A fresh political debate has emerged over President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s decision to proceed on vacation abroad without publicly confirming a formal transfer of presidential functions to Vice-President Kashim Shettima.
The issue was raised by Oyo State Governor Seyi Makinde, who questioned why the President had not handed over to his deputy while away from the country.
“If the president is out of the country, why is he scared of handing over power to the vice-president?” Makinde asked while addressing civil servants at the Oyo State Government House in Ibadan on Friday. He also argued that the arrangement amounted to non-compliance with the Constitution.
Makinde compared the situation with his own recent vacation, saying he handed over responsibilities to his deputy governor before leaving Oyo State.
What does the Constitution say? The debate centres on Section 145 of the 1999 Constitution, as amended.
The provision states that whenever the President is proceeding on vacation or is otherwise unable to discharge the functions of his office, he “shall transmit a written declaration” to the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives.
Upon such a declaration, the Vice-President is to perform the functions of the President as Acting President until the President transmits a contrary declaration indicating that he is ready to resume his functions.
The Constitution also provides a separate 21-day mechanism. If the President fails or is unable to transmit the required declaration within 21 days, the National Assembly may, by a simple majority in each chamber, mandate the Vice-President to perform the functions of President as Acting President.
Has Tinubu transmitted the required declaration? That remains the central unanswered question.
A Premium Times report published on September 1 said it contacted officials in the Presidency and National Assembly to establish whether Tinubu had transmitted a Section 145 declaration before commencing his vacation.
The newspaper reported that the officials contacted could not confirm that such a declaration had been transmitted.
Presidential spokesman Bayo Onanuga confirmed the President was on a three-week working vacation but did not disclose whether the constitutional declaration had been sent.
The Presidency has, however, maintained that the physical absence of the President and Vice-President from Nigeria does not automatically create a leadership vacuum.
A September 14 report by The Guardian noted that Section 145 is concerned with the President’s ability to discharge his constitutional functions and the activation of the prescribed procedure, rather than simply whether he is physically inside Nigeria.
The controversy therefore goes beyond whether President Tinubu is physically in Nigeria.
The immediate constitutional question is whether a written declaration under Section 145 has been transmitted to the leadership of the National Assembly and, if so, whether Vice-President Shettima is formally exercising presidential functions as Acting President.
Makinde has framed the matter as a question of constitutional compliance, asking why Tinubu has not formally handed over to Shettima.
The Presidency’s position, as reported, is that Tinubu can continue to discharge his responsibilities while abroad and that his absence from Nigeria does not automatically transfer presidential powers.
For now, the public record does not clearly establish whether a Section 145 declaration was transmitted, leaving the constitutional procedure being followed during the President’s vacation open to further clarification.
The big question, therefore, is not simply where the President is — but what formal constitutional arrangement governs the exercise of presidential functions while he is away.
