PEOPLE: International Journal of Social Sciences

ISSN 2454-5899

Linus O Nwauzi, 2022

Volume 8 Issue 2, pp. 113-127
Received: 01st Sept 2021
Revised: 05th July 2022, 22nd July 2022, 26th July 2022
Accepted: 26th August 2022
Date of Publication: 19th September 2022
DOI- https://doi.org/10.20319/pijss.2022.82.113127
This paper can be cited as: Nwauzi, L, O. (2022). The Doctrine of Separation of Powers Under the
Nigerian Constitution. PEOPLE: International Journal of Social Sciences, 8(2), 113-127.
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International
License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ or send a
letter to Creative Commons, PO Box 1866, Mountain View, CA 94042, USA.

THE DOCTRINE OF SEPARATION OF POWERS UNDER THE

NIGERIAN CONSTITUTION

Linus O Nwauzi
LLB, LLM, BL, PhD (India), Senior Lecturer and Head, Department of Business Law, Faculty of
Law, Rivers State University, Port Harcourt, Nigeria
[email protected]
[email protected]
__________________________________________________________________
Abstract
Separation of powers is a hallowed constitutional principle of the democratic government of
Nigeria for the three arms of government to stay in their assigned tracks to avoid arbitrary
excesses by any of the arms. The ideal is that the legislature makes the law; the executive
executes the law, while the judiciary interprets the law. In recent times, the president of Nigeria
churns out Executive Orders in the form of ‘laws seeking to regulate the activities of the
government and the people. Similarly, agencies of the federal government have been found
wanting in this act. This paper thus revisits the doctrine of separation of powers in Nigeria with
a view to justifying its practice and an examination of the emerging trends of Executive Order
and independence of the judiciary. The paper finds that the practice of separation of powers is
on course in Nigeria despite some pockets of arbitrariness and concludes that adherence to the
principles of separation of powers remains a sine qua non to Nigeria’s successful democratic
journey.

113
PEOPLE: International Journal of Social Sciences
ISSN 2454-5899

Keywords
Constitution, Separation of Powers, Checks and balances, Executive Order and rule of law
______________________________________________________________________________
1. Introduction
The Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 as amended (CFRN, 1999)
was examined in this study to see how the idea of separation of powers is applied to the three
branches of government; the Executive, the Legislature, and the Judiciary.
The Nigeria’s presidential system of governance is predicated on the supremacy of the
Constitution, the doctrine of separation of powers and the principle of the rule of law, which are
the three constituent pillars of any democratic government. This work began with an analysis of
the meaning, history and practice of the doctrine under the military regimes and under previous
Constitutional enactments in Nigeria, in addition to the present including attendant checks and
balance measures. Additionally, emerging issues affecting the practice of separation of powers in
Nigeria like executive order by the President is still functional in Nigeria with pockets of
arbitrariness by the executive arm of the government which merits our discussion.
1.2. Literature Review
The literature review will briefly examine the historical origins of the principle of
separation of powers and it meaning below.
1.2.1. History
The principle of separation of powers as it is known today was the basis of thisprinciple
to dissuade men from the temptation to grasp power of making laws, to execute them, whereby
they may exempt into one hand for fear of putting it to their own private advantage according to
(Locke, J, 1960).
It follows that political liberty can only be established in an environment free of abuse of
power as proposed by (Baron Montesquieu in 1748). Constant experience, however,
demonstrates that every guy who is given authority is prone to misuse it and extend it as far as
he can. In order to avoid this kind of exploitation, it is essential that one power be a check on the
other. As a result, the notion of executive and legislative branches of government was
acknowledged and codified in the US Constitution. The US Court in 1926 made this
pronouncement according to Baron de Montesquieu that the doctrine was to preclude the
exercise of arbitrary powers among the 3 departments and from anarchy.

