Today’s defection of some governors and leading lights of the breakaway faction of the Peoples Democratic Party to the All Progressives Congress (APC) does not have the full backing of all members of the G7 group, Huhuonline.com can confirm.
Already, Governor of Niger State, Mu’azu Babangida Aliyu has denied media reports purporting that he dumped the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) for APC, instead affirming his membership of the ruling party.
In a statement issued on Tuesday evening, Aliyu’s Chief Press Secretary, Malam Danladi Ndayebo revealed the shock of his principal by the announcement of the merger of New PDP and APC, even before a final decision had been taken on the matter.
He said the governor was not present at the meeting where the merger deal was sealed, and insisted that talks are still ongoing with President Goodluck Jonathan, which means he would await the outcome of the negotiation before taking a final decision.
He said that the decision of some leaders of the new PDP to merge with APC lacks internal democracy, as the action is tantamount to the very offence the new PDP has been accusing the Tukur-led PDP of.
Also, his counterpart from Jigawa state, Sule Lamido says he is still a member of the PDP.Huhuonline.com learnt that the governors of Rivers and Adamawa are only in a hurry to depart the PDP because the party structure in the state has been taken from them.
Now, they want take advantage of the openings in APC and become the leaders of the party in their respective state. Nyako wants his son to succeed him after his tenure while Amaechi is alleged to be seeking to be able to influence 2015 election in Rivers State, without supporting President Jonathan’s second term ambition.However, his political God father,Dr.Peter Odili is gradually taking back the political structure he ceded to Gov. Rotimi Amaechi.
He also said part of the decision to join the APC was because the issues raised by G7 governors were not resolved by President Goodluck Jonathan and the Peoples Democratic Party, PDP.
Speaking with journalists at the Port Harcourt International Airport upon his arrival from Abuja, Tuesday, Governor Rotimi Amaechi said,, “Yes, we have joined APC after the meeting we had with (Muhammadu) Buhari, (Bola) Tinubu and the interim chairman of APC (Chief Bisi Akande).
“The governors met on Monday and decided that we must meet with the APC leadership and when we met with the APC leadership, it was important we took a position and the position we took is for the good of our democracy and ensure that Nigeria moves forward. We can’t continue the way we are, where we are. The picture painted by the PDP was as if we were begging to come back to PDP and issues were not being looked into; issues were not being resolved and it’s important that we resolve it one way or the other.
“I think that what has happened is that what was then new PDP decided that it’s important that we move into APC and position ourselves for the next election.
“Rivers State must know that for me to have taken that decision, I had looked at the general interests of Rivers people. I was not elected to lead Nigeria, I was elected to lead Rivers State and I had looked at the interests of Rivers people and have seen that these interests were not protected in PDP. I have seen the fact that we are losing our oil wells in Etche, in the Kalabari areas and that the more they continue to pilfer these oil wells, the more we will continue to lose our wealth,” Amaechi said.
“The President and I have no personal quarrel. It’s important we put that in perspective. All the issues were issues that affect Rivers people; were issues that affect Nigerians and I am a Nigerian. I have to address those issues. He is my President and I respect him. I respect his office, respect him as a person, respect the fact that he's older but then as elected governor of Rivers State, I have the responsibility to lead Rivers State.
“If you look at what is going on, the federal government is not able to fund the states anymore. They say oil theft but oil theft is not enough reason for which we cannot fund ourselves.
“As per development in Rivers State, we are about to commission about 300 primary schools, we are about to commission another 70 health centres to add to the 60 we commissioned before. We are about to commission the Kelsey Harrison Hospital at Emenike Street. There is a new one inside Rivers State University of Science and Technology campus. There is a partnership between us and NDDC for which we have paid NDDC about N960 million for the Mother-and-Child hospital and NDDC is expected to bring about N900 million to make it N1.8 billion for the hospital. The stadium is about to be completed. So development is actually going on. We are working.”
