S.O.S ALIEME

The system of checks and balances in a presidential system is unarguably the power behind the functional system of democracy. In Nigeria, the system of checks and balances involves the presidential veto, the legislative powers of the house of assembly, the role of the judiciary in constitutional control, as well as the impact of impeachment mechanisms and the possibility of parliamentary investigation of the executive branch.

The system of checks and balances in Nigeria differs from other presidential republics. In Nigeria, the separation of powers is violated. In a presidential republic, there is a strict separation of powers, characterized by the formal isolation of the branches of government and the absence of close functional relationships between them. The system of checks and balances plays a crucial role in maintaining this structure. Such a division of power is enshrined in the Constitution. 

However, the independence and autonomy of each branch of government in Nigeria do not imply their complete detachment from one another. In practice, such isolation could lead to inefficiency, conflict, or even governmental paralysis. Therefore, a mechanism of mutual cooperation, checks and balances has developed within presidential republics to ensure both the independence and interaction of all branches of government. The legislative power, represented by the parliament, holds the exclusive right to pass laws. No other authority or state body possesses such a right. However, in practice, these strict rules are not always consistently enforced. All these strict rules limiting the executive branch’s access to parliament are designed to preserve the independence of the legislative branch. However, this is not in practice in Nigeria.

The independence and autonomy of each of the three branches of government, especially the legislative and executive branches, should not serve as an obstacle to their cooperation. Moreover, effective governance is impossible without their interdependence and interaction. On fundamental issues of state policy, all branches of government must act in coordination, as failure to do so would make governance impossible, inevitably leading to anarchy and disintegration.  The system of checks and balances is designed to neutralize any attempts at power usurpation by any branch of government. Congress has the authority to reject the president’s legislative proposals, including budgetary bills, which he submits to the house personally or through a delegated authority. The Senate can reject any presidential nominee for high federal positions, as approval requires a two-thirds majority vote in the Senate.

In some countries that have adopted the presidential system, the checks and balances system is often undermined. In such states, the president wields extensive powers and can exert influence over other branches of government. To strengthen the effectiveness of the system of checks and balances in presidential republics, several measures should be considered: ensuring  judicial independence through mechanisms of constitutional oversight and anti-corruption initiatives; enhancing executive accountability by expanding parliamentary oversight of the actions of the president and the government; optimizing the impeachment process to prevent its misuse for political purposes and to guarantee an objective and fair procedure; promoting political culture and increasing civic awareness, both of which are crucial for the stable functioning of democratic institutions.

Having been through military regimes overtime, the average Nigerian citizen has come to appreciate that the three arms of government should work independently. However, the frictions and disruptions in governance occasioned by the frequent standoff between the executive and the legislature have brought to the fore the need to investigate how Nigeria has fared as regards separation of powers and checks and balances. Separation of powers is a mechanism for promoting and enhancing the independence of the organs of government in building a virile and stable political environment. A constitutional democracy that is anchored on the modern principles of liberal culture of representative democracy expresses its powers in three forms; legislation, execution (implementation) and judicial precedence.

The separation of powers presupposes that no one should have powers over the others neither can anyone usurp the functions of the other arms. This is to ensure political and civil liberty and the advancement of freedom of citizens. The doctrine of separation of powers means that when an individual occupies the position of both the executive and the legislature, there is the danger of the legislature enacting oppressive laws which the executive will administer to attain its own ends. In the same manner, if the power of the judiciary is not separated from the legislative and executive, liberty is not guaranteed. When the legislative and executive powers are united in one person, or in the same person, there can be no liberty; because an apprehension may arise, lest the same monarch or senate should enact tyrannical laws, to execute them in a tyrannical manner.

In all, for instance, in Nigeria, there is the argument as to whether the three arms of government should enjoy the same level of privilege and entitlement. The legislature in Nigeria have argued that they should be entitled to “life pension” and “immunity” just like the president, vice president, governors, deputy governor (executive) and the judges (judicial). The advocates of this, believe that if the other arms of government are given the same opportunities and privileges, it will enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of the application of the principle of separation of powers, which will lead to the efficacy of the rule of law. Hence, the need for the principle of separation of power comes to play to help stabilize and enhance the institutions and agencies of government.

For good governance, separation of powers and checks and balances must coexist. The whole argument in favour of separation of powers is meaningless if the principle of checks and balances does not, in reality, operate as it helps in limiting the powers of each arm and restricting them to operate within their constitutionally assigned duties. This implies that when an individual is vested with such powers of abating and probating or executing and adjudicating, there is every possibility that such a person will become despotic.

It is therefore, obvious that in modern democracy absolute separation of powers is not feasible. In the first place, there is great need for the arms of government to cooperate and collaborate with each other for them to ensure good governance and deliver dividends of democracy. Secondly, a water-tight separation of powers will lead to power tussle between the executive and legislative thereby over heating the political environment and instituting political instability.

In Nigeria for instance, the National and State Houses of Assembly since the dawn of this republic believe that their constitutional powers and responsibilities are often usurped by their executive counterpart. The executive on the other hand feels that the legislature delay the implementation of their policies and programmes by not giving speedy attentions to executive bill, confirmation of appointments and any other collaborating assistance. In as much as modern democracy does not support water-tight separation of powers; there is need for both organs to check the activities of each other.

Therefore, the lesson for Nigeria democracy is that both the executive and legislature should uphold the constitutional principle of separation of powers and at the same time ensure collaboration in carrying out their various over-sight functions.

God Bless Nigeria!!!