114
PEOPLE: International Journal of Social Sciences
ISSN 2454-5899

2. Separation of Powers under Military Regimes in Nigeria

According to (Chinwo, C, 2020) the military is an undeniable organ in the matter of
politics and the Constitution of Nigeria. The military in Nigeria first got involved in the political
system with neither an invitation nor a directive of the civilian government authority, as should
happen in cases of emergency under the existing Constitution. The effect of a military coup in
Nigeria has always been to sack the legislature and the executive organ, replace it with a military
head of state by whatever name called and other officers appointed by him from time to time at
different levels.
It is in the character of each military junta, upon a successful usurpation of power of
government, albeit, by unconventional means, to suspend some parts of the Constitution,
irrespective of the constitutional provision for the amendment of the constitution. This attitude of
the successive military administrations in Nigeria simply underscored the disdain for which the
military holds the doctrine of separation of powers during their administration. With military
administrations, the judiciary was also allegedly made inefficient and devoid of judicial powers
under numerous constitutions, making them unable to carry out their duties. By promulgating
orders pretending to eliminate the court's authority, military officers seize control of the
judiciary and deny it the ability to carry out the functions and responsibilities placed on it by the
CFRN, 1999 per A-G Federation v Guardian Newspapers Ltd (1999).
It is also worthy to note that the judiciary, even during military regimes, was bold in the
defence of its constitutional roles - the much it could in the circumstances. In the famous case of
Attorney General (Western State) &Ors v. Lakanmi (1971)the separation of powers provided
under the 1963 Constitution was relied upon by the Court when it held thus:-
We have a three-tiered system of government under our
Constitution: legislative, executive, and judicial. Our
constitution is based on the American Constitution in every
way possible.
As stated in the 1963 Constitution, the Supreme Court unambiguously affirmed the idea
of separation of powers. A military law, Decree No. 28 (Supremacy and Enforcement of Powers)
Decree of 1970, effectively nullified the Supreme Court's ruling. Nevertheless, this has not made
the judiciary to falter in their constitutional functions even during military regimes through
decisions that challenged the military authorities to their marrow. The judiciary although often
ends up in hushed voices, benumbed limbs, bruised noses or visage, is usually, at least, on paper,

115
PEOPLE: International Journal of Social Sciences
ISSN 2454-5899

left untouched by Military power when it takes over power. Quick to state here that Section 1(2)
of the Constitution has in very clear terms outlawed military and other undemocratic takeovers of
governance in Nigeria -the rationale being that the process of their emergence to power by
military might are clear signs of disrespect for due process and the rule of law. It is expected that
the perpetrators of the various military coups – both successful and unsuccessful ones - should be
seen and treated a law-breakers and punished accordingly because right from independent, the
Nigerian Constitutions outlawed violent takeover of government.
2.1. Separation of Powers under the 1960 and 1963 Nigerian Constitutions
There were two constitutions in force during Nigeria's first democratic transition: the
1960 Independent Constitution and the 1963 Republican Constitution, both of which had
provisions for the separation of powers, but with less stark distinctions than those of succeeding
times. Chapter IV of both the 1960 and 1963 constitutions created the Governor-Office General's
and the President's Office, respectively. For the Parliament, both constitutions had Chapter V;
for the judiciary, both had Chapter VIII. Chapter VI outlined the President's and Governors'
methods for carrying out their duties as chief executive officers. Both Constitutions did not have
a clearly defined division of powers. To be eligible to serve in executive posts, a person must be
elected to either the federal or regional legislature, as stipulated in the 1960 or 1963
constitutions.
2.1.2. Separation of Powers under the 1979 Constitution
Sections 4, 5, and 6 of the 1979 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, which
was in effect throughout the Second Republic of her democratic experiment, allowed for a clear
separation of powers. The Constitution established the legislative branch in Chapter V, the
executive branch in Chapter VI, and the judicial branch in Chapter VII. In accordance with this
arrangement, the executive branch of government is responsible for carrying out the laws passed
by the legislature and enforcing the court's decisions; the legislature is responsible for passing
laws, while the judiciary adjudicates and interprets the laws passed by the legislature. This
arrangement is completely consistent with the principle of separation of powers. This notion
under the Constitution of 1979 was interpreted by the courts in the 1981 case A-G Bendel State
v. A-G Federation & 22 Ors, in which the Supreme Court ruled that when the President signs a
bill, he is exercising executive powers within the legislative process.