No one is sure of where governor Wamaako of Sokoto stands. His arch nemesis and former boss, Governor Baffarawa is the leader of APC in Sokoto State. Huhuonline.com learnt that the leadership of APC was forced to apologise to Baffarawa for visiting the governor last month. Governor Wammako served as Deputy Governor to Alhaji Bafarawa, before resigning to run for the governorship of the state.
Our finding shows that Bafarawa is unwilling to collapse his political structure for a decamping Governor Wammako. Also, Alhaji Shekaru, the former governor of Kano state who is the leader of APC in the state is not ready to collapse his political structure for kwankwanso.
Meanwhile, the Rivers State chapter of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) has described the official exit of Governor Rotimi Amaechi and other G7 governors to the All Progressives Congress (APC) as no shocker but rather, a vindication of the party’s earlier revelation.
In a statement signed by Special Adviser on Media to the Rivers State PDP Chairman, Jerry Needam, the party expressed satisfaction with the “welcome development”, saying it is a big relief for its leadership and other genuine members of the party, who have continued to tolerate the rebellious and insubordinate behaviour and actions of Amaechi and his allies over the period in the state and at the national level.
“With the formal defection of Amaechi and his associates, the party is now better placed and focused to deliver to the people of the state the much-desired development and programmes that have been illusive following the internal ache that acted like a virus to the party by Governor Amaechi and his co-travellers”, the statement read.
“The defection of Governor Amaechi is inconsequential to the success of PDP in Rivers State, and the nation. Rather than create adverse effect on the party, it will further strengthen the party at all levels.
“To this end, the PDP in the state, in the coming days, it will organise a thanksgiving service in celebration of the exit of the undesirable elements and to thank God for answering its prayers”.
The party implored its numerous members to join it in thanking God for “being delivered from the evil that has held the party in bondage in the state and at national level”, and to remain steadfast and even more committed, noting that time has come for those who have been held captive to be liberated.
It congratulated all those who have, over the period, joined hands with its leadership in fighting against “dictatorship, impunity and abuse of rights of the citizenry in Rivers State.” It also wished “Governor Amaechi and his ill-fated train best of luck in their future endeavour”.
On its own, the nPDP has urged President Goodluck Jonathan to start preparing his 2015 handover notes, claiming that APC is now the majority party in the country.
Late this morning, at about 11:46am, National Chairman of the New Peoples Democratic Party (nPDP), Alhaji Abubakar Kawu Baraje, formally announced the merger of the party with the All Progressives Congress (APC).
The merger was contained in a communiqué read to journalists by Baraje at the end of a meeting between the leadership of New PDP and that of the APC held at the Kano Governor’s Lodge in Abuja.
“A meeting of the leadership of All Progressives Congress (APC) and the new PDP met this morning at the residence of the Kano State Governor, Dr. Rabiu Musa Kwankwaso, in Abuja and after exhaustive deliberations the two parties agreed to merge in order to rescue our fledgling democracy and the nation”, the communiqué, signed by Bisi Akande, the APC national chairman and Baraje, read.
With this development, the G7 Governors of New PDP — namely, Babangida Aliyu (Niger), Rabiu Kwankwaso (Kano), Sule Lamido (Jigawa), Aliyu Wamakko (Sokoto), Murtala Nyako (Adamawa), Abdulfatah Ahmed (Kwara) and Rotimi Amaechi (Rivers) — are now members of the APC. The merger thus shoots up the number of APC state governors to 18 while PDP’s shrinks to 16, with All Progressives Grand Alliance (APGA) and Labour Party having one governor each. A similar permutation exists in the National Assembly where APC now has the majority with PDP and its allies in minority.
“The simple meaning of this is that APC is now the majority party in the country while PDP has become a minority party. In the circumstances, President Goodluck Ebele Jonathan must now start writing his handover notes because his ambition to maouvre the party structures so as to get a third term in office in 2015 has suddenly collapsed”, National Publicity Secretary of NPDP, Chief Eze Chukwuemeka Eze wrote in a statement.
“What a sudden change of fortune! What a sad day for the PDP, a party which we laboured to build, which was viciously taken away from us but which, out of our great love for it, we did everything humanly possible to save but were frustrated by the unpatriotic elements that have usurped the leadership of the party.
“Nigerians could recall that several meetings had been held between the APC leaders and the leaders of the New PDP. The APC had visited each of our seven New PDP governors in their states to convince them to join its fold but all these notwithstanding while the PDP Leadership on their own side were plotting on daily basis on how to frustrate us out of the party we suffered to nurture”.
nPDP maintained that it did all within its powers to reconcile with PDP to no avail, as sadly, Jonathan allowed the hawks within the Presidency and PDP Leadership to convince him to abort last Sunday’s meeting that would have brought a last peace to the party, which the PDP leadership under Alhaji Bamanga Tukur frustrated.
“So we have no other option than to formally announce the death and burial of PDP. Day and night we cried out, begging whoever loved PDP to join us to rescue the party from imminent doom but we were conveniently ignored and abused. Just last night, we issued the last in a series of passionate appeals to PDP Elders to take urgent steps to save the troubled party in the face of their unbelievable silence in the face of the chain of developments instigated by factional National Chairman, Alhaji Bamanga Tukur, which has put the party at the edge of the precipice.
“Now, we have reached the stage that we can only say: ‘PDP, your sinking ship has been abandoned to you! You brought this misfortune upon yourself, now you must bear it alone!’
“As for us, we are happy to belong to the APC, where our value is appreciated, where we are made to feel truly wanted, and where we can now join forces with like minds in our struggle to liberate Nigeria from PDP’s misrule, which is soon to end”.
Among those at Tuesday’s merger meeting were APC leader and former Lagos State Governor, Bola Tinubu; APC National Chairman, Bisi Akande; Kano State Governor, Rabiu Kwankwaso: former Kwara Governor and serving senator, Bukola Saraki; former Nasarawa Governor and serving senator, Abdullahi Adamu; former Bayelsa Governor, Timipre Sylva; and Adamawa State Governor, Murtala Nyako.
Others are former Speaker of the Federal House of Representatives, Aminu Bello Masari; Rivers State Governor, Rotimi Amaechi; court-reinstated National Secretary of the PDP, Olagunsoye Oyinlola; former Abia State Governor, Ogbonnaya Onu; former PDP Vice Chairman, Sam Jaja; Kwara State Governor, Abdulfatah Ahmed; and Niger State Governor, Babangida Aliyu.
However, in some sort of counter-reaction, the national leadership of PDP slammed its decamping members, saying it remains unperturbed by the move.
“The attention of the National Leadership of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) has been drawn to an announcement by members of the so called New PDP declaring their membership of the All Progressive Congress (APC). We recognize the rights of freedom of association for all Nigerians and declare that it is within the rights of any Nigerian citizen to associate with anybody he/she deems fit”, read a statement signed by National Publicity secretary, Chief Olisa Metuh.
“By this open declaration today, those individuals have unveiled their true intent, which most Nigerians suspected ab initio. They have chosen to abandon a broad based National Platform and embraced a narrow group of ethnic and religious bigots whose main intention is to unleash a state of anarchy on Nigeria.
“We wish to state categorically that the PDP remains unperturbed, as we are now rid of detractors and distractions. We urge all our members nationwide to remain focused and close ranks, now that agents of distraction have finally left our ranks”.
The party reminded its members that from the rulings of the court, there are no factions whatsoever in the PDP. It affirmed that in the eyes of the law, the PDP remains one and an indivisible entity under the leadership of Alhaji Bamanga Tukur. It also commended the “wise decision” of some of the aggrieved governors to dissociate themselves from the action of some of their colleagues, and assured Nigerians that the PDP will continue to grow from strength to strength and will definitely emerge stronger from this event.
“We reiterate that the position of the law is very clear that there is no factions whatsoever in the PDP”, the statement added.
