An Analysis and Prognosis on the Challenges and Prospects in the Exercise of Executive Powers under the Nigerian and British Constitutions

This paper amalyzes the challenges inherent in the exercise of executive powers under the Nigerian and British constitutions, and prognosticates the future prospects. While both countries share historical ties rooted in colonialism, their extant constitutional structures differ fundamentally—Nigeria operates a rigid, written presidential constitution, while the United Kingdom follows an unwritten, constitutional monarchy within a supreme parliamentary framework. The study explores how these structural differences shape the scope and application of executive authority in both jurisdictions. In Nigeria, executive power is centralised in the office of the President, often raising concerns about over-concentration of power, abuse of discretion, and weak institutional checks. Conversely, in the UK, executive power is diffused between the Monarch, Prime Minister, and Cabinet, operating under the conventions and principles of parliamentary sovereignty and responsible government. The paper identifies prospects such as democratic accountability, judicial oversight, and evolving conventions, while also addressing challenges including constitutional ambiguity in the UK and institutional inefficiencies in Nigeria. The findings underscore the importance of constitutional balance in the exercise of executive authority for sustainable governance. The study argues for and recommends constitutional reforms for stronger institutional mechanisms in both systems to promote transparency, accountability, and democratic consolidation.