From Advisory to Authority: The Rise of AVMS Parliament

AVMS CONSTITUTIONAL REVIEW: THE POWER SHIFT NO ONE CAN IGNORE

Power does not always change hands with grand announcements or dramatic upheavals. Sometimes, it moves quietly, slipping through procedural cracks, taking root in amendments, and solidifying in structures before anyone realizes what has happened. The AVMS constitutional review is one such shift—subtle yet decisive. The rules have changed, and so has the game.

At the center of this transformation stands the Parliamentary Council. Once an advisory body, it has now cemented itself as the legislative backbone of the association. No longer a mere observer, it has become the engine of governance—structured, strategic, and unyielding. With 15 members—three from each DVM class (DVM I–DVM V)—and a Speaker drawn from a two-timer or more in the clinical class, the council is no longer just part of the system; it is the system.

THE SUPREME AUTHORITY OF CONGRESS: A MYTH OR A REALITY?
On paper, the Congress remains “the supreme authority of the association.” It elects the Executive, deliberates on emergencies, and retains the final say on impeachment. But how does authority manifest in a system where structure has been refined for efficiency?
The Parliamentary Council now controls financial decisions. Budget defense and approval? Handled. Congress? It gets to listen, but the real decision-making now follows a streamlined process. "Why waste time with formalities when the choices have already been made?"
Even the Budget and Welfare Committees, once administrative entities with limited visibility, have been absorbed into the Parliamentary Council. The result? A Parliament that not only drafts policies but also ensures financial prudence. The illusion of Congress as a decision-making force remains intact, but governance has been optimized for precision.

THE AVMSIEC DILEMMA: INDEPENDENCE OR TRANSPARENCY?
For years, AVMSIEC, the electoral commission, operated with unquestioned independence. Now, that independence comes with structured accountability. “This isn’t about control,” they insist. “It’s about transparency.” Autonomy remains intact, but so does the expectation of responsible governance. The balance between oversight and independence has been recalibrated—not to weaken, but to reinforce integrity.

PARLIAMENT AS ENFORCER: ORDER, DISCIPLINE, AND CONSEQUENCES
The days of evasion are over. Executives can be summoned, questioned, and even tried in absentia. A summons is no longer a request—it is an obligation. "Miss two Congress meetings without a valid excuse? Consider yourself suspended." The message is clear: governance demands presence.
Financial management is under a microscope. Post-budget spending exceeding 10%? Expect scrutiny. The days of unchecked expenditures and overlooked errors are gone.

ELECTION REFORMS: STRUCTURE, ACCOUNTABILITY, AND ORDER
The casual approach to elections has been eliminated. No student ID? No vote. Candidates have 48 hours before election day to withdraw—after that, they’re locked in. Class representatives for Parliament must be elected a week before the general election. No sudden last-minute candidates, no unexpected alliances—just an organized, accountable system.
Parliamentarians are now elected to handle affairs, so they might as well do just that. “Don’t like it? Maybe you should have attended the constitutional review.”

AMENDING THE CONSTITUTION: A RIGID FRAMEWORK WITH FLEXIBILITY
The constitution, once a document subject to convenience, now follows a structured revision process. The Speaker interprets it, but if Congress disagrees, a two-thirds majority can overrule. Any amendment must pass three readings and a ten-member review committee chaired by the Deputy Speaker.
Reviews are scheduled every five years—unless those in charge, responding to emerging needs, decide an earlier review is necessary. Governance does not wait for the past; it adapts to the present.

A LONGER LIST OF EXPECTATIONS—AND CONSEQUENCES
The constitution does not just define authority; it defines responsibility. Embezzlement, forgery, theft, financial misappropriation, abuse of office, negligence—each an express ticket to immediate suspension. Even inaction is a liability. Miss two Congress meetings? Suspended. Fail to respond to a query? Consider yourself out. "In this new system, silence is not just costly—it is damning."

THE FINAL VERDICT: A SYSTEM BUILT FOR GOVERNANCE, NOT NEGOTIATION
What emerges is a system that is tighter, more regulated, and designed for efficiency. A Parliament that enforces. A Congress that deliberates. An Executive that is watched.
For those who ignored the review, believing their absence would shield them from its effects—congratulations. You have just handed power to those who showed up. Because in the end, authority does not belong to those who abstain. It belongs to those who participate.

THOSE WHO SHAPED THE FUTURE
The constitutional review was not merely an event—it was a moment of reckoning. Senator Jesufemi Owopetu, the CR Chairman, steered the session with precision, assisted by Comrade Eniola Adejinmi. The room bore witness to the presence of Comrade Daniel, AMC Chairman; Comrade Opeyemi, the most senior HOC from DVM 5; along with Comrades Asiwaju, Michael, Abdulrahman, Morenikeji, Victoria, and others.
Whether they came out of duty, curiosity, or sheer determination, one truth remains: they were there. And by being present, they shaped the future of AVMS.
For the rest? The rules are already in motion.

By: Odukoya Abdulrahman 

Associate Editor II.