“We wish to use this opportunity to remind all PDP members that the peace process initiated by President Goodluck Jonathan is still on course and we wish to thank him for his patience, humility and spirit of accommodation. The meeting between the president and aggrieved members shall hold on Sunday, December 01, 2013.
“Finally, we wish to reassure our teeming members that our doors remain open to address all grievances. We shall however not condone any acts of internal subversion from any quarters”.
 |
|
Shettima at UNGA: Africa Demands a Seat at the Global Table
Nigeria has taken its campaign for a bigger African voice in global affairs to the heart of the United Nations, with Vice President Kashim Shettima demanding sweeping reform of the UN Security Council and permanent representation for Africa.
Delivering President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s address at the **81st United Nations General Assembly** in New York on Thursday, Shettima said the international system created after World War II could no longer adequately reflect the realities of the modern world.
Nigeria called for **at least two permanent seats for Africa**, with the full rights and responsibilities of permanent membership, including veto rights for as long as the veto remains part of the Security Council, alongside **five non-permanent African seats**.
The demand puts Africa's long-standing campaign for greater representation at the centre of Nigeria's message to world leaders.
1945 cannot define 2026’
The Nigerian delegation argued that the distribution of power established in 1945 has left Africa under-represented in the institution responsible for some of the world's most consequential decisions on peace and security.
For Abuja, the issue is not simply about seats at the UN. It is about giving African countries a greater role in decisions that directly affect the continent.
Nigeria anchored its position on the **Ezulwini Consensus**, the African Union's common position on Security Council reform.
CONFLICTS: NIGERIA CALLS FOR DIPLOMACY
Shettima's address also turned to the conflicts confronting the international community.
Nigeria called for stronger diplomacy, respect for international law and protection of civilians, while urging greater international efforts to resolve conflicts, including the crisis in Sudan.
The Nigerian position was that lasting peace cannot be secured solely through military action and that diplomacy, dialogue and negotiated settlements remain essential tools for resolving conflicts.
TERRORISM: ‘NO COUNTRY CAN FIGHT ALONE’
With Nigeria continuing to confront terrorism and other forms of transnational crime, the address placed international security cooperation high on the agenda.
Nigeria called for stronger intelligence-sharing, action against terrorist financing and greater cooperation to prevent illicit weapons from crossing borders.
But Abuja also linked security to development, pointing to education, economic opportunity, accountable governance and protection of citizens** as important elements of long-term stability.
AFRICA’S WEALTH: FROM RAW MATERIALS TO INDUSTRIAL POWER
The Nigerian message went beyond politics and security.Tinubu's address, delivered by Shettima, called for Africa to transform its vast natural resources into industrial and economic opportunities by expanding **local processing, manufacturing, technology and value-added production**.
Nigeria also highlighted the African Continental Free Trade Area as an opportunity to expand intra-African trade and build stronger regional supply chains.
The message was clear: Africa's resources should generate greater value, jobs and investment within the continent rather than being exported largely in raw form.
CLIMATE AND DEVELOPMENT
Nigeria also reaffirmed its commitment to climate action, including its 2060 net-zero target, while stressing the need for financing, technology transfer and international support for developing countries.
Abuja argued that climate action and economic development should be pursued together, particularly in countries still struggling to provide reliable energy and economic opportunities for rapidly growing populations.
THE NIGERIAN MESSAGE
From the UN podium in New York, Shettima delivered a message that combined Nigeria's foreign-policy priorities with its wider vision for Africa: **greater representation, stronger security cooperation, economic transformation and a more inclusive international system.**
For Nigeria, the Security Council reform campaign remains a central part of that agenda.
The demand from Abuja is straightforward: **Africa should have a permanent voice in the room when decisions affecting international peace, security and global governance are made. And Nigeria says it intends to keep making that case.
News
CBN Slashes Interest Rate to 23% in Major Policy Adjustment
The Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) has reduced its benchmark interest rate from 26.5 per cent to 23 per cent, marking a significant shift in its monetary policy direction.
CBN Governor, Olayemi Cardoso, announced the decision on Tuesday following the conclusion of the Monetary Policy Committee’s (MPC) 307th meeting in Abuja.
