ABUJA, Nigeria — September 24, 2026: A growing political and constitutional controversy has emerged in Nigeria following President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s prolonged stay outside the country while Vice-President Kashim Shettima is also abroad on official engagements.
The controversy centres on a fundamental question: who is formally exercising the constitutional functions of the President while both the President and Vice-President are outside Nigeria?
President Tinubu left Nigeria on August 30 for what the Presidency described as a three-week working vacation. He initially travelled to London before proceeding to Paris, France. On September 21, the Presidency announced that he had extended his stay by a few days and was expected to return to Nigeria at the weekend.
Vice-President Shettima, meanwhile, travelled to New York on September 20 to represent Nigeria at the 81st United Nations General Assembly.
Their simultaneous absence has triggered renewed debate over Section 145 of Nigeria’s 1999 Constitution, which sets out the procedure to be followed when a President proceeds on vacation or is otherwise unable to discharge the functions of the office.
What Section 145 Says
Section 145(1) provides that when the President is proceeding on vacation or is otherwise unable to perform the functions of his office, he is to transmit a written declaration to the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives.
Under the provision, the Vice-President performs the functions of the President as Acting President until the President transmits a declaration indicating his availability to resume those functions.
Section 145(2) also provides a mechanism for situations in which the President does not transmit the required declaration within 21 days. In such circumstances, the National Assembly may, by a simple-majority resolution of both chambers, mandate the Vice-President to perform the functions of President as Acting President until the President communicates his availability.
It is this 21-day provision that has become central to the current controversy.
Opposition Demands Clarification
The African Democratic Congress has questioned whether President Tinubu transmitted the written declaration required under Section 145.
The party has demanded that Nigerians be told whether such a document was sent to Senate President Godswill Akpabio and House Speaker Tajudeen Abbas.
Former Vice-President and ADC presidential candidate Atiku Abubakar has also questioned who is constitutionally exercising presidential authority, arguing that the public should be given clarity on whether the required constitutional procedure was followed.
Some members of the House of Representatives operating under the Save Democracy Group have gone further, calling on the National Assembly to reconvene and determine whether action under Section 145(2) is required.
The lawmakers say that if the required declaration was transmitted, the Senate President and Speaker should publicly confirm that fact. If it was not, they argue that the National Assembly should consider the procedure provided by Section 145(2).
Presidency Says Tinubu Remains in Charge
The Presidency has rejected the suggestion that Nigeria is without effective presidential leadership.
According to the government’s position, President Tinubu has remained in contact with officials in Nigeria and continues to direct government affairs while abroad.
Special Adviser to the President on Policy Communication, Daniel Bwala, has also argued that the President’s constitutional powers are not geographically restricted and that Tinubu can continue governing Nigeria while outside the country.
Senate President Godswill Akpabio has similarly dismissed suggestions of a leadership vacuum.
Speaking in Akwa Ibom, Akpabio said Tinubu remained President and was still running the affairs of the country from abroad. He also rejected the suggestion that he himself had become Acting President.
Akpabio argued that modern communications make it possible for the President to issue instructions and oversee government business from another country.
Why Shettima’s Absence Has Intensified the Controversy
Ordinarily, the Vice-President would be the constitutional figure at the centre of any temporary transfer of presidential functions.
However, Shettima is currently in New York representing Nigeria at the United Nations General Assembly.
That has made the situation more politically sensitive because the two highest-ranking elected officials in the executive branch are simultaneously outside Nigeria.
The Senate President is also reported to be abroad, further fuelling questions about the country’s constitutional chain of authority.
The issue has therefore moved beyond questions about whether a president can work remotely. It has become a debate over whether the formal constitutional procedure for presidential absence has been followed.
Legal Experts Raise Concerns
Human-rights lawyer Inibehe Effiong has argued that Section 145 requires presidential authority to be formally addressed when the President proceeds on vacation or is otherwise unable to discharge his functions.
Effiong said the simultaneous absence of Tinubu and Shettima raised constitutional concerns and called on the National Assembly to intervene.
Former National Human Rights Commission chairman Chidi Odinkalu has also criticised the prolonged absence, arguing that the country should not be governed indefinitely from abroad.
These are the views of the individual legal commentators and should not be treated as a judicial determination that the Constitution has been violated.
The Unresolved Question
At the centre of the dispute is therefore a relatively specific factual question:
Did President Tinubu transmit the written declaration contemplated by Section 145 of the Constitution to the Senate President and the Speaker of the House of Representatives?
As of September 24, public reports have not established that the document has been publicly released.
The Presidency maintains that Tinubu remains in charge and continues to direct government affairs. Critics, opposition politicians and some lawmakers argue that communication with officials from abroad does not by itself answer whether the constitutional procedure for presidential absence has been satisfied.
The National Assembly’s response could therefore become significant in determining whether the controversy remains a political dispute or develops into a formal constitutional issue.
For now, President Tinubu remains the substantive President of Nigeria, while Vice-President Shettima is representing the country at the United Nations General Assembly. Tinubu is expected back in Nigeria at the weekend, according to the Presidency.
Until the question surrounding Section 145 is publicly clarified, however, the debate over the formal exercise of presidential authority is likely to continue.
