Constitutional and Legal Challenges of Three Decades of the 1992 Constitution: Justification for Demands for Amendment

This chapter discusses the nature of the Constitution as a living document and therefore amenable to change. It identifies the nature of the change processes being canvased as falling into three main categories as follows: total replacement of the constitution with a new one; massive amendment of its provisions; and amendment of specific provisions. The chapter contends that unlike the Constitutions of some other jurisdictions, the 1992 Constitution does not provide for a periodic comprehensive review of the whole Constitution. Neither does it make possible that a sovereign national conference or convention could by itself effect changes. It is generally accepted that a constitution must be allowed to grow, and one such growth process is through judicial interpretation. It is, however, the case that constitutional reforms through judicial interpretation could be constrained by some provisions that are structural and may only be changed through structural reform of the Constitution. It is nevertheless suggested that in the operation of the Constitution, amendments might not become very necessary if its inherent values are respected.