Nigeria’s democratic experiment since 1999 has been riddled with inconsistencies, manipulations, and outright subversion of the people’s will. One of the constitutional tools that have suffered significant frustration is the recall process of elected legislators. Enshrined in Section 69 of the 1999 Constitution, the recall mechanism was designed to empower constituents to remove non-performing lawmakers. However, history has shown that while this process exists on paper, its practical application has been anything but successful. With the ongoing recall attempt against Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan, it is crucial to examine the history of failed recall efforts in Nigeria, the systemic bottlenecks, and the potential implications of the latest move against the Kogi Central lawmaker.

Without a doubt, Nigeria’s political paths since 1999 is replete with the footprints of futile recall attempts.  Since 1999, there have been multiple attempts by constituents to recall their representatives, but none has succeeded. Political analysts argue that Nigeria’s political class has deliberately ensured that the recall process is practically impossible to achieve, weaponizing institutions such as the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) and security agencies to frustrate legitimate recall efforts.

For instance, the most high-profile recall attempt in Nigeria’s democratic history was the move against Senator Dino Melaye in 2017. His constituents, reportedly aggrieved by his controversial conduct and alleged lack of representation, initiated the recall process. The exercise quickly became a battleground for political forces, with the state government playing a visible role in mobilizing against Melaye.

Despite INEC verifying over 188,000 signatures from his constituency, the recall process collapsed under legal gymnastics, delays, and alleged manipulation. The signature verification exercise recorded a woeful turnout of about 5.3% of registered voters, well below the constitutional threshold required for a recall. The process, rather than being a reflection of the people’s will, became an avenue for political grandstanding, rendering the recall mechanism effectively impotent.

In a similar vein, in 2016, some constituents of Borno South attempted to recall Senator Ali Ndume, citing poor representation and insensitivity to their plight. The effort, however, did not even advance beyond the initial petition stage, as it was heavily resisted by political forces loyal to the senator. The recall attempt eventually fizzled out without any substantial traction, once again demonstrating the structural weakness of Nigeria’s recall system.

Also in a similar vein, the recall attempt against Senator Jubril Aminu in 2005 was one of the earliest tests of the recall process in Nigeria’s Fourth Republic. Some of his constituents accused him of being disconnected from grassroots issues and initiated the process to remove him. However, it ended in futility, as the petition failed to meet INEC’s requirements due to alleged intimidation and vote suppression.

Beyond these high-profile cases, there have been multiple recall efforts against state and federal lawmakers, including former House of Representatives members like Farouk Lawan and Abdulmumin Jibrin. Each attempt faced insurmountable challenges ranging from the coercion of petitioners, political interference, judicial delays, and voter apathy.

In 2018, constituents in Kaduna attempted to recall Honourable Garba Datti Mohammed, citing neglect and lack of accountability. However, the recall effort never materialized beyond media discussions, as political heavyweights in the state quickly shut it down.

Similarly, in 2012, some constituents in Anambra Central reportedly attempted to recall Senator Chris Ngige, but the effort crumbled as allegations emerged that the petitioners were being intimidated and coerced into withdrawing their support for the recall.

At this juncture, it is expedient to ask, “Why do recalls fail in Nigeria?” The consistent failure of recall processes in Nigeria can be attributed to a combination of legal, institutional, and political factors:

First is unrealistic signature requirement. This is as constitutional provision that mandates a recall petition be signed by at least 50% of registered voters in the affected constituency is an uphill task in a country where voter turnout in elections rarely exceeds 40%.

In a similar vein, is INEC’s role in verification exercise. INEC, the electoral umpire responsible for verifying signatures, has often been accused of playing a biased role. The verification process is cumbersome and susceptible to manipulation, as was evident in Dino Melaye’s case.

Also in a similar vein is political interference. This is as political godfathers and state actors often intervene in recall processes to protect their loyalists. In many cases, state governments deploy resources to frustrate recall attempts, as seen in Kogi State under Governor Yahaya Bello’s tenure.

Still in a similar vein is that of security agencies being used as political tools. In fact, the police and other security agencies have been accused of intimidating petitioners and suppressing protests in favor of recall attempts. This discourages constituents from fully engaging in the process.

Another factor borders on judicial delays. The foregoing factor cannot be farfetched as the Nigerian judicial system is notorious for its slow pace so much that politicians facing recall often rush to the courts, obtaining injunctions that stall the process indefinitely.

Again is that of voter apathy and manipulation. Even when recall attempts gain traction, voter turnout during signature verification and the actual recall referendum remains abysmally low, making it easy for the process to fail.

Against the foregoing backdrop, it is germane to ask, “Is Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan’s recall another political charade?

The reason for the foregoing question cannot be incredible as the latest recall attempt targeting Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan follows a familiar script. Akpoti-Uduaghan, a vocal and independent-minded senator representing Kogi Central, has been a thorn in the flesh of entrenched political interests in Kogi State. The recall initiative against her, rather than being a spontaneous expression of the people’s will, appears orchestrated by powerful interests seeking to silence her.

The lessons from past recall failures indicate that the process will likely face the same fate as others before it. While her detractors may gather signatures, it remains to be seen if the threshold for recall will be met and if the process will be free from political interference. If history is anything to go by, the recall will likely fizzle out in the face of legal and political obstacles.

At this juncture, it is expedient to opine that the recall process in Nigeria, though a constitutional provision, has been reduced to a mere theoretical concept. Since 1999, every recall attempt has failed, not necessarily due to a lack of public will but because of systemic manipulations and political subterfuge. The ongoing recall attempt against Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan must be viewed with skepticism, as it bears all the hallmarks of politically motivated recalls in the past. If Nigeria’s democracy is to mature, the recall mechanism must be reformed to truly reflect the people’s will rather than serve as a political weapon wielded by the powerful against their adversaries.