THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CONSTITUTION AND CONSTITUTIONALISM

Generally, it is agreed that a constitution could be defined as a document of a greed rules and principles stating hoe power should be shared and exercised in the country. 

A constitution could also be defined as the basic laws and principles of the country which must be obeyed by all. It is also set of rules that are subject to the wall.

Review on The relationship between constitution and constitutionalism though it already mention in my first post about constitution, 

Constitutionalism could be defined as the strict adherence to the constitution with full obedience constitution is the engagement or commitment of the practices of the constitution. It is observing to do all that is embedded in the constitution 
The relationship between constitution and constitutionalism is that constitution itself is the document or book but constitutionalism is the practice of all that is written in the constitution without sentiments.

QUESTIONS 2

The provision of 1999 constitution in section 308 is inconsistent with the principles of rule of law, are there other provisions that are so inconsistent with the principle of rule of law in the constitution.
Section 308 of the Nigerian constitution talks about immunities granted to the president vice-president, Governor or deputy governor as regards their past that on no account shall.

1. Proceedings shall be instituted or continued against the person.
2. He shall not be arrested or imprisoned during this period in pursuance of the process of any court or otherwise.
3. No process of any court can compel or require the federal republic of Nigeria is inconsistent with the principle of the rule of law, because the principle of the rule of law states that there is equality of every person before the law as nobody is above the law. But this section tells us that so set of people could be above the law as a result of the immunities granted to them, due to the post the hold governmentally. E.g. OKADA RIDER’S VS Lagos state government 23rd October, 2012. (NOT GOV. FASHOLA).

Another section of the constitution that is inconsistent with the principle of the rule of law can be found in section 174 and 211 of the Nigerian constitution, sub section 1 it states that.
The attorney-General of the federation shall have power.
a) To institute and undertake criminal proceedings against any person before any court of law in Nigeria other than a court –martial, in respect of any offence created by or under act of the national assembly.
b) To take over and continue any such criminal proceedings that may have been instituted by any other authority or person; and 
c) To discontinue at any stage before judgment is delivered any such criminal proceedings instituted undertaken by him or any other authority or person.

2) The powers conferred upon the attorney-general of the federation under sub section 1 of this section may be exercised by him in person or through officers of his department.
3) In exercising his powers under this section, the attorney General of the federation shall have
Regard to public interest the interest of justice and the need to prevent above of legal process.

Section 174 of the Nigerian constitution of 1999, sub section (1a) grants immunities to court martial. A court martial could be defined as a judicial court judge for trying members of armed services, accused of offences against military law. There should not be immunities at all for anyone irrespective of the office he or she accepts, and the arguments concerning the provision of section 308 of the Nigerian 1999 constitution which provides for immunity for certain elected officers. Though this section appears to be express and clear enough, it has however generated a lot of its abrogation argue that immunity encourages corruption and therefore gives room for bad leadership. More also it becomes so inconsistent with the rule of law, because the rule of law states that everyman is equal before the law, irrespective of class, states and post held publicly. With every power conferred on the attorney-general of the federation, he still has no powers of undertaking criminal proceedings against a court martial. Then the purpose for the rule of law has been defeated.

According to section 175 of the Nigerian constitution of 1999, only the president may grant punishment to any person, after consultation with the council of state.
If in a state where the rules of law is being practiced, immunities are granted to the president, vice-president, Governor and deputy governor according to section 308 of the Nigerian constitution, and even a court-martial is granted immunity according to section 174 and 211 of the constitution, then it is obvious that the principle of rule of law is obeyed.

In that case, we can conclude that sections 308,114 and 211 of the 1999 constitution of Nigeria are inconsistent with the principle of the rule of law.