President Bola Tinubu departed Abuja for a three-week vacation, but as of this weekend, the presidency has not clarified whether Vice President Kashim Shettima has been formally handed power to act in his place — a silence that is raising fresh questions.
What happened?
Tinubu left for Europe, with London as his first stop, for what has been described as a working vacation ahead of the intense campaign season for the January 2027 election. Presidential spokesperson Bayo Onanuga confirmed the trip but did not say whether Tinubu had formally transferred presidential powers to Shettima, as Nigeria’s constitution allows a president to do when travelling or otherwise unable to carry out his duties.
Adding to the unusual timing, Vice President Shettima is also currently out of the country, attending an African Union security summit in Angola. This means Nigeria’s two top leaders are abroad at the same time, even as questions swirl over who is formally in charge at home. Tinubu has not formally handed power to Shettima during any of his trips since taking office in May 2023, unlike his predecessor Muhammadu Buhari, who regularly transmitted power to then-Vice President Yemi Osinbajo during his own absences.
Why does the “acting president” question matter?
Under Nigeria’s constitution, a president can send a written declaration to the Senate President and Speaker of the House, allowing the vice president to formally act in his place, with full presidential authority, until the president returns. Without that declaration, Nigeria technically has no one holding full presidential power while Tinubu is away — even though the government insists day-to-day operations continue as normal through ministers and top officials.
This is not the first time this ambiguity has come up. In October 2024, when Tinubu and Shettima were both abroad at once, the presidency responded to public concern by naming interim leaders — the Senate President, the Secretary to the Government of the Federation, and various ministers — to reassure Nigerians there was no leadership vacuum, pointing to a similar situation under Buhari and Osinbajo in 2022.
Causes and effects
Security analysts say the bigger concern isn’t paperwork — it’s continuity of command during an emergency. Dr Kabir Adamu, a security and risk expert, has warned that the simultaneous absence of the president and vice president should be assessed not just constitutionally, but through the lens of national security, especially at a time when the country is dealing with active kidnapping crises like the one in Borgu. Politically, the silence has also fed speculation about the true state of the Tinubu-Shettima relationship ahead of the 2027 election, with critics noting Tinubu’s history of changing his deputy multiple times during his years as Lagos governor.
At the national level, this recurring ambiguity raises a bigger question: whether Nigeria’s system for handling presidential absences is robust enough for a country facing active security threats on multiple fronts at once, or whether it depends too much on informal reassurance rather than clear constitutional process.
What can be done?
Constitutional and governance experts have long recommended that Nigerian presidents formally transmit power whenever they travel, exactly as the constitution allows, rather than relying on informal reassurances that “nothing has changed.” Doing so removes ambiguity and ensures a clear chain of command exists at all times, particularly during periods of active security threats.
Final Word
Vacations are normal, and no one begrudges a president time to rest. But in a country actively battling kidnappings, communal violence, and economic uncertainty, ambiguity about who is formally in charge is not a small detail — it is the kind of gap that can matter enormously if something urgent happens while both leaders are away. We believe a quick, formal declaration would cost the presidency nothing and would close a loophole that keeps resurfacing every time Nigeria’s leadership travels abroad.
Published by Ejoh Caleb
