Tinubu’s Vacation: ‘If The President Fails To Do What The Law Says, It Is Impeachable’ – Lawyer

Senior lawyers have faulted the description of President Bola Tinubu’s extended foreign trip as a “working vacation”, arguing that the expression has no specific recognition under the 1999 Constitution.

The lawyers spoke as the National Assembly is expected to resume today, September 30, the same day the President is expected to return to Nigeria after spending about a month abroad.

Tinubu left Abuja on August 30 for what the Presidency described as a three-week working vacation in Europe. On September 21, the Presidency announced that he had extended his stay by a few days and was expected to return on Tuesday, September 30.

The prolonged absence has generated renewed debate over Section 145 of the Constitution, which deals with the President’s vacation or inability to perform the functions of his office.

A Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Mike Ahamba, said the Constitution did not recognise the expression “working vacation”.

Ahamba, a constitutional lawyer and former presidential candidate, told Leadership that the President could be either working or on vacation.

He said, “It is either the President is working or on vacation. I’m not aware of any provision for a working vacation.

“All these things they are manufacturing are meant to cover up his dereliction of duty and constitutional responsibilities, something this administration is already very used to.”

Another lawyer, Oladele Joseph, said the controversy should be determined by the Constitution’s provisions rather than by whether the President was able to communicate with officials or issue directives from abroad.

Joseph said working vacation was not a constitutional category and maintained that Section 145(1) was central to the issue.

The provision states that when the President proceeds on vacation or is otherwise unable to perform 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.

Joseph said, “This requirement is mandatory, not discretionary.”

He cautioned, however, against concluding that Tinubu violated the Constitution without first establishing whether the required written declaration was transmitted to the two presiding officers of the National Assembly.

Joseph said, “The Constitution does not say that the President ceases to be President because he travels out of the country. Neither does it say that a President cannot communicate with his officials or continue to perform some official functions while abroad.

“But there is a specific constitutional consequence attached to the President proceeding on vacation. Section 145 prescribes what must happen. The issue, therefore, is not whether Mr President has access to a telephone, the internet or government files. The issue is whether the constitutional procedure applicable when the President proceeds on vacation has been complied with.”

Abdul Balogun (SAN) also said Section 145 clearly provides for what should happen when the President is away from office because of vacation or ill-health.

“There is no controversy on this issue; the law has already taken care of it. In fact, there is nothing to debate about it. If the President fails to do what the law says, it’s an impeachable offence,” Balogun said.

Constitutional lawyer Bula Zakayo Kelle said the Constitution requires the President to notify the National Assembly when he cannot perform the functions of his office because of vacation or ill-health.

He said the arrangement was designed to prevent a vacuum in the exercise of presidential functions.

“For the purpose of avoiding a vacuum, the 1999 Constitution has already taken care of that area. So, he is expected by law to communicate his absence to the National Assembly. The National Assembly is also mandated to call on the Vice President to act in that capacity until the President returns from his trip,” Kelle said.

Kelle further argued that the constitutional process should be followed rather than relying on informal arrangements.

He added, “Upon his return, he will communicate to the National Assembly that he is back so that he will assume the functions of his office.

“We are practising a constitutional democracy; the President cannot rule the country in absentia. If there is anything outside what the law prescribes, I’m not aware. All I know is that the law has taken care of that and there is no confusion.

“The issue has been taken care of by the law, so there is no basis for anyone to do anything outside the law and still claim he is doing the right thing.”