The recent debate on whether President Bola Tinubu should have transmitted power to Vice President Kashim Shettima during his vacation has reignited discussions on Nigeria's constitutional provisions. According to Section 145 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, the President is required to transmit power to the Vice President when going on vacation or unable to perform duties. This provision has raised questions about the country's informal practices and conventions.
The debate has also centered on the issue of simultaneous travel by the President and Vice President. There is no constitutional provision prohibiting both from traveling out of the country at the same time. In fact, during President Muhammadu Buhari's administration, there were instances where both he and Vice President Yemi Osinbajo traveled abroad simultaneously. However, an informal practice developed during the military era, which was maintained during previous administrations, suggests that they should not travel at the same time.
The Supreme Court's decision in Adegbenro v Akintola [1963] AC 614 established that constitutional provisions override conventions. This case concerned the interpretation of the Western Region Constitution and the process of removing the Premier. The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council overturned the majority decision of the Federal Supreme Court, emphasizing the supremacy of the Constitution.
Section 1(1) and (3) of the Constitution states that the Constitution is supreme and binding, and any law inconsistent with it is void. Despite this, Nigerians often engage in constitutional debates without tangible outcomes. The debates rarely lead to amendments or filling of vacuums in the Constitution, resulting in practical observations of the Constitution in breach.
The current debate on presidential leave and power transmission highlights the need for clarity on Nigeria's constitutional provisions. While some argue that President Tinubu's decision to travel abroad without transmitting power to Vice President Shettima was in line with informal practices, others contend that it was a breach of the Constitution. The issue has sparked concerns about the country's ability to adhere to its constitutional provisions.
The role of conventions in constitutional matters has also been raised. While conventions can play a significant role in shaping the country's governance, they do not have the force of law. In the case of presidential leave and power transmission, the Constitution provides clear guidelines that should be followed.
Ultimately, the debate on presidential leave and power transmission underscores the need for Nigerians to engage in meaningful discussions about their Constitution and its provisions. By doing so, the country can work towards a more robust and effective governance system that prioritizes adherence to its grundnorm.
Key points
- The debate on presidential leave and power transmission highlights the need for clarity on Nigeria's constitutional provisions.
- The country's informal practices and conventions often conflict with its constitutional provisions.
- The Constitution is supreme and binding, and any law inconsistent with it is void.