According to Cardoso, the committee reviewed developments in both the global and domestic economies, assessed emerging risks and considered their potential implications for monetary policy before reaching its decision.
“The Committee decided as follows: reset the monetary policy rate at 23 per cent,” the governor said.
The latest move represents a 350-basis-point reduction in the Monetary Policy Rate (MPR). It follows two consecutive MPC meetings at which the rate was left unchanged, after the committee lowered it by 50 basis points in February 2026.
In addition to cutting the MPR, the committee adjusted the standing facility corridor to +50 and -300 basis points around the new benchmark rate.
However, the CBN retained existing Cash Reserve Requirement (CRR) levels at 45 per cent for deposit money banks, 16 per cent for merchant banks and 75 per cent for non-TSA public-sector deposits.
Cardoso explained that the changes were designed to improve the effectiveness of monetary policy by strengthening the transmission of policy decisions through the financial system.
He said the adjustment was also part of efforts to restore the MPR as the primary signal of the CBN’s monetary policy and improve the operation of the monetary policy framework.
According to the governor, the MPC viewed the recalibration as an operational adjustment rather than a fundamental shift in the bank’s monetary policy stance.
“The Committee emphasized that the duration of the corridor does not constitute a change in the current monetary policy stance, but rather an operational reset to enhance the effectiveness of monetary policy and support the transition to an inflation targeting framework,” he said.
The committee also noted ongoing efforts by the CBN to strengthen its monetary policy implementation framework. Cardoso said transaction-based operational benchmarks had improved the transparency of money-market operations.
The MPC consequently concluded that resetting the MPR and adjusting the policy corridor would bring the monetary policy framework more closely in line with prevailing market conditions.
The committee said the changes are expected to improve policy transmission and reinforce the MPR’s role as the central benchmark for monetary policy.
Members further maintained that the latest adjustments should be viewed primarily as an operational realignment of the framework and not, in themselves, as a change in the underlying monetary policy stance.
Business
In The Spotlight
Editorial:Trump @ UNGA: Power Is Not a Substitute for Strategy
President Donald Trump came before the United Nations this week with a message that has defined much of his second presidency: The United States is powerful, it intends to use that power, and it will not permit international institutions to place limits on American sovereignty.
There was little ambiguity in the message. Trump celebrated military strength, demanded greater control over America’s borders, challenged international institutions and portrayed American technological leadership as a strategic necessity. On Iran, Gaza, immigration, the International Criminal Court and artificial intelligence, the president returned repeatedly to the same principle: Nations must defend their own interests, and the United States must remain free to act.
That is a coherent philosophy. But coherence is not the same as effectiveness.
The question raised by this speech is not whether America should be strong. No serious foreign policy can begin from the premise that American power is irrelevant. The question is what that power is for — and whether it is being used in ways that make the United States more secure over the long term.
Trump's remarks on Iran illustrated the dilemma.
He reaffirmed that Iran cannot be allowed to obtain a nuclear weapon and paired the possibility of diplomacy with warnings of devastating military consequences.
Deterrence has always depended partly on credibility. But credibility is not measured only by the willingness to threaten force. It is also measured by the ability to achieve a political outcome once force has been used.
Wars can begin with clear objectives and end with consequences no government anticipated. The history of American foreign policy offers ample evidence that military superiority does not automatically translate into political control.
That is why diplomacy cannot simply be regarded as the alternative to strength. At its best, diplomacy is one of the instruments through which strength is converted into durable agreements.
The same distinction matters in Trump's approach to the United Nations.
The president has argued that international institutions have become too costly, too bureaucratic and too willing to intrude upon national sovereignty. His administration has pursued reductions in America's financial and institutional commitments to the United Nations.
There is nothing inherently wrong with demanding accountability from an international organization. The United Nations deserves scrutiny. Its bureaucracy can be inefficient, its member states often disagree and its institutions can fail to prevent the very conflicts they were created to address.
But the choice is not simply between an ineffective United Nations and an unconstrained America.
