By Kunle Oyatomi
Since late Monday morning this week, opposing forces in the Nigeria constitutional crisis began to move decisively. Our president in absentia spoke for the first time, and within 10 hours of his speech, the opposition to his constitutional violations was up in arms in their thousands virtually rejecting Mr. President’s excuse for his disregard of the law of the land.

What hurts so much in the quaint episode of the president’s 86 seconds remark is the underlying contempt for the people’s sentiments and aspirations by doing just the opposite of what Nigerians are demanding of him.

When he left the shores of this country, he didn’t think it was reasonable to tell these Nigerians that he was going for treatment.

Then, when he had been away 50 days and still counting, it was then he thought it worth his while to inform Nigerians that he is “getting better.” And for whatever it is worth, we may also be informed that, “any time my doctors discharge me, I will come back home to Nigeria to continue my work.” A work which he can do at his own discretion or pleasure!!?

But the baloney of it all is that the sick man, who is thousands of kilometres away from Nigeria, could say to his countrymen, (who are suffering both international indignity as a result of his absence, and experiencing increasing instability in governance) that “everything is going on well in accordance with the constitution of the country”, smacks of two dangerous probabilities; it is either that the president has become a prisoner of manipulators in the corridors of power, or the illness is already having a telling effect on his judgment.

One can deduce the later from these words of Mr. Ailing President: “Any time God heals me and I am strong, that is the time, Insha-Allahu, I will go back to Nigeria,  anytime the doctors discharge me.” This is not the kind of statement you expect from a person in full grasp of his constitutional responsibilities, or in command of the provisions of our constitution relevant to the exercise of his powers as President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

From Mr. President’s interview, it doesn’t take too much effort to figure that something has gone wrong fundamentally.
To say it as clearly as possible, the whole episode resembles the work of a  spin-doctor, but because he was sick, the Spin didn’t click.

Another thing to note is that Monsor Liman, the BBC reporter  who was allowed to do a telephone interview with the president, is a Ghanaian.

Certainly, if he were a Nigerian, he would have prioritised other issues; one of which would have been, “Mr. President, since you signed the 2009 supplementary budget, why have you refused to sign a letter to the National Assembly to inform Nigerians that you were out there in Saudi Arabia for health reason, so that your Vice could act in your position until you recover?”

Whatever the president had given as answer to that question, would have accorded greater credibility to the interview. As it is, that interview stands discredited as a plot to take the wind off the sails of the protest march which took place in Abuja less than 10 hours after the broadcast. The difference between both events was clear.

Anybody who cannot grasp from the voice of Mr. President  in that  interview,  that the man may not be fit to continue in office, is in denial of the facts, and is not a friend of this country. The earlier we face reality, the better for us. I wish Mr President well.

And here comes the judgment

A judgment by the Federal High Court in Abuja on Wednesday to the effect that Vice President Jonathan Goodluck  can and should perform all functions of Mr ailing and absentee President until he returns, is a most unfortunate complication added to the on-going manipulation of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

First, the judgment appears so outlandish and confusing — having regard to what has been happening in the country these past 54 days — that one is inclined to raise the following posers:

(1) What evidence was before the judge to the effect that Mr. President has “delegated” all his functions to his Vice?
(2) If there is no such evidence, what was the judge trying to say by asking Jonathan to go ahead and act on behalf of the president, “so far such powers are delegated to him?”

(3) Since when did the law say that powers personal to an individual constitutionally can be exercised without a proper instrument of delegation?

(4) Now that the courts is asking Jonathan to proceed and act without the authorising instrument of delegation (impliedly), isn’t it strange that the court is at the same time trying by some strange act of intellectual summersault to give similar meaning to section 145 of the constitution which was not even pleaded?

To  understand the situation even much better, let us look at the position of jurisprudence regarding this question of delegation:

“Delegation of power is the conferment of power by one person or body on another to act for him… It is the transfer of authority by one person to another person to empower that other person to perform a task on behalf of the donor of the power.

As President, Yar’Adua has not transferred  his powers (in accordance with Section 145 of the Constitution) to Vice President Jonathan. So whatever Jonathan is doing in the present circumstance he is doing so as Vice President. Unless and until powers of the President are transferred to him, there are several functions personal to the President which he must and cannot do.

That is why this judgment is patently flawed. For instance, even under this current judgment, Jonathan as VP cannot declare war!! He can only do so as Acting President, which he is not. There are many other things he cannot do that are constitutionally personal to Mr. President.
This judgment is bound to create more confusion; it could even backfire on the manipulators of the constitution. If anything it is more political, but certainly not constitutional.