FEDERAL DOMINANCE OR NECESSARY INTERVENTION? A CRITICAL EXPLORATION OF THE NIGERIAN PRESIDENT’S POWER TO SUSPEND A STATE GOVERNOR AND LEGISLATURE

Abstract

Governance in Nigeria operates within a federal framework, theoretically structured to ensure a balance of power between the central and subnational governments. However, the extent of federal authority particularly the power of the Nigerian President to suspend a state governor and legislature remains a contentious constitutional and political issue. This research critically interrogates whether such presidential intervention constitutes an act of federal dominance that undermines state autonomy or a necessary measure to maintain constitutional order and national stability. Adopting a doctrinal methodology with an analytical approach, this research relied on primary legal sources, including constitutional provisions, statutory frameworks, and judicial decisions, as well as secondary sources such as scholarly articles, and law journals. Findings revealed that while federal intervention mechanisms exist within Nigeria’s legal framework, the discretionary nature of their application, enforcement inconsistencies, and political undercurrents raise concerns about their impact on democratic governance. This work recommended constitutional clarity, judicial oversight, institutional safeguards, and policy reforms to ensure that any exercise of presidential authority over state governance is strictly confined within legal and democratic parameters, preserving both national stability and the autonomy of subnational entities.