116
PEOPLE: International Journal of Social Sciences
ISSN 2454-5899

The essence of the theory is to allow for checks and balances, hence promoting a healthy
influence or control by one party over the actions of the other. As accurately stated by (Ali, Y.,
2019), "the whole concept indicates that the legislative, the executive, nor the judicial would
exercise the entire or a portion of the functions of another," but it does not exclude influence or
control by one over the actions of another.
The politicians in power in 1979 did not fully adhere to the notion of separation of
powers set out in the Constitution. The civilian administration likewise worked harder to nullify
the Constitution's provisions on the separation of powers, although less obviously. The fact that
the legislative branch of government was not independent of the executive branch during the
Second Republic, which lasted from 1st October 1979 to 30th December 1983, was brought to
light by (Nwabueze, B.O, 1985). The President and Governors in particular, he said, had the
luxury of abusing their positions and influence to utilize the power of patronage to subjugate
members of the Legislature. Some believe that despite clear and detailed rules for separation of
powers, those who interpreted and enforced it did not completely adhere to it, probably because
of a protracted military interregnum during the country's post-World War II period.
2.1.3. Separation of Powers under the 1999 Constitution
There are no changes to the separation of powers clauses in the Federal Republic of
Nigeria's 1999 Constitution (as amended), which is the same as the 1979 Constitution.
According to Sections 4, 5, and 6 of the Constitution, the Executive, Legislative, and Judiciary
were each given a part of the Federation's authority. Section 4 of the Constitution grants the
National Assembly and Houses of Assembly of the States the authority to make laws for the
federal government and for each of the states. Section 5 of the Constitution grants executive
authority to the government's executive branch. According to S.6 of the Constitution, the
Judiciary has the ability to adjudicate and interpret the law.
So, the three branches of government have separate roles, underscoring the fact that the
Constitution specifies a clear division of powers between them. Individuals who are members of
one arm cannot concurrently be members of another. Thus, no one who has served as a judge in
the superior courts of records can ever hope to join the other two branches of government - no
matter how far up the ladder they may have been.
In a plethora of judicial authorities such as Kayili v Yilbuk (2015), the Courts, have held
as unconstitutional actions by any of the three arms of government that tend to undermine the

117
PEOPLE: International Journal of Social Sciences
ISSN 2454-5899

doctrine of separation of powers. More interestingly, the Courts have also resisted attempts to
make the Judiciary infringe on the doctrine of separation of powersinAmoshima v State (2011).

3. Conceptual Analysis
Separation of powers, as the name indicates, refers to the division of government
authorities and responsibilities across the three branches of government, namely, the executive
(executive branch), legislative (legislative branch), and judicial (judicial branch). There are three
departments of government: legislative, executive, and judicial, each having specific
responsibilities that the other two cannot trespass on, according to this definition (Garner, B. A,
2014).The argument states that the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches of government
should focus on policies and the implementation of laws, respectively, while the Judiciary
should solely be concerned with interpreting the laws. According to Nigeria's constitution, each
of the country's three branches of government must adhere within its designated limits in order
to ensure that government powers are not concentrated in the hands of a few persons, but rather
distributed among many institutions. Dictatorship is defined by the consolidation of
governmental powers in a single individual's hands, according to (Nwabueze, B.O, 1983), who
cautioned that absolute authority is arbitrary, capricious, and tyrannical by definition. Separation
of powers is defined as the execution of three different duties by the three branches of
government without excessive meddling and/or needless intervention in the affairs of another to
maintain desirable checks and balances in government.
As the three parts of government are necessary for the creation, enactment, and
administration of laws, the separation of powers serves to minimise the likelihood of arbitrary
abuses by government. Separation of powers may be defined as the concept that only one of
three branches of government has authority to take action at a given time: (Paton, G.W. 1972).

4. Research Issue
The major issue in this research is the examination of the principle of separation of
powers with particular interest in how it is practiced in everyday situation in Nigeria and
whether the necessary checks and balances are applied to keep the various arms of the
government in check to avoid arbitrariness.

