RECALL OF ELECTED LEGISLATORS IN NIGERIA AND THE UNITED STATES: A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS

Abstract

Democratic governance operates through elected representatives who hold office for specified terms, yet mechanisms exist to remove these officials before tenure expiration for recognized misconduct. This article employs doctrinal and comparative methodologies to examine the recall systems for legislators in Nigeria and state officials in the United States. Through analysis of specific recall cases in both jurisdictions, the research demonstrates that recall represents the electorate's sovereign right to demand good governance and reflects the principle that representatives hold office in trust for the people. Findings reveal that recalled American officials expressed genuine concern for their positions and intent to improve if given another opportunity. The article recommends that recall petitions demonstrate strong cause related to official duties while excluding discretionary acts. Enabling statutes should clearly articulate grounds constituting loss of confidence. Additionally, the fifty percent signature requirement for petitions proves excessively burdensome; a reduction to forty percent would better balance preventing abuse while maintaining practical feasibility.