The Doctrine of Legitimate Expectation and Human Rights Protection in Nigerian Administrative Law: An Original Contribution

This doctoral research develops an original theoretical contribution to Nigerian administrative law and human rights jurisprudence by reconstructing the doctrine of legitimate expectation as a vehicle for enforcing human rights obligations against public authorities. The doctrine of legitimate expectation, derived from English administrative law and increasingly applied by Nigerian courts, protects individuals' reasonable expectations arising from public authority representations, established practices, or statutory frameworks. The dissertation argues that the doctrine can be theoretically reconstructed and jurisprudentially expanded in Nigeria to provide enforceable human rights protection in administrative contexts, particularly regarding the delivery of social services, withdrawal of government benefits, and administrative decisions affecting fundamental rights. The research employs a theoretical-doctrinal methodology, systematically analyzing legitimate expectation doctrine in Nigerian Supreme Court and Court of Appeal decisions from 2000 to 2024, with comparative engagement with developments in South Africa, India, and the UK. Theoretical grounding draws on Fuller's procedural legality theory, Dworkin's rights as trumps framework, and the emerging scholarship on social rights and administrative constitutionalism. The dissertation advances an original theory of Human Rights-Enhanced Legitimate Expectation (HRELE), demonstrating how courts can deploy the doctrine to enforce constitutional social rights obligations against defaulting public authorities. Three application domains are developed: withdrawal of subsidized healthcare, cancellation of public education entitlements, and displacement without alternative housing provision. Keywords: legitimate expectation, administrative law, human rights, judicial review, Nigeria.