118
PEOPLE: International Journal of Social Sciences
ISSN 2454-5899

4.1. Issues of Checks and Balances

Constitutional rules for unambiguous separation of powers among the three branches of
government do not guarantee total non-interference, but rather the need for cooperation between
the three branches of government for a successful country's administration. Checks and balances
is a notion which stresses that different organs keep an eye on each other's actions. According to
(Onyekachi, D. 2019) the idea of separation of powers, known as checks and balances, this may
be an exception.
Under the Constitution, there are also checks and balances in place to keep the
government from going over the top, even if it seems to be lawful. "The concentration of
government powers in the hands of one man is the exact essence of dictatorship, and absolute
authority is by its very nature arbitrary, capricious and tyrannical," wrote (Nwabueze, B.O, 1981)
in support of this position.
The notion of checks and balances extends to situations in which the powers of the
executive and legislative branches have been united under the Constitution. There shall be no
legislation passed by either House or National Assembly that interferes with the judicial rights or
tribunals of the courts under Section 4 (8) of the CFRN 1999, and no law passed by either House
or National Assembly that disagrees with this provision will be implemented.
Instances of the provisions for checks and balances under the CFRN, 1999 are legion:
Firstly, by the combined reading of Sections 1 (1) and (3), 4 (8) and 6 (1) and (6) (a) – (b) of the
Constitution, the Courts are the guardians of the Nigerian Constitution, hence no doctrine,
including that of separation of powers, will inhibit the courts from voiding any act on the ground
of unconstitutionality per (Hon, S.T. 2016)
In Atoshi v A-G Taraba State (2012), while providing justification for deviating from the
doctrine of non interference – by voiding the Legislative and Executive actions of the Taraba
State House of Assembly and State Governor, respectively which had dissolved the elected
Local Government Councils and replaced them with Caretaker Committees, the Court of Appeal
held, per Yakubu, JCA, amongst others that
the Courts have the judicial powers to consider and determine
whether the law so made by the legislature is consistent with
the Constitution … and that is the beauty of our democracy.

119
PEOPLE: International Journal of Social Sciences
ISSN 2454-5899

Secondly, the Constitution, by the provisions of S. 46 (3) authorizes the Chief Justice of
Nigeria to make rules (laws) with respect to the practice and procedure of a High Court in
fundamental right matters. In this particular instance, the judiciary appears to be performing
legislative functions. Thirdly, under Section 32 (1) of the Constitution, the President is
authorized to make regulation (laws) on matters concerning citizenship and immigration matters.
This is such an instance where the President has been assigned a law making responsibility or so
it seems.
Fourthly, the President or the Governor, as the case may be, is entitled to pardon a
criminal or to exercise his prerogative of compassion - by, for example, erasing or expunging a
convict's sentence issued by the court in a particular instance (Section 171 and 212, CFRN,
1999).In the same way, the President or "Governor with the relevant legislature" might remove a
judge for misconduct in the same manner as described above (Section 292, CFRN 1999).
Changes to current laws may be made by the President as well (Section 315 CFRN 1999).
Some executive bodies that were constituted by the Constitution have the authority and
responsibility under the Constitution to manage their own operations as well as confer powers
and impose duties on themselves (Section 160 and 205 CFRN, 1999). A Minister of the Federal
Government or a State Commissioner is required to appear before the National Assembly or
State House of Assembly, as applicable, to explain the conduct of his ministry in accordance
with Sections 67, 108, 67(2) and 108(2) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria
(CFRN) 1999. Impeachment procedures may be initiated by either chamber of Congress under
Sections 143 or 188, respectively, and the legislature has full authority to do so. In A-G.
Federation &Ors v. Atiku Abubakar & Ors, the Supreme Court repeated this clause (2007).
Sections 147 (2) and 192 (2) of the Constitution mandate that the Legislature must
approve all executive appointments of ministers and commissioners who are members of the
Executive. According to Section 80 of the Constitution, the National Assembly has the
jurisdiction to control public money and to set the salaries of the executive and judiciary.
S. 88 also grants to the legislature quasi-judicial powers to issue warrants, summons, and
receive evidence on oath from any person in connection with its legislative powers of I which
include the ability to investigate and expose corruption, inefficiency, or waste in the execution or
administration of funds appropriated by the legislature. An appeals court found that the
provisions of Sections 88 and 1989 of the Constitution did not amount to a breach of legislative

120
PEOPLE: International Journal of Social Sciences
ISSN 2454-5899

and executive powers in National Assembly &Ors v Momoh (1984), where the Court of Appeal
concluded that this section had been amenable to judicial interpretation.
Sections 58 and 159 of the Constitution provide the President additional veto authority
over legislation passed by Congress. While legislative approval is required for the appointment
of judicial officers in Sections 231 and 271, certain other judicial officers are granted
constitutional authority to issue rules governing the practice and procedures of their respective
courts in Sections 236,248,259,264,274,279 and 284 of the CFRN 1999. Though three branches
of government each have their own distinct powers, they are all obligated to cooperate with one
other for the interest of the people and the advancement of justice, freedom, or equity, no matter
what their respective powers are in Gadi v Male (2010).

