The African Action Congress has instituted an action before the Federal High Court in Abuja challenging President Bola Tinubu’s alleged failure to transmit a written declaration to the National Assembly before proceeding on an extended vacation outside Nigeria.
The suit, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/2353/2026, was filed by the party’s National Legal Adviser, Inibehe Effiong, on behalf of the AAC. TheCable
The defendants include President Tinubu, Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice Lateef Fagbemi, SAN; Senate President Godswill Akpabio; Speaker of the House of Representatives Tajudeen Abbas; and the National Assembly. The Guardian Nigeria
The case centres on Section 145 of the 1999 Constitution, which regulates the temporary transfer of presidential functions to the Vice President.
The AAC is asking the court to determine whether the President can proceed on vacation without transmitting the required written declaