EXECUTIVE CLEMENCY AND VICTIMS‟ RIGHTS IN NIGERIA: REASSESSING THE BALANCE BETWEEN MERCY AND JUSTICE UNDER SECTIONS 175 AND 212 OF THE CONSTITUTION

Abstract

Prerogative of mercy represents one of the most ancient and enduring expressions of sovereign power. In Nigeria, it is constitutionally vested in the President and State Governors under Sections 175 and 212 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 Intended as a humanitarian safeguard to temper the rigidity of law, this executive power allows for pardon, reprieve, remission, or commutation of sentence. Yet, its exercise has often generated moral and constitutional controversy. The Nigerian clemency process, largely opaque and discretionary, has consistently excluded victims of crime—those most directly affected by its outcomes. This paper interrogates the tension between executive clemency and victims‘ rights, focusing on whether Nigeria‘s constitutional and institutional framework adequately balances mercy with justice. Drawing on retributive, restorative, and utilitarian theories of justice, the paper argues that the prerogative of mercy, when exercised without transparency, fairness, or victim consultation, undermines public confidence and perpetuates secondary victimisation. Through doctrinal analysis and comparative insights from jurisdictions such as South Africa, India, and Canada, the study demonstrates that clemency can coexist with balancing of victims‘ rights when grounded in procedural fairness and restorative engagement. It concludes with reform proposals aimed at aligning Nigeria‘s clemency system with contemporary human rights and restorative justice standards.