A growing constitutional debate is gathering momentum in Nigeria after prominent political thinker and constitutional scholar, Olusegun R. Babalola, warned that the country is “sitting on a constitutional goldmine but refusing to mine it.”
At the centre of the debate is Section 21 of the 1999 Constitution — a largely overlooked provision within Chapter II that mandates the State to promote Nigerian cultures capable of enhancing human dignity and national development, while also encouraging scientific and technological advancement rooted in cultural values.
But according to Babalola, Nigeria has spent decades treating the provision as symbolic rhetoric instead of a serious governance framework.
“The country is wasting one of the most strategic ideas embedded in its own Constitution,” he warned, arguing that Section 21 has become “a sleeping clause trapped in ceremonial politics.”
His intervention is rapidly drawing attention in policy, academic and political circles as renewed discussions around constitutional reform and governance restructuring gain national relevance ahead of the 2027 elections.
For Babalola, the problem goes far beyond legal interpretation. He argues that Nigeria fundamentally misunderstands the meaning of culture itself.
Rather than seeing culture as a living governance system capable of shaping institutions, accountability and economic organisation, he says the country has reduced it to dances, festivals, artefacts and symbolic public ceremonies.
According to him, this “museum approach to culture” has stripped Section 21 of real constitutional and developmental force.
At the heart of his argument is a more far-reaching claim: Nigeria has disconnected its governance system from its civilisational foundations.
Traditional institutions such as emirates, obaship structures and councils of elders, he argues, still command enormous moral and social legitimacy across communities, yet remain constitutionally marginalised and excluded from meaningful governance architecture.
“The result is a state that appears modern but lacks deep cultural legitimacy and social cohesion,” he argued.
Babalola believes this disconnect has weakened governance, accountability and national development by separating moral authority from administrative authority.
The renewed debate around Section 21 has gained added political traction following repeated interventions by Adewole Adebayo, presidential candidate of the Social Democratic Party, who has consistently argued that Nigeria’s development crisis stems less from policy absence and more from the failure to activate Chapter II of the Constitution.
Adebayo’s emphasis on constitutional directive principles has reopened conversations around whether Nigeria’s governance failures are rooted in ignored constitutional provisions rather than lack of ideas.
Babalola situates Nigeria’s predicament within a broader global transformation he describes as the rise of “civilisational states” — countries that combine modern governance structures with deeply rooted historical and cultural identity.
He points to China’s fusion of Confucian traditions with state planning, India’s constitutional strengthening of local governance systems, and the governance-development models of Japan, South Korea and Singapore.
In these countries, he argues, culture is not treated as decoration or nostalgia, but as a strategic governance resource tied directly to economic growth, institutional discipline and national identity.
“Nigeria celebrates culture loudly but governs without it,” Babalola said.
He warned that the country has fallen into what he described as a “symbolism trap” — a condition where culture is displayed publicly but excluded from actual governance and development planning.
As an example, he referenced FESTAC 77, describing it as one of Nigeria’s most powerful cultural moments that ultimately failed to produce structural constitutional or institutional transformation.
Rather than discarding Section 21, Babalola is calling for its radical reinterpretation and activation.
He advocates integrating indigenous governance values such as communal accountability, consensus-building and restorative justice into local government administration, public institutions and development policy.
According to him, such reforms would transform culture from a passive identity marker into an active governance and economic instrument.
The debate, analysts say, now raises a deeper national question: whether Nigeria’s persistent crisis is truly a lack of ideas, or the failure to implement the ideas already embedded in its constitutional framework.
As calls for constitutional reform continue to grow, Section 21 is increasingly emerging as more than a forgotten clause. It is becoming a battleground in a larger struggle over Nigeria’s future identity — whether the country will continue operating as a state disconnected from its civilisational foundations, or evolve toward a governance model rooted in both modern institutions and indigenous legitimacy.