The Save Democracy Group, a newly formed bipartisan pressure group within Nigeria’s House of Representatives, has emerged as a vocal platform challenging what it describes as breaches of constitutional procedure. It has taken particular interest in fighting weak budget implementation, opaque government spending and worsening insecurity under the administration of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu.

The group came into the spotlight after questioning the validity of the House of Representatives’ passage of the proposed constitutional amendment to establish state police.

According to a statement signed by the group’s leaders, the organisation believes the House did not satisfy the constitutional requirements necessary for the passage of the State Police constitutional alteration bill, despite Speaker Tajudeen Abbas announcing that 311 lawmakers had voted in favour.

The group claims that fewer than the constitutionally required number of lawmakers were physically present in the chamber when the proposal was considered.

It has also questioned the validity of votes allegedly transmitted remotely through WhatsApp, arguing that constitutional alteration cannot legitimately be based on what it describes as an unverifiable voting process.

A Bipartisan Parliamentary Pressure on State Policing

The Save Democracy Group is described in the report as a bipartisan organisation within the House of Representatives.

That distinction is important. Rather than presenting itself as a conventional opposition bloc belonging to one political party, the group is positioning itself around issues that it says transcend party interests.

The statement was signed by the group’s leader, Honourable Awaji-Inambek Biante, alongside Honourable Abu Bakr Kusada and Honourable Mansur Jagger. Their intervention suggests that the group intends to use its position within the National Assembly to scrutinise decisions and actions that it believes undermine constitutional governance.

Its stated approach is therefore centred on parliamentary oversight rather than simply opposing the governing party. The immediate issue that brought the group into public attention is the proposed constitutional amendment establishing state police.

The group argues that constitutional amendments require strict compliance with prescribed legislative procedures. It is particularly concerned about the number of lawmakers physically present during the vote and whether remotely transmitted votes can be relied upon when determining whether the constitutional threshold has been achieved.

Its position is that the process must be verifiable and consistent with the requirements governing constitutional alteration. The group is therefore presenting itself as a defender of parliamentary procedure and constitutional safeguards.