5. Methodology
The style of writing employed in this paper is the doctrinal methods. Here consultations
to statutory provisions, texts, journals and publications of learned authors are made to define the
concepts in this paper for clarity.

6. Analysis of Research
Under this sub heading, we will be consideration the numerous benefits and advantages
of the principle of separation of powers under the various constitutional provisions in Nigeria.
6.1. The Pros of Separation of Powers
In Inajoju v Adeleke (2007), his Lordship Musdapher, JSC summed up the benefits of
separation of powers by stating that the idea of division of powers under the Constitution is
supposed to assure good governance and development and prevent the misuse of authority. The
theory of separation of powers is intended to increase the efficacy of government by prohibiting
the use of arbitrary authority by all branches of government, hence preventing conflict.
According to the Court of Appeal, the rule of law "is the foundational principle of democracy, as
demonstrated by the idea of separation of powers, which is anathema to authoritarianism"
(1996).
6.1.2 Executive Orders of the Federal Government of Nigeria

121
PEOPLE: International Journal of Social Sciences
ISSN 2454-5899

Executive agencies or government officials to direct or instruct their actions, or to create

rules that the executive branch must follow, an executive order is generally issued by the
president or on his behalf (Amadi S, 2022).
In Nigeria, both the President of the country and the various State Governors issue and
gazette executive orders. A practice became which became much rampant during the early part
of year 2020 when the Corona virus pandemic was at its worst ebb.Inrecent times, the President
of Nigeria has had cause to issue about 10 Executive Orders since 2017 till date. Some of them
are as follows:
(i) Executive Order No. 1: On the Promotion of Transparency and Efficiency in the business
Environment – came into force on 18th May, 2017.
(ii) Executive Order No. 2: Promotion of Local Content in Public Procurement by the
Federal Government – came into force on 18th May, 2017.
(iii) Executive Order No. 3: Timely submission of annual budgetary estimates by all statutory
and non-statutory agencies, including Federal Government owned companies – came into
force on 18th May, 2017.
(iv) Executive Order No. 4: Voluntary Assets and Income Declaration Scheme (VAIDS) –
came into force on 29th June, 2018.
Hitherto, the making of executive order has not been very popular with the government
of the Federal Republic of Nigeria; however, the current administration of President Muhammad
Buhari has, within a short period of time made several executive orders per Belgore, JSC in Abia
State v A-G Federation (2003). Irrespective of the beauty and necessity of the various executive
orders being churned out by the President ostensibly under the combined authority of Sections 5
and 315 of the Constitution as part of the President’s implied powers, it arguable, that the
President is tacitly encroaching on the law-making powers of the Legislature although executive
orders are instruments of management of the national economy and other domestic affairs by the
President. It remains for the Supreme Court to pronounce on the validity of the various executive
laws being issued by the current President of Nigeria – more than any other President of the
country before him – if and or when such matter is presented to the court per O. Adeyemi,
(2022).
6.1.3 The Code of Conduct Bureau

122
PEOPLE: International Journal of Social Sciences
ISSN 2454-5899

The Code of Conduct Bureau (CCB) and the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT)
established under the Fifth Schedule to the Constitution are statutory bodies for the discharge of
the roles given to them by the Constitution. Incidentally, the recent events under review here
portend the tribunal,which is not constituted by judicial officers, as seemingly functioning at the
behest of the Executive arm of Government in encroaching on the duties of the judiciary. The
circumstances of the trial at CCT of Senator BukolaSaraki and, later, Hon. Justice Walter
Onnoghen were clearly disruptive of the activities of the other two arms of government led by
the two accused persons at that point in time. In the case of the Chief Justice, the CCT granted
an ex- parte order to suspend him from office and that led to his eventual removal from office.

