What Nigerian law says about Tinubu’s vacation in Europe, transfer of power to Shettima

For the next three weeks, President Bola Tinubu will be away from Nigeria on vacation, reviving controversy over whether a Nigerian president can proceed on holiday and continue to exercise the powers of his office, or does the Constitution require him to transfer those powers to the vice president.

Mr Tinubu left Abuja on Sunday for Europe, with London as his first destination. The Presidency said the trip is part of his annual leave and described it as a “working vacation.” He is expected to return after three weeks.

At almost the same time, Vice-President Kashim Shettima travelled to Luanda, Angola, where he was representing the president at an African Union summit. Mr Shettima returned to Nigeria on Monday, a day after the president embarked on vacation.

Bayo Onanuga, the presidential spokesperson who announced the president’s trip, did not indicate if he transmitted the written declaration required under Section 145(1) of the Constitution before embarking on the trip.

Section 145 of the Nigerian Constitution requires the president to transmit a written declaration to the Senate President and the Speaker of the House of Representatives whenever he proceeds on vacation or is otherwise unable to perform the functions of his office. Once such a declaration is transmitted, the vice president is required to perform the functions of the president as acting president.

Section 145(1) states: “Whenever the President is proceeding on vacation or is otherwise unable to discharge the functions of his Office, he shall transmit a written declaration to the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives to that effect, and until he transmits to them a written declaration to the contrary, the Vice President shall perform the functions of the President as Acting President.”

To establish whether Mr Tinubu complied with the constitutional requirement, PREMIUM TIMES contacted officials at the Presidency and the National Assembly to ascertain whether the president had transmitted the required declaration.

Those contacted are Mr Onanuga, the Senior Special Assistant to the President on National Assembly Matters (Senate), Baheer Lado; the President’s Special Adviser on National Assembly Matters (House of Representatives), Wasiu Olarenwaju-Smart, and Senate spokesperson Yemi Adaramodu.

Others contacted were Eseme Eyiboh, spokesperson to Senate President Godswill Akpabio; Lanre Ladipo, special adviser to the Senate President on New Media, and Leke Baiyewu, chief press secretary to the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Abbas Tajudeen.

Messrs Adaramodu and Olarenwaju-Smart did not respond to calls and messages seeking clarification.

Other officials who responded, however, could not confirm whether Mr Tinubu transmitted the constitutional declaration to the National Assembly before embarking on leave.

Mr Onanuga said the president is on a short working vacation, but declined to say whether he had transmitted the required written declaration to the legislature.

Mr Eyiboh said he did not have information on the matter. In contrast, Mr Ladipo said he was not aware of any such communication from the president in the Office of the Senate President.

Similarly, Mr Lado said he was on holiday and was unaware of whether the president had sent the declaration to the National Assembly.

Mr Baiyewu, on his part, said the office of the Senior Special Adviser to the President on National Assembly Matters was better positioned to confirm whether the declaration had been transmitted.

The responses from the officials left PREMIUM TIMES unable to independently establish whether Mr Tinubu had formally notified the National Assembly of his vacation as required by the Constitution.

What the Constitution says

Section 145(1) appears explicit in requiring the president to transmit a written declaration to the Senate President and the Speaker of the House of Representatives whenever he proceeds on vacation or is otherwise unable to discharge the functions of his office.

Mr Onanuga, who announced the president’s trip, confirmed that Mr Tinubu would spend three weeks on vacation but did not disclose whether the Section 145 declaration had been transmitted to the National Assembly or whether presidential functions had been transferred to Mr Shettima.

If Mr Tinubu has not transmitted the declaration, his administration may be relying on Section 145(2), which provides a 21-day mechanism for the National Assembly to mandate the vice president to act as acting president.

Section 145(2) states: “If the President is unable or fails to transmit that written declaration within 21 days, the National Assembly can, by a simple majority in each chamber, mandate the Vice President to perform the functions of the President as Acting President. This continues until the President writes to the Senate President and House Speaker that he is available to resume his functions,” the section says.

The three weeks Mr Tinubu is expected to be abroad on vacation amount to 21 days. So the president might be relying on section 145(2).

However, constitutional lawyers who spoke with PREMIUM TIMES on the matter have different interpretations of the two sections.

Fadilat Ibrahim said that the literal interpretation of section 145(1) imposes an immediate obligation on the president to notify the National Assembly whenever he proceeds on vacation, irrespective of the period he intends to spend.

“So, by the ordinary literal interpretation of the text of the constitution, President Tinubu is mandatorily required to transmit that letter upon proceeding on his vacation because of the word shall, which ordinary interpretation in legal text connotes obligatory,” she said.

On the 21-day provision in subsection (2), Ms Ibrahim argued that it should not be interpreted as granting the president a 21-day grace period.

