This is without prejudice to what Umaru Yar’Adua may eventually decide to do with the Presidency of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. At the moment, he is lying ill in a Saudi Arabian hospital.
Back in Nigeria, there is this seeming political tension which for the past two months has been unnecessarily and in some cases, self-servingly escalated largely as a shameless clever ploy to regain political relevance. Today, the picture before the outside world is that Nigeria is on the precipice.
If, as the alarm goes rather loosely, this democracy cracks, the blame should go all round because when delicate political/constitutional issues arise, our individual/group reaction is determined by ethnic interests. At convenient moments, when political wrongs occur in, or are committed by our own, we acquiesce or sleep off and when the same wrongs are committed by others, we raise alarm.

That President Yar’Adua left he country without filling the attendant vacuum is clear non-compliance with constitutional necessity if not an impeachable offence. However, we all (Nigerians) have no moral right to zero in on Yar’Adua. When we now quote section 145 of Constitution, the impression is unfairly created that violation of that section is unprecedented or peculiar to Yar’Adua. When the man was flying out for medical treatment as he did a couple of times, he couldn’t have realised he would be for this long and if he returned after, let’s say, three weeks, nobody would have mentioned section 145 or the need for an acting President. Yet, the Constitution would have been violated.

Remarkably, section 145 is being deliberately cited by limiting it to only health prospects or uncertainties of an incumbent President. Instead, the section is slightly wider and in fact, is more specific on absence or vacation. We must therefore, expand the criticism of the violation of the Constitution (e.g. section 145) or demand for compliance by tackling infraction of the Constitution since 1999.
Furthermore, section 190 also requires that “whenever the (state) governor transmits to the Speaker of the House of Assembly a written declaration that he is proceeding on VACATION or that he is otherwise unable to discharge the functions of his office, …. Such functions shall be discharged by the deputy governor, as ACTING GOVERNOR .
Since 1999, who is that governor that ever allowed an acting governor especially by elevating his deputy? Even when some governors (including the then Katsina’s Umaru Yar’Adua) were out for months on medical treatment, did they hand over to their deputies as acting governor or did we complain? If we had, the issue would have been public and President Yar’Adua could not in that capacity have violated section 145.

Equally, section 145 is not limited to the health requirement of a sitting President. Indeed, the requirement primarily is that “whenever the President transmits to the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives a written declaration that he is proceeding on VACATION …, such functions (of the President shall be discharged by the Vice President as Acting President.”
During his tenure of eight years as President, Olusegun Obasanjo went on vacation at least once and for not less than two weeks. Did Obasanjo comply with section 145 to allow Vice-President Atiku Abubakar to act as President? Yet, we did not complain.
In the present controversy, a new dimension has been added to the provisions of section 145 on the absence, from office, of the President either on vacation or deterioration of his health, and section 190 for state governors. We must either believe in the rule of law or don’t. Where we don’t, anarchy portends. Admittedly, the law is an ass and can easily be manipulated. Unfortunately, the judiciary is the only “kabiyesi” (unquestionable authority) in our constitutional arrangement.

In the matter of President Yar’Adua’s violation of section 145, interested parties or busy bodies went to court obviously with the legitimate aim of forcing Yar’Adua to comply with section 145 specifically to enable Vice President Jonathan Goodluck assume the title of Acting President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.
The court ruled that first, no law can force an incumbent President to write National Assembly on his health incapacity or impending vacation. Instead, the court clearly stated that compliance with section 145 is discretionary. Second, the court further ruled that much as a Vice President can assume the duties of an absent President such duties cannot be in the capacity of an Acting President.
What else? It must be noted that neither President Yar’Adua nor Vice President Jonathan commenced any of the series of court cases.

In another remarkable case, (again not initiated by either President Yar’Adua or Vice-President Jonathan) the Federal Executive Council (FEC) should decide on the health position of Yar’Adua. The council, presided over by Vice President Jonathan accordingly met and resolved most probably unanimously, that President Yar’Adua is fit medically to perform his duties.
On its part, the Senate resolved to be informed by President Yar’Adua officially of his trip abroad for medical treatment. The same Senate however, conceded, obviously in compliance with the court ruling that President Yar’Adua cannot be compelled to comply with its (Senate’s) request.

Meanwhile, Vice President Jonathan in that capacity commenced performing the official duties of the President. These include summoning and presiding over meetings of the Federal Executive Council (or Executive Council of Nigeria as clarified by the court) receiving letters of credence from new foreign envoys, issuing execution orders for the deployment of troops for operations like containment of the Jos riots, awarding of contracts, etc. In short, Jonathan, even as substantive Vice-President, is already ruling Nigeria in the absence of President Yar’Adua, strictly as declared by the law court.