7. Discussion of Research
7.1. Independence of the Judiciary
The system is such that the judiciary cannot be divulged from the clutches or patronage
of the executive arms of government especially in the area of funding. It is no longer news that
there is acute funding constraint being experienced by the judiciary in Nigeria both at the federal
and the State level.
The Chief Justice of Nigeria, who spoke at the 2019 Legal Year Opening Ceremony and
the Inauguration of the new Senior Advocates of Nigeria in Abuja on the full autonomy granted
to the judiciary, admitted that funding remains the biggest handicap in the effective
administration of justice in Nigeria, said recently that the judiciary has been given full autonomy
in 2019. It is a well-known fact that most State Governors go out of their way to provide
infrastructures for the judiciary within their States irrespective to whether it is the Federal courts
or State Courts. What is relevant in this paper is the fact that there cannot be an effective practice
of the doctrine of separation of powers if the third arm of the government is not fully
autonomous and free from control by the other aims of government.
Another cause for the quest for the independence of the judicial is the issue of
intimidation of judicial officials by the security agents of the executive arm of the government.
Under the present Federal Government in Nigeria, there has been spate of breaches of the
securities of the judicial officers including the Honorable Justices of the Supreme Court of
Nigeria. For instance, at different times in 2016, the homes of senior judicial offices in Nigeria,
including justices of the Supreme Court, Judges of the High Courts in several parts of the

123
PEOPLE: International Journal of Social Sciences
ISSN 2454-5899

country were invaded by security agents at unholy hours of the night for no justification. Most
recent is the raid by security operatives on the residence of Hon. Justice Mary Odili – the 2nd
highest senior Justice of the Supreme Court of Nigeria – on Friday, October, 29, 2021, for no
justifiable cause according to the (Vanguard Newspaper, 2022). Incidents, such as this
underscore the fact that undue interference and or intimidation amongst the arms of the
government, wittingly or unwittingly exists, and they portend danger to democracy and the rule
of law, a fortiori, the practice of separation of powers in Nigeria.
7.2. Concluding Remarks
The taste of the pudding they say is in the eating. The beautiful notion of separation of
powers notwithstanding, the citizen must have their eyes open to scrutinize the actions of the
three arms of government in order to ensure that their respective actions are in line with the
democratic ideals of the rule of law and separation of powers. Vigilance by the citizenry is the
price to pay for good governance to be sustained
This paper, in reviewing the application of the doctrine of separation of powers has also
considered some emerging issues such as the resurgence of Executive Orders by the Executive
arms of the government and surmised that the making of the executive orders have not infringed
on the hallowed doctrine of the Separation of Powers, rather those orders have accentuated the
beauty of the Presidential system of government. However, care must be taken to ensure that
these orders do not encroach into the lawmaking functions of the Legislatures. Secondly, the
Code of Conduct Tribunal which tried both the former Senate President – Dr. BukolaSaraki, and
the immediate past Chief Justice of Nigeria – Hon Justice Walter Onnoghen,though a tribunal set
up by the Constitution to try public officers must be conscious of its actions so as not to give the
impression that it is a tool in the hands of the executive used for punishing un-cooperating
members of the other arms of government.
Whilst it is appropriate that the 1999 Constitution enshrined the principles of separation
of powers, the same Constitution created areas where the three organs interface and there are
also measures of checks and balances therein. To this end, the Constitution has taken care of the
doom that could have befallen governance where there is to be strict adherence to the doctrine of
separation of powers. The bottom line is that the doctrine of separation of powers is good for our
polity and its perceived demerits have also been cushioned by the same Constitution in the
practice of checks and balances. Therefore, the Constitution, being the grundnorm, having

124
PEOPLE: International Journal of Social Sciences
ISSN 2454-5899

enshrined the doctrine of Separation of powers under Sections 4, 5, and 6, and flowing from the
legal positivist theory, it behooves on all Nigerians to work for the full realization of this intent.
The doctrine of Separation of Powers under the 1999 Constitution of the Federal
Republic of Nigeria (as amended)is an essential component of the rule of law, which is a sine
qua non for good governance in a democratic environment such as ours. Under the Constitution,
the practice of separation of powers was not made watertight or mutually exclusive amongst the
three arms of government. Ample provisions were made for the fusion of the functions of the
three arms of government for ease of governance. The principle of checks and balances were
also entrenched in the constitution to enable the three arms serve as checks on one another, in
order to balance the interplay of powers amongst them. This is to forestall arbitrariness and
autocracy in the system.
Furthermore, the practice of separation of powers we should encouraged by ensuring that
members imbibe the culture of mutual respect for one another. Mutual respect will enable
members of one arm of the government not to look down on the others, but to see one another as
equal partners in the democratic process. The populace should vote in members of the three arms
of government who are men of integrity and of impeccable quality. By so doing, it will be
difficult for one arm of government to tend to intimidate the other such as in subjecting the
leadership of that arm of government to persecution. Such a trial, while the person is still in
office may not augur well in enhancing the doctrine of separation of powers.
Finally, whilsta full independence of the judiciary is advocated for the judicial officers
should, like Caesar wife, be and act above board. As a result of the importance of the judicial
arm of government in the equation, the twin essentials of full independence and integrity must be
pursued simultaneously. It will amount to suicide for a biased judiciary to be accorded full
independence that they deserve if the practitioners cannot be fair and just in the performance of
their functions.

