Human rights lawyer and professor Chidi Odinkalu has criticised President Bola Tinubu’s extended stay outside Nigeria, comparing the situation to Nigerians who leave the country in search of opportunities abroad.
Odinkalu made the comments on Channels Television’s Politics Today, while discussing the constitutional implications of Tinubu’s absence from Nigeria and the simultaneous absence of Vice President Kashim Shettima, who is currently in New York for the 81st United Nations General Assembly.
The former chairman of the National Human Rights Commission argued that the issue should not be viewed only from a technical interpretation of the Constitution but also from the perspective of governance and leadership.
Addressing the constitutional provision on presidential absence, Odinkalu said the situation was more complicated than simply counting 21 calendar days.
“It’s not that straightforward. We’ve got to be intellectually honest, whether or not we agree with that.”
He referred to Section 145 of the 1999 Constitution, which provides that when the President is proceeding on vacation or is otherwise unable to perform his functions, he should transmit a written declaration to the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives. If the President fails to transmit the declaration within 21 days, the National Assembly can, by a simple majority in both chambers, mandate the Vice President to perform the functions of President as Acting President.
Odinkalu also questioned the current arrangement in which both Tinubu and Shettima have been outside Nigeria at the same time.
He said previous administrations had generally avoided situations where both the President and Vice President were simultaneously out of the country.
“This is the first time that it is a habit. And under Buhari, whenever Buhari was going out of the country, Osinbajo was required to be back in the country.”
Tinubu left Nigeria on August 30, 2026, for a working vacation that began in London before he travelled to Paris. During his stay in France, he met French President Emmanuel Macron at the Élysée Palace and also held discussions with businessman Vincent Bolloré on investment opportunities in Nigeria’s creative and digital economy.
The Presidency later announced that Tinubu had extended his working vacation by a few days and was expected to return to Nigeria at the weekend. It also maintained that the President had remained in contact with developments in Nigeria and continued directing government affairs while abroad.
Shettima, meanwhile, travelled to New York to represent Nigeria at the 81st UN General Assembly, where he is scheduled to deliver Nigeria’s national statement and participate in other high-level engagements.
Odinkalu was particularly critical of the argument that government could simply continue operating normally in the President’s absence.
He said:
“Nigeria effectively has become an ungoverned territory. We’ve been talking about our insecurity situation as a reflection of ungoverned territories, and here we are.”
He then compared Tinubu’s extended stay abroad with the experience of Nigerians who relocate overseas in search of better opportunities, using the popular Nigerian term “japa.”
“It’s not that people should be telling us that our President is running the country. Nigeria effectively has become an ungoverned territory.”
Odinkalu also compared Tinubu’s situation with that of Cameroon’s President Paul Biya, who has spent extended periods outside Cameroon and frequently travels to Switzerland.
He argued that Nigeria should not adopt a similar approach to presidential governance.
The lawyer further criticised the suggestion that the Secretary to the Government of the Federation (SGF) could effectively run the country while both the President and Vice President are abroad, saying such an arrangement does not replace the constitutional mechanism for transferring presidential functions.
His comments come amid an ongoing public debate over the simultaneous absence of Tinubu and Shettima. Opposition figures and other critics have questioned the arrangement, while the Presidency has maintained that governance has continued without disruption.
The constitutional question has also been raised by other lawyers. Human rights lawyer Inibehe Effiong previously described the simultaneous absence of Tinubu and Shettima as a constitutional violation, while the Presidency has defended the President’s continued ability to direct government from abroad.
Odinkalu’s comments are his assessment of the situation and should be distinguished from a judicial determination of whether the President’s current absence violates the Constitution. As of Thursday, no court ruling establishing such a violation had been reported.
How did this story make you feel?
Join the conversation
Share a thoughtful response. Submissions may be reviewed before appearing.