International institutions exist in part because some problems cannot be solved effectively by individual nations acting alone. Nuclear proliferation is one. Global pandemics are another. Artificial intelligence increasingly belongs on that list.
Trump's comments about AI therefore deserve particular attention. He emphasized American technological leadership and warned against international regulation that could restrain innovation.
The United States has obvious reasons to remain at the forefront of AI development. But technological leadership and international coordination are not necessarily opposing objectives. The challenge is to develop rules that protect security without freezing innovation.
That requires American leadership, not American isolation.
The president's immigration argument followed the same pattern. He presented control of the border as an essential expression of national sovereignty and rejected the notion that international norms should prevent governments from determining who may enter their territory.
A sovereign nation plainly has an interest in controlling its borders. But sovereignty also carries responsibilities. The United States, like other countries, must reconcile border enforcement with its legal and humanitarian obligations.
The difficult work of governing begins where slogans end.
That is ultimately what was missing from the most sweeping parts of Trump's speech: not conviction, but attention to the institutional machinery required to turn conviction into lasting results.
America can impose costs on adversaries. It can withdraw from agreements. It can reduce contributions to international organizations. It can threaten overwhelming force. It can use its enormous economic and technological advantages.
But power has a second dimension that is easier to overlook: the ability to persuade allies, maintain coalitions, preserve diplomatic channels and build institutions capable of surviving changes in leadership.
The United States did not become the world's leading power merely because it possessed the world's strongest military. It built alliances. It established institutions. It cultivated economic relationships. It persuaded other countries that American leadership could serve interests beyond America's own.
Trump's speech represents a different emphasis.
It places sovereignty before institutions, pressure before accommodation and national interest before international consensus.
There is a legitimate debate to be had over whether the postwar international system has become too cumbersome, too expensive or insufficiently accountable. But reforming that system and weakening it are not the same thing.
The distinction will matter greatly in the years ahead.
A stronger America is not necessarily an America that stands alone. Nor is international cooperation synonymous with surrendering sovereignty.
The enduring challenge of American foreign policy is to combine power with restraint, independence with alliances and national interest with the recognition that American security is inseparable from the wider world.
Trump's speech made clear which side of that debate he occupies.The more consequential question is what happens next.
History will not ultimately judge the speech by its applause lines, its threats or its declarations of American strength. It will judge the policy that follows — and whether that policy produces a world in which the United States is not merely more powerful, but more secure.
Power matters. But power, by itself, is not a strategy.
In The Spotlight
Who Is in Charge? Tinubu Is in Paris, Shettima Is in New York
By now, Nigerians deserve more than explanations. They deserve clarity. President Bola Ahmed Tinubu is in Paris. Vice President Kashim Shettima is in New York.
And Nigeria is in Abuja, Lagos, Kano, Port Harcourt, Maiduguri and everywhere else Nigerians are dealing with the daily business of surviving, working and waiting for government to deliver. So, a simple question is becoming increasingly difficult to avoid:Who is in charge?
Before anyone dismisses that question as opposition politics, let us establish the facts. Tinubu left Nigeria on August 30 for what the Presidency described as a working vacation. He subsequently moved from London to Paris and, on September 21, the Presidency announced that he had extended his stay by a few days and would return at the weekend.
Shettima left Nigeria on September 20 for New York, where he is representing the President and leading Nigeria's delegation to the 81st United Nations General Assembly.
The government says there is no vacuum. It says Tinubu remains in contact with officials at home and continues to direct the affairs of government. It also says Shettima has been given the President's mandate to represent Nigeria at the UN.
Fine. But that does not make the question disappear.It makes the question more important.
A country cannot run on “trust us”
Government is not supposed to operate on whispers, assumptions or political reassurance.It operates through institutions.
It operates through constitutional authority. It operates through clearly defined responsibilities. And when the President is abroad for an extended period while the Vice President is also outside the country, Nigerians have every right to ask where executive authority is located and who is exercising it.
This is particularly relevant because Nigeria's Constitution provides a specific mechanism for a President who is proceeding on vacation or otherwise unable to discharge the functions of office.
That mechanism exists for a reason.It is designed to prevent uncertainty.It is designed to prevent a vacuum.It is designed toensure that, at every moment, Nigerians know who is constitutionally responsible for the presidency.
So why should Nigerians have to debate the issue?
The Presidency says everything is fine
The government insists that there is no disruption to governance.The Presidency says Tinubu has remained engaged from abroad. It points to decisions taken by the President while away and says the Vice President's trip to New York is an official assignment.
There is nothing inherently unusual about a Nigerian president travelling abroad.There is nothing unusual about a vice president representing the country at the United Nations.
The problem is the combination.The President is away. The Vice President is away. And the country is being told that everything is perfectly normal.
Perhaps it is.But if it is, then proving it should be easy.Tell Nigerians clearly who is exercising presidential authority.
Tell Nigerians whether the constitutional procedure has been followed.Tell Nigerians who is accountable for presidential decisions while both men are outside the country.This should not be difficult.
Leadership is also about presence
There is a difference between saying government is functioning and demonstrating that leadership is present.Nigeria is not short of challenges.
The cost of living remains a major concern. Security remains a national issue. Unemployment and economic hardship continue to affect households. Nigerians are demanding better public services and greater accountability.
At such a moment, leadership cannot be reduced to whether instructions can be transmitted from one continent to another.
Leadership is also about visibility. It is about being present when the country needs reassurance. It is about being accessible when difficult questions arise. It is about giving citizens confidence that somebody is firmly in control. A president does not have to sit permanently in Aso Rock to govern Nigeria. But Nigerians should never be left wondering whether anyone is sitting firmly at the controls.
Paris is not Abuja
There is another uncomfortable truth.Nigeria's political class has become remarkably comfortable governing from airports, hotel suites, foreign capitals and conference rooms.The rest of the country does not have that luxury.
The Nigerian worker cannot take a working vacation from inflation.The small business owner cannot take annual leave from electricity costs.The parent struggling with school fees cannot postpone the bills until the President returns. The young graduate without a job cannot simply wait for the government to reconnect with reality.
For ordinary Nigerians, the country does not go on vacation.That is why the optics matter.While the President is in Paris and the Vice President is in New York, millions of Nigerians remain at home confronting the consequences of government policy every day.
This is bigger than Tinubu
The danger is that this debate becomes another partisan shouting match. Supporters will say the President is working.
Opponents will say the government has abandoned its responsibilities. Both sides can shout themselves hoarse.
But the Constitution does not work by volume. The question is not whether Tinubu's supporters are satisfied.The question is not whether his opponents are outraged.The question is whether the constitutional chain of executive authority is clear. That is an institutional question, not a party question. And the National Assembly has a role to play in ensuring that Nigerians are not left guessing.
Nigeria deserves an answer
There is something deeply unhealthy about a democracy in which citizens have to ask social media, political parties and television commentators who is exercising presidential power.
The answer should be official.It should be constitutional.It should be unambiguous.If Tinubu is fully exercising the powers of President from Paris, say so.If Shettima is exercising presidential functions under the constitutional provisions governing presidential absence, say so.If there is no constitutional problem, explain precisely why.
But please, stop treating a legitimate question as an attack on the government.A government confident in its constitutional position should welcome clarity.
Who is in charge?
This is ultimately not about Paris.It is not about New York.It is not even primarily about Tinubu or Shettima. It is about the Nigerian presidency. A republic of more than 200 million people should not have an invisible question mark hanging over its executive authority.
Tinubu can travel.Shettima can travel.Government can continue. But constitutional responsibility must remain visible.
Because when both the President and Vice President are outside the country, Nigerians should not have to look at a map to figure out where their government is.
They should be able to look at the Constitution.And the answer should be unmistakable.Who is in charge? Nigeria deserves to know.
By Emmanuel Emeke Asiwe, Publisher/Editor-in-Chief