Lawyers, on Friday, carpeted the actions of President Muhammadu Buhari, saying that governing the country from abroad is an abuse of the nation’s sovereignty.

They also argued that it was wrong for the President to take vital decisions that had to do with Nigeria, outside the country.

The lawyers, who spoke against the backdrop of a statement credited to the National Chairman of the All Progressives Congress (APC), Adams Oshiomhole, who opined that the “president can work from anywhere.”

The Chief of Staff to the President, Abba Kyari, had travelled to London, the United Kingdom on Tuesday to meet with Buhari, for the purpose of assenting to a bill, an action that generated public outcry, prompting the chairman of the ruling party to make the statement.

Reacting, a Professor of Law, Ernest Ojukwu (SAN), said the president was vested with a variety of duties and powers, which were restricted to the geographical location called Nigeria.

He noted that aside from negotiating treaties with foreign governments, these obligations include signing into law or vetoing legislation passed by the National Assembly, appointing high-ranking members of the executive like ministers and all judges of the federal judiciary, and serving as commander in chief of the armed forces.

“These powers are exercised under the sovereign entity of Nigeria.

The principle of sovereignty envisages that the powers of the President can only be exercised within the territorial limits of the country.

“There are however certain acts that may still be intrinsically tied to the exercise of the country’s sovereignty and such acts may undermine our sovereignty and expose the country to foreign interference if done outside the territory of Nigeria.

Example is signing a bill into law on a foreign land. “That is a fundamen- tal exercise of the right of a nation to its sovereignty. It should not be allowed.

I think the courts may declare such bill invalid despite the fact that there is no express provision against such act in our constitution.”

In his own reaction, another lawyer and human rights activist, Inibehe Effiong, also said the action of the president was unconstitutional and illegal. Faulting the act, the lawyer said it was pertinent to reproduce Section 145 (1) and (2) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended), which will subsequently be referred to as ‘the Constitution’, cited by him in aid of his defence.

“Section 145 (1) states that: ‘Whenever the President is proceeding on vacation or is otherwise unable to discharge the functions of his office, he shall transmit a written declaration to the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives to that effect, and until he transmits to them a written declaration to the contrary, the Vice- President shall perform the functions of the President as Acting President. “(2): In the event that the President is unable or fails to transmit the written declaration mentioned in subsection (1) of this section within 21 days, the National Assembly shall, by a resolution made by a simple majority of the vote of each House of the National Assembly, mandate the Vice- President to perform the functions of the office of the President as Acting President until the President transmits a letter to the President of the Senate and Speaker of the House of Representatives that he is now available to resume his functions as President.

“The literal, grammatical and commonsensical reading of Section 145 (1) and (2) supra evinces the true purport of the said provisions and does not leave any room for ambiguity or debate as to the actual intention of the framers of the constitution.

The law is trite that the constitution is a living document and must be given a liberal interpretation to fulfil the intention of its framers. “President Buhari does not have the discretion or prerogative to embark or proceed on vacation outside the mandatory constitutional framework of Section 145 (1) and (2) of the Constitution.

“As shown earlier, ’whenever’ in this context implies that every or any time the President is proceeding on vacation he must transmit a written declaration to the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives to that effect.

“There is no legal or moral justification for the President to commit such grave constitutional infraction even for one day. A grave violation of the Constitution amounts to gross misconduct which is an impeachable offense under Section 143 of the Constitution.

“To say that Nigeria should remain for days without a president or an acting president is to say the least reprehensible. It becomes grossly offensive for the president’s spokesperson to go further to claim ridiculously that the president of the Federal Republic of Nigeria can exercise his presidential authority from anywhere.

“The Nigerian Constitution does not have extraterritorial application. The President of Nigeria cannot exercise presidential powers from anywhere.

“To put it in perspective, two examples will suffice: First, President Buhari cannot exercise his authority under Section 58 (1) of the Constitution to assent to Bills passed by the National Assembly in the United Kingdom.

He also cannot exercise his authority under Section 148 (2) of the Constitution to preside over the regular (weekly) Federal Executive Council meeting from the United Kingdom, or anywhere outside the territory of the Federal Republic of Nigeria”.

In the same vein, a law teacher, Dr. Jonas Ekpo submitted that it was wrong for the Chief of Staff to have embarked on an illegal trip with tax payers’ money.

“It is illegal by all know laws and reasoning for a President to sign a bill outside the country. It therefore follows that the Chief of Staff to the President is wrong to have taken the bill to UK, using tax payers’ money.

“There is no amount of explanation that can justify that act, as something cannot be built on nothing.” (New Telegraph)

Update news