“Subsection 2 does not mean that the president has discretion to just travel without transmitting the letter; so far, it’s just for 21 days. Subsection 2 is actually a consequence of what happens when the president fails to do his constitutional mandatory duty in this respect,” she added.

Another constitutional lawyer, Musa Adamu, however, offered a different interpretation, arguing that the Constitution envisages a situation in which a president may be absent for up to 21 days without the National Assembly having to intervene.

Mr Adamu said the president acted within the law if he did not send the declaration to the parliament.

“If you calculate three weeks, that is 21 days, and they also said that while he’s there, he will be intermittently working and resting. However, wrong you think it is or morally wrong you think it is, the president will be away within the time, if the president doesn’t come back within the 21 days that is when you’ll say the president has violated the law but as it is, he was very careful, he has acted within the law and he hasn’t violated any section of the law.

The competing interpretations centre largely on the relationship between the two subsections.

While subsection (1) says the president “shall” transmit a declaration whenever he proceeds on vacation, subsection (2) specifically refers to a situation where the president is unable or fails to transmit the declaration within 21 days.

One interpretation, therefore, treats 21 days as the period after which the National Assembly can act if the president has failed to comply. The other treats it as a constitutional threshold that effectively allows a president to remain away for up to 21 days without the National Assembly needing to intervene.

A similar interpretation was given on Monday by veteran broadcaster and former presidential spokesperson Reuben Abati, who said the Presidency appeared to have kept Mr Tinubu’s vacation within the 21-day threshold contemplated by Section 145.

Tinubu’s previous vacations

Mr Tinubu’s current trip is not the first time concerns have been raised over whether he formally transferred presidential functions to Mr Shettima during an extended foreign trip.

In October 2024, Mr Tinubu travelled to the United Kingdom for a two-week working vacation. The Presidency did not publicly announce a formal transfer of power to Mr Shettima at the time.

The same issue arose in September 2025 when Mr Tinubu embarked on a 10-day annual leave in Europe. The presidential announcement did not state that a Section 145 letter had been transmitted to the National Assembly, either.

In both instances, however, the president returned before the 21 days referred to in Section 145(2) of the Constitution, and there is no record that the National Assembly mandated the vice president to act.

The Presidency’s position in 2024 was that there was no leadership vacuum because Mr Tinubu remained engaged in government affairs while abroad.

Tinubu has not publicly handed over power to Shettima since 2023

Since assuming office in May 2023, there has been no publicly documented instance in which Mr Tinubu transmitted presidential powers to Mr Shettima under Section 145 before embarking on a vacation.

This is different from the practice under his predecessor, Muhammadu Buhari, particularly during the first term of the latter’s administration.

Mr Buhari repeatedly transmitted written declarations to the National Assembly when he proceeded on vacation or medical leave during his first term.

In February 2016, shortly after assuming office, Mr Buhari embarked on a five-day vacation and transferred presidential functions to Vice-President Yemi Osinbajo.

He did the same in June 2016 when he travelled to London for medical treatment. In January 2017, Mr Buhari again notified the National Assembly that he would be away on a 10-day vacation and that Mr Osinbajo would perform the functions of his office.

When his medical vacation was subsequently extended, another communication was sent to the National Assembly.

In May 2017, Mr Buhari also transmitted a letter to the National Assembly before travelling to London for a medical follow-up. The wording of that letter generated controversy because it said Mr Osinbajo would “coordinate the activities of the government” rather than explicitly describing him as Acting President. The Senate nevertheless treated the communication as sufficient under Section 145.

The practice continued in August 2018, when Mr Buhari embarked on a 10-day working vacation in London.

The Presidency announced that a letter had been transmitted to Senate President Bukola Saraki and Speaker Yakubu Dogara in compliance with Section 145(1), and that Mr Osinbajo would act as president during his absence.

After returning to Nigeria on 18 August 2018, Mr Buhari again wrote to the National Assembly informing it that he had resumed his presidential functions.

READ ALSO: Tinubu tasks North-central stakeholders on collective action against insecurity

Thus, unlike the current Tinubu administration, the Buhari administration publicly announced several formal handovers and, in at least some cases, the National Assembly publicly acknowledged and read the president’s letters.

Yar’Adua, Jonathan and doctrine of necessity

On 9 February 2010, the National Assembly, led by former Senate President David Mark, invoked the doctrine of necessity to make the then vice president, Goodluck Jonathan, the acting president.

The invocation of the extra-constitutional doctrine followed the failure of then-late President Umaru Yar’Adua, who was ill and receiving treatment in Saudi Arabia for over two months, to formally transmit a letter of transfer of power to the National Assembly as required by the constitution.

Mr Yar’Adua’s absence created a political and constitutional void, leaving the country without a leader.

The president later died in May of that year, after which Mr Jonathan was sworn in as the substantive president.