JUDICIAL REVIEW AND CONSTITUTIONAL SUPREMACY IN NIGERIA AND THE UNITED KINGDOM

Abstract

Judicial review refers to the power of the court to examine the actions and decisions of the legislative, executive, and judicial arms of government to determine whether they are consistent with the provisions of the constitution. This article examines judicial review and constitutional supremacy in Nigeria and the United Kingdom. It examined how the courts in these two countries exercise judicial review and the limits placed on their powers. Nigeria operates the principle of constitutional democracy; however, this is not so with the United Kingdom, which is based on a parliamentary system. These different systems affect the manner in which the judiciary relates to the executive and legislative arms of government. Also, this article made a comparative analysis of the constitutional basis of judicial review in the two countries and considers the extent to which the court can exercise control over or question the acts of governmental institutions. Although the extent and scope of judicial review differ among the two jurisdictions, the judiciary remains an important arm of government as it helps in maintaining constitutional government. To protect constitutional democracy, an independent and effective judicial review is necessary.