Senate President Godswill Akpabio and the African Democratic Congress (ADC) have clashed over the constitutional implications of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s prolonged absence from Nigeria.
The disagreement followed Tinubu’s continued stay in Europe after leaving Nigeria on August 30 for a working vacation, with the Presidency announcing on Monday, September 21, that the trip had been extended by a few days and that the President would return at the weekend.
Speaking in Akwa Ibom State on Tuesday, September 22, Akpabio dismissed concerns about a leadership vacuum, insisting that Tinubu remained in charge of the country despite his physical absence.
Akpabio also rejected suggestions that he had assumed the role of Acting President, saying Tinubu continued to exercise presidential authority from abroad.
“I am the Senate President, and I am not the acting President of Nigeria, because President Tinubu is still in power,” Akpabio said.
He described Tinubu’s absence as a “working leave,” arguing that modern communication technology allows the President to direct government affairs from anywhere in the world.
“He is on a working leave, and there is no absence in Aso Rock. The world is a global village, and one can give instructions over the internet. So, why are people complaining?” he added.
Akpabio further declared: “Right now, there is no vacancy. Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu is still in power, and he is still running the affairs of Nigeria.”
The Senate President’s comments came as the ADC questioned whether the constitutional procedure for presidential absence had been followed.
In a statement issued by its National Publicity Secretary, Bolaji Abdullahi, the opposition party cited Section 145 of the 1999 Constitution and demanded clarification on whether Tinubu had transmitted the required written declaration to the President of the Senate and Speaker of the House of Representatives.
“President Tinubu left Nigeria on 30 August and has now been away for more than 21 days. We therefore demand to know whether the required declaration was transmitted by the President. If he did not, we would like to know why the National Assembly has ignored Section 145 of the Constitution,” the ADC said.
The party also challenged the argument that the President’s continued communication with officials from abroad was sufficient to settle the constitutional question.
“Representation is not governance. Attendance at official functions is not presidential authority,” the ADC said.
The party further argued that having officials represent the President at ceremonies did not amount to a transfer or exercise of presidential powers, insisting that the constitutional provisions governing presidential absence should be clarified.
“There is no constitutional category known as a ‘working vacation’. Presidential authority cannot be transferred by convenience, protocol or press statement,” the ADC said.
The controversy has been further complicated by the simultaneous absence of Vice-President Kashim Shettima, who left Nigeria on September 20 to represent Tinubu at the 81st United Nations General Assembly in New York. The Presidency said Secretary to the Government of the Federation, George Akume, would continue to represent Tinubu at official functions while Shettima is away.
The Presidency has maintained that Tinubu has remained in contact with officials at home and continued to direct the affairs of government while abroad. It cited, among other actions, his directive for an independent investigation into the deaths of 37 suspected illegal miners in Minna.
The development has renewed political debate over the exercise of presidential powers during an extended absence from the country, with the ADC demanding a clear explanation of who is exercising the constitutional powers of the President and under what provision of the Constitution.
Akpabio, however, maintains that there is no presidential vacancy and that Tinubu remains firmly in control of the affairs of the country.