REFERENCES
A-G Abia State v A-G Federation. (2003) FWLR Pt 152, Pg 131 @ 158Per Belgore JSC
A-G Bendel State v A-G Federation. (1981)
A-G Federation v Guardian Newspapers Ltd.(1999) 5 SCNJ 342 @ 368-368, perKaribi-
Whyte JSC.

125
PEOPLE: International Journal of Social Sciences
ISSN 2454-5899

A-G Federation v Atiku Abubakar &Ors (2007)

Ali, Y.cited in Aihe & Oluyede, (2011). Cases and Materials on Constitutional Law in Nigeria.
Amoshima v State ( 6-7 SC Pt.111), 1 @35.
Atoshi v A-G Taraba (2012)
B. O. Nwabueze, (1985). Nigeria’s Presidential Constitution, 1979-1983; The Second
Experiment in Constitutional Democracy (London, Longman), 174 -177
B. O. Nwabueze.(1983). The Presidential Constitution of Nigeria (London, Sweet & Maxwell,
32-33.
Baron de Montesquieu (1748). The Spirit of the Law Chapter XI, 3
C. Chinwo, (2020).Principles and Practice of Constitutional Law in Nigeria, 2nd Ed. (Lagos:
Princeton & Associates Publishing Co. Ltd., 194.
Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended), hereinafter, CFRN
1999.
D. Onyekachi, (2019). The Doctrine of Separation of Powers under the Nigerian Constitution: A
Critical Overview, <http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2142933> accessed on
21/4/19.
Garner, B. A. (ed), (2014). Black’s Law Dictionary10thedn (USA, Thomson Reuters)
G. W. Paton, (2010). A Textbook on Jurisprudence, 4th Ed. (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1972) 330.
Gadi v Male 7 NWLR Pt 1193 Pg 225 @ 287
Inajoju v Adeleke (2007) All FWLR Pt 353 Pg 3 @ 146
J. Locke, (1960) 2nd Treatise on Civil Government Chapter XII
Kayili v Yilbuk (2015) 7 NWLR Pt 1457, Pg 26; A-G Abia State v A-G Federation
(2002) 3 SCNJ 158@312.
National Assembly v Momoh (1984).
O. Adeyemi, (2022). The Dynamics of Executive Orders in Nigeria (1), available
at<https://aolulaw17.medium.com/the-dynamics-of-executive-orders-in-nigeria-i
e66ff8ed79b2> visited on 30/01/2022.
S. T. Hon. ( 2016). Constitutional and Migration Law in Nigeria (Pearls Publishers Int’l Ltd,
145.
S.Amadi. (2022).Executive Order and Presidential Power in Nigerian Constitutional

126
PEOPLE: International Journal of Social Sciences
ISSN 2454-5899

Democracy, available at <https://guardian.ng/features/executive-order-and-

presidential-power-in-the-Nigerian-constitutional-democracy> visited on
30/01/2022.
The Attorney General (Western State) &Ors v. Lakanmi((1971) UILR 201 or
(1974ECSLR 13).
Vanguard Newspaper(2021). November 9, 2021
https://www.vanguardngr.com/2021/11/attack-on-justice-mary-odili’s-residence-
make-report-of-your-investigation-public-senate-tells-igp/visited on 30/01/2022
Y. Ali, (2022). Separation of Powers under the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of
Nigeria: Critical Review@<http://yusufali.net/articles/separation-of-power-
Under-the-1999-Constitution>accessed on 24/4/19.

127