighting concerns about attendance and the effectiveness of oversight.

That distinction is important. The true test of Parliament is not simply how many bills it passes, but whose interests those laws serve, how carefully they are scrutinized, how effectively government spending is monitored and whether citizens can hold their representatives accountable.

There is also a deeper connection between Parliament and national independence. Political independence in 1960 meant the transfer of sovereign authority from colonial rule to Nigerians. But sovereignty is not secured merely by lowering a foreign flag. It also requires institutions capable of making independent national decisions, controlling public resources and protecting constitutional government.

A Parliament that cannot effectively scrutinize executive power weakens that sovereignty. Conversely, a Parliament that exercises constitutional oversight strengthens it.

The legislature must therefore neither become an extension of the executive nor turn opposition into permanent obstruction. Its constitutional purpose is to provide an independent institutional check while cooperating with other branches where national interests require cooperation.

This is particularly important in Nigeria’s presidential system, where the legislature controls appropriation and possesses constitutional investigative powers. Sections 88 and 89 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999(as amended) provide the National Assembly with investigative authority over matters within its legislative competence.

Nigeria’s experience suggests several reforms.

First, legislative independence must be protected. Parliament must have sufficient institutional and financial autonomy to scrutinize the executive without fear or inducement.

Second, oversight must become more evidence-based and consequential. Committees should publish reports, establish deadlines for government responses and track implementation of their recommendations.

Third, legislative transparency should be expanded. Citizens should be able to follow bills from introduction to passage, examine voting records, access committee reports and monitor constituency projects. The National Assembly has already begun developing digital tools, including a legislation tracker, Hansard access and public committee information.

Fourth, lawmakers need stronger research capacity. Complex legislation on artificial intelligence, taxation, energy, national security, digital finance, climate change and international trade cannot be effectively scrutinized without independent technical expertise.

Fifth, political parties must strengthen internal democracy. Legislators should be representatives of citizens first and party members second. Party discipline is legitimate, but it should not extinguish independent legislative judgment.

Finally, Nigerians themselves must demand accountability from their representatives. Democracy cannot be sustained by Parliament alone. An informed electorate, independent media, professional civil society, credible elections and an impartial judiciary are equally necessary.

At 66, Nigeria’s democratic journey remains unfinished. The First Republic demonstrated both the possibilities and vulnerabilities of parliamentary government. The Second and Third Republics demonstrated how quickly constitutional experiments can be interrupted. The Fourth Republic has demonstrated that sustained civilian rule is possible, while also exposing the institutional weaknesses that must still be addressed.

The 10th National Assembly under Akpabio and Abbas will ultimately be judged not merely by the number of bills introduced or passed, but by the quality of those laws, the independence of its oversight, the transparency of its proceedings and the extent to which it strengthens constitutional government.

Nigeria’s independence therefore requires more than political sovereignty from external control. It requires institutional sovereignty at home; a Parliament capable of representing citizens, scrutinizing power, controlling public expenditure and defending the Constitution.

That is the parliamentary standard worthy of an independent Nigeria, not a Parliament that merely legislates for the government, but one that legislates for the people; not one that simply approves power, but one that constitutionally scrutinizes it; and not one that measures success by activity alone, but by the democratic institutions and national prosperity its work helps to build.