Tinubu, Shettima Abroad: Security Expert Raises Fresh Alarm Over Absence of Nigeria’s Top Leaders
- President Tinubu left Nigeria for a three-week vacation in Europe while Vice President Shettima was already abroad for an AU summit in Angola
- Security expert Dr Kabir Adamu said the simultaneous absence of both leaders raises concerns about who holds authority during a national emergency
- Dr Adamu called on Nigeria to develop clearer protocols governing when the president and vice president can both be outside the country at the same time
PAY ATTENTION: Mark Legit.ng as a preferred source, and our content will appear higher in your Google feed!
President Bola Tinubu’s decision to embark on a three-week annual vacation while Vice President Kashim Shettima is also outside Nigeria has raised questions about leadership continuity and the country’s preparedness to respond to emergencies.
Legit.ng on Sunday, August 30, reported that the Presidency announced that Tinubu would leave Abuja for Europe as part of his annual leave, with London, United Kingdom, listed as his first destination.
Source: UGC
Presidential spokesperson Bayo Onanuga said the president would spend three weeks on vacation but did not indicate whether Tinubu would formally transfer presidential powers to Shettima or another senior official during his absence.
What does the constitution say?
Under Nigeria’s Constitution, a president who proceeds on vacation or is temporarily unable to discharge the functions of his office can transmit a written declaration to the Senate President and Speaker of the House of Representatives, enabling the vice president to perform the functions of the office in an acting capacity.
The issue has attracted particular attention because Shettima is currently in Angola attending the African Union leaders summit on behalf of Tinubu. He is expected to return to Nigeria later in the week.
Tinubu has not formally transferred presidential powers to Shettima during his foreign trips since assuming office in May 2023.
His predecessor, Muhammadu Buhari, frequently transmitted power to then Vice President Yemi Osinbajo during prolonged absences, although the practice became politically contentious after Osinbajo, while acting president, removed the then Director-General of the Department of State Services, Lawal Daura, in 2018.
Expert raises leadership continuity concerns
Speaking with Legit.ng on Sunday, August 30, security and risk management expert Dr Kabir Adamu, CEO of Beacon Security and Innovations Limited, said the simultaneous absence of the president and vice president should be viewed not only from a constitutional perspective but also through the lens of national security and continuity of government.
Adamu argued that although Nigeria’s Constitution does not expressly prohibit the president and vice president from being outside the country at the same time, the practice raises important questions about how the government would respond to an unexpected national emergency.
“In the theatre of statecraft, symbolism and prudence often carry as much weight as written law,” he said.
According to him, the central concern is not necessarily whether the two leaders have violated any specific provision of the Constitution, but whether adequate arrangements exist to guarantee uninterrupted decision-making in the event of a crisis.
He said natural disasters, civil unrest, military emergencies, terrorist attacks and major economic shocks could occur without warning, making uninterrupted access to the country’s highest political authority critical.
“When both the President and Vice President, or their equivalents, are out of the country at the same time, it sends a troubling signal: that the cockpit of the state is temporarily unmanned,” Adamu said.
Expert: 'The risk is a leadership vacuum'
The security expert said the absence of both principal political leaders could create uncertainty over who would immediately exercise executive authority if an emergency required urgent presidential decisions.
He noted that even where constitutional succession arrangements exist, delays or uncertainty surrounding the activation of those arrangements could complicate crisis management.
“The most immediate concern is the risk of a leadership vacuum in the event of an emergency,” he said.
Adamu added that national emergencies do not conform to political schedules, meaning the government must maintain mechanisms capable of responding regardless of where individual leaders are physically located.
He therefore described leadership continuity as a national security issue rather than merely a matter of political optics.
Security implications
Beyond governance, Adamu said the simultaneous absence of the president and vice president could have security implications, particularly in a country confronting terrorism, insurgency, banditry and other internal security challenges.
He cautioned that hostile actors could interpret a temporary absence of the two highest-ranking political leaders as evidence of institutional vulnerability, even if the government has contingency arrangements in place.
“The risk is not merely theoretical,” he said.
He further argued that adversaries can attempt to exploit periods they perceive as moments of political or institutional weakness.
The expert also pointed to international practices designed to preserve continuity of government.
He noted that some countries deliberately avoid having their top leaders travel together or remain outside the country simultaneously, ensuring that a senior constitutional authority is available domestically should an unforeseen crisis occur.
Political optics also matter
Adamu said the issue extends beyond constitutional procedure and security architecture to the political perception created by the absence of the country’s two highest-ranking elected officials.
With Nigerians continuing to contend with economic pressures and security concerns, he said the simultaneous presence of the president and vice president outside the country could create an impression of detachment among citizens.
“In democracies especially, perception is policy,” he said.
The expert acknowledged that foreign travel and international engagement are an important part of presidential responsibilities, but argued that such engagements should be balanced with the need to maintain visible and effective leadership at home.
“Leadership also requires presence, not just in policy, but in geography,” he said.
Beyond constitutional requirements
Adamu stressed that the absence of an explicit constitutional prohibition does not necessarily eliminate the need for caution.
He argued that governments often develop conventions and protocols beyond the strict requirements of their constitutions to protect continuity of government during periods of uncertainty.
He cited the practice in several countries where the travel schedules of senior leaders are coordinated to ensure that there is always an effective leadership structure available within the country.
For Nigeria, he said, such a convention could strengthen institutional confidence and reduce uncertainty during emergencies.
Call for clearer protocol
The security expert ultimately called for Nigeria to consider developing clearer protocols governing the simultaneous foreign travel of the president and vice president.
He suggested that such arrangements could be established through executive guidelines, legislation or, where necessary, constitutional reform.
According to him, the objective should not be to restrict the president or vice president from travelling but to guarantee that there is always a clearly identifiable and constitutionally empowered authority capable of taking urgent decisions on behalf of the Nigerian state.
“Ultimately, the question is not simply about where a leader travels—but about the architecture of trust between the state and its people,” Adamu said.
“In times of uncertainty, even symbolic absence can be a dangerous luxury,” he added.
Source: Legit.ng