Therefore, clear that the only political irritation of observers is the nomenclature of Acting President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. Must Nigeria go on fire because of that?
As Vice President performing the duties of a substantive President, Jonathan can only do his best to provide jobs, awards contracts, provides roads, makes public appointments, improves power supply, guarantees national security, etc. If as a Vice-President performing the duties of a substantive President, Jonathan is unable to do these, announcing him as Acting President will not dramatically change the situation.

In fact, the present controversy is for the elite. Confront the wretched in the squalour of Ajegunle in Lagos or the almajiri on Kano and Kaduna streets, and they are the majority in Nigeria, their reaction will be that “Na Acting President we go chop? I need food and accommodation. I beg. Leave me alone.”
As Vice President, Jonathan should get on with his job of discharging the functions of the President, as directed by the court of law. Jonathan must maintain his present posture and ignore attempt(s) to create bad blood between him and President Yar’Adua.

In his present position of performing the functions of an incumbent President, Jonathan is being stampeded to dissolve the cabinet. Is that the reason for insisting on a status of Acting President? Where is the sincerity of wishing Yar’Adua early recovery to enable him resume his duties as President?
Yes, Jonathan may have the power and indeed, he has the authority to appoint a new cabinet. Will he do that without informing Yar’Adua? The very idea of that intention will likely be rejected by Yar’Adua. Bad blood would have been created. Perhaps, Jonathan thereafter proceeded to exercise his power. Would the Senate approve new ministerial nominees in that situation? Worse, anytime Yar’Adua returned, he re-asserts his authority by sacking Jonathan’s cabinet to re-instate his (Yar’Adua’s) new or old cabinet.

Of course, any erring minister should be sacked even by Vice President Jonathan performing the duties of an incumbent President. But there is no way an entire cabinet he (Jonathan) inherited could be deemed to be erring. Any erring minister to be sacked should be so seen by Nigerians to warrant such dismissal.
Last time, unconfirmed reports said some ministers flagrantly ignored a particular directive given by Jonathan. In his new position, Jonathan should not sack such ministers, if any, for such retroactive indiscipline. But henceforth and throughout his period of holding fort for President Yar’Adua, Vice President Jonathan must be firm in controlling such ministers. Anyone among them unwilling to submit to or respect his authority should be free to exit or be exited.

Ever opportunistic, ex-President Olusegun Obasanjo tried to hijack the public mood not only by denying responsibility for imposing Yar’Adua on the nation, but also by turning the heat on him. What height of wickedness all in a callous attempt to regain political relevance. Otherwise, why exploit the poor state of health of a fellow human being?
Obasanjo now assumes an untenable moral posture of calling on Yar’Adua to do the honourable thing. Seemingly well said except by a wrong person. Completing two terms of four years each as President, did Obasanjo advise himself to do the honourable thing? Of course, not. Instead, he tried to perpetuate himself through a bogus Third Term, the first four years of a new 12-year tenure.

We had to drive him out.
And what arrogance. Obasanjo said he was looking for somebody with integrity etc. to succeed him. What section of the Constitution provides an outgoing President with that power? The arrogance he displayed on that issue has now spilled to the states where each governor unlawfully arrogates to himself the power to select his successor.
By the way, when the Yar’Adua issue first broke, it was argued in this column that Nigeria’s President could rule from anywhere in the world. And when the Attorney-General of the federation and Justice Minister Aondoaaka so submitted, he was attacked by his colleagues. Now, his same colleagues are now demanding that Yar’Adua should submit a written declaration to the National Assembly on his health position.

From where would President Yar’Adua write such an official letter? Saudi Arabia. Is Saudi Arabia part of Nigeria? And if Yar’Adua wrote such a letter from Saudi Arabia, would he (Yar’Adua) not be performing his constitutional function?
Foreign Ministers of United States and European community have also expressed concern on the fall-out of Yar’Adua’s failure to comply with the Constitution by allowing an Acting President.
Among them was Britain’s Foreign Secretary, David Milliband. The whole show is stupid. Only last year, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown proceeded on vacation of at least three weeks. Brown did not appoint an Acting Prime Minister unlike his predecessor, Tony Blair, who allowed his deputy, John Prescott, to act as Prime Minister.
Instead, vacating Prime Minister Brown split his duties among three ministers – Justice Secretary Jack Straw, Business Secretary Lord Mandelson and another top ranking minister, David Milliband? The same man worries about Nigeria.