Judical review of political question in Nigeria and Malaysia :a comparative analysis

Abstract

This thesis aims at finding the Nigerian and Malaysian courts‘ approach or attitude in the exercise of judicial review power on political questions. Because of similar circumstances stated in the research, these two jurisdictions are chosen. The researcher develops the pragmatic theory in order to delimit the meaning and scope of political questions. This is borne out of the weaknesses in the classical and prudential theories on the doctrine of political questions to realistically delimit the meaning and scope of political questions. Based on this premise, the thesis analyses the two jurisdictions‘ approach or attitude in the exercise of judicial review power on political questions. To achieve the aims of this research, the thesis analyses the concept of judicial review and political questions as well as the legal frameworks for judicial review as affecting political questions. It uses many case laws to analyse the reactions of the courts to political questions flowing from legislative actions, executive actions and affairs of political parties over the years with July, 2012 being the cut-off date of the research. Interviews with many stakeholders formed the basis of the research findings. The thesis finds that political questions though appear political in nature have come with legal and constitutional stings which the courts need to interprete. However, the legal frameworks on the exercise of judicial review power on political questions are weak and inadequate mainly because of ouster of the courts‘ jurisdictions. It further finds that the courts in Nigeria have abandoned its initial application of political question doctrine. While it now largely reviews political questions, Malaysian courts refrain from this practice to a large extent. To this extent, the thesis finds that judicial review or judicialisation of political questions is the current doctrine in Nigeria. It therefore reveals the merits and the risks in this practice. It also finds the legal and political implications of the practice. The thesis also reveals major legal impediments and constitutional usefulness of judicial review of political questions. As a result of this finding, the thesis recommends constitutional and legislative amendments in order to allow the courts properly decide, on their merits, matters which appear political in nature but with legal and constitutional stings. It recommends far-reaching measures that, if adopted, will improve the quality of courts‘ decisions in areas of political questions, better the relationship between the judiciary and the political class and sustain peace, security and democratic institutions.