The simultaneous absence of President Bola Tinubu and Vice President Kashim Shettima from Nigeria has triggered fresh constitutional debate, with legal and opposition voices questioning the arrangements for exercising executive authority while both top officials are abroad.
The controversy intensified on Tuesday, September 22, 2026, after a lawyer described the situation as a serious constitutional concern, particularly because Tinubu has remained outside the country beyond the three-week annual vacation initially announced by the Presidency.
Tinubu left Nigeria on August 30 and was initially expected to return after three weeks. The Presidency subsequently announced that he had extended his stay and was expected back at the weekend.
Shettima, meanwhile, travelled to New York on September 20 to represent the President at the 81st United Nations General Assembly, where he is expected to deliver Nigeria’s national statement and participate in high-level engagements.
The controversy centres on Section 145 of the 1999 Constitution, which sets out the procedure for presidential absence and the circumstances under which the Vice President can perform presidential functions as Acting President.
Section 145 does not simply state that a President loses authority because he is physically outside Nigeria.
Rather, it provides a specific constitutional procedure where the President is proceeding on vacation or is otherwise unable to discharge the functions of his office.
Under Section 145(1), the President is required to transmit a written declaration to the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives. Until the President communicates otherwise, the Vice President performs presidential functions as Acting President.
The Constitution also contains a 21-day provision.
If the President fails or is unable to transmit the required declaration within 21 days, Section 145(2) provides that the National Assembly may, through a simple majority in each chamber, mandate the Vice President to perform the functions of President as Acting President.
The provision has become the central point in the current debate because Tinubu’s stay abroad has now extended beyond the period originally announced.
The Key Constitutional Questions
The controversy has effectively produced several questions:
- Did Tinubu transmit the written declaration contemplated under Section 145?
- If such a declaration exists, was it formally communicated to the required National Assembly leaders?
- If no declaration was transmitted within 21 days, has the National Assembly taken the action contemplated by Section 145(2)?
- Does physical absence from Nigeria, by itself, mean the President is unable to discharge his constitutional functions?
- What authority does the Secretary to the Government of the Federation have when representing the President at official events?
These questions are being debated by lawyers, politicians and commentators, but they should not be treated as settled judicial findings.
The Presidency has rejected suggestions that Nigeria is operating without effective presidential leadership.
According to the government, Tinubu has continued to direct the affairs of the country during his stay abroad and has delegated Shettima to represent him at international engagements.
The Presidency also said Secretary to the Government of the Federation George Akume would continue to represent the President at some official functions while Shettima attends the UN General Assembly.
Special Adviser to the President on Policy Communication, Daniel Bwala, separately argued that presidential authority is not geographically restricted and that Tinubu can exercise his constitutional responsibilities while outside Nigeria.
That position directly contrasts with the argument advanced by critics who believe the circumstances require a formal constitutional transfer of presidential functions.
Shettima’s presence in New York has become an important element of the controversy because he is not abroad on personal business.
The Presidency formally assigned him to lead Nigeria’s delegation to the 81st UN General Assembly.
He is expected to:
- Deliver Nigeria’s national statement;
- Participate in high-level diplomatic meetings;
- Engage world leaders and international organisations;
- Represent the President at official UNGA events.
The arrangement means both the President and Vice President are outside Nigeria at the same time, even though they remain involved in official government activities.
Critics argue that the unusual situation makes it more important for the Presidency to clarify the constitutional instrument governing the exercise of presidential powers.
The government, however, maintains that physical location does not prevent the President from directing government business.
The legal debate is not one-sided.
Some constitutional lawyers argue that Section 145 requires a formal process when the President goes on vacation or cannot perform his duties. Others distinguish between being physically outside Nigeria and being constitutionally unable to discharge presidential responsibilities.
One recent legal analysis noted that the Constitution does not prescribe a fixed maximum number of days a President can remain outside Nigeria. It also argued that Section 145 does not expressly state that presidential powers automatically transfer to the Vice President simply because the 21-day period expires.
Another interpretation focuses on the wording of Section 145(2), which expressly gives the National Assembly a role if the President fails to transmit the required declaration within 21 days.
That distinction matters: the constitutional text says the National Assembly shall mandate the Vice President to perform presidential functions; it does not describe an automatic transfer triggered solely by the passage of 21 days.
Why the Legal Distinction Matters
The debate therefore involves two separate questions:
Physical absence: Whether the President is outside Nigeria.
Constitutional inability: Whether he is unable to discharge the functions of his office and whether the procedure under Section 145 has been activated.
Those questions should not automatically be treated as identical.
The Constitution’s succession provisions also do not suggest that the President ceases to hold office merely because he travels abroad. Section 146 deals with circumstances in which the presidential office becomes vacant, including death, resignation, impeachment or permanent incapacity.
The constitutional debate has also become a political issue.
Former Vice President Atiku Abubakar has questioned whether Tinubu transmitted the written declaration required by Section 145 and called for the document to be made public if it exists.
Atiku argued that the 21-day period had elapsed and asked why the National Assembly had not acted if the required declaration had not been transmitted.
The African Democratic Congress has similarly questioned the arrangement, with its National Publicity Secretary, Bolaji Abdullahi, asking who is constitutionally exercising presidential authority while Tinubu and Shettima are both outside the country.
The Presidency has dismissed the criticism and maintained that government operations have continued.
The immediate issue is likely to remain centred on whether a Section 145 declaration was transmitted and, if so, what authority it conferred on the Vice President.
The National Assembly’s role could also attract greater attention if the controversy persists, particularly because Section 145(2) expressly addresses circumstances in which the President fails to transmit the required declaration within 21 days.
For now, there is no reported court judgment establishing that Tinubu’s absence from Nigeria constitutes a constitutional violation.
What exists is a growing dispute over the interpretation and application of Section 145, with lawyers, opposition politicians and the Presidency advancing different positions.
The controversy is therefore less about whether the President can physically travel outside Nigeria and more about what constitutional procedure governs the exercise of presidential functions during an extended absence.
As Tinubu is expected to return to Nigeria at the weekend, attention will remain on the Presidency’s explanation of the constitutional arrangements, the National Assembly’s position and whether any legal challenge is filed over the matter.
