Reps Demand National Assembly Reconvene Over Tinubu’s Extended Stay Abroad
ABUJA — Some members of the House of Representatives under the banner of the Save Democracy Group (SDG) have called on the National Assembly to reconvene over President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s extended stay outside Nigeria.
The lawmakers are seeking clarification on whether the President transmitted the written declaration contemplated by Section 145 of the 1999 Constitution, as amended, notifying the leadership of the National Assembly of his absence from Nigeria and his availability or otherwise to perform the functions of his office.
The demand follows the Presidency’s announcement that President Tinubu, who travelled abroad on August 30 for a three-week working vacation, had extended his stay by a few days and was expected to return at the weekend.
The lawmakers argued that the development raises a constitutional question that should be addressed transparently by the leadership of the Senate and House of Representatives.
Under Section 145(1), whenever the President proceeds on vacation or is otherwise unable to discharge the functions of his office, he is required to transmit a written declaration to the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives.
The provision further states that, where the President fails or is unable to transmit such a declaration within 21 days, the National Assembly may, by a simple-majority resolution of each chamber, mandate the Vice-President to perform the functions of President as Acting President until the President communicates his availability to resume the functions of his office.
The SDG members therefore want the National Assembly leadership to establish whether the required communication was transmitted and, if so, make the position known publicly.
The lawmakers said the issue should not be treated as a political contest but as a matter of constitutional procedure and institutional accountability.
They argued that Nigerians are entitled to know whether the constitutional requirements governing a President’s absence have been fully complied with, particularly where the absence extends beyond the period initially announced.
The demand was signed on behalf of the group by Awaji-Inombek Abiante, representing Andoni/Opobo-Nkoro Federal Constituency of Rivers State, and Abubakar Yahaya, representing Kankia/Ingawa/Kusada Federal Constituency of Katsina State.
The development has also drawn attention to the constitutional roles of the President, Vice-President and National Assembly during a presidential absence.
Vice-President Kashim Shettima is currently outside Nigeria on official duties, including Nigeria’s representation at the 81st United Nations General Assembly in New York.
The Presidency has maintained that the Federal Government remains fully functional and that President Tinubu continues to exercise presidential authority while abroad.
Senate President Godswill Akpabio has also defended the President’s continued stay outside the country, maintaining that Tinubu remains in charge of the administration.
The latest demand by the SDG members, however, puts the spotlight on Section 145 and the obligation of the National Assembly to clarify whether the constitutional procedure relating to presidential absence has been followed.
The matter is now likely to generate further debate over the interpretation and application of the constitutional provision, particularly regarding the 21-day period and the circumstances under which the National Assembly may invoke Section 145(2).
The Analyst Online Media will continue to follow the constitutional and institutional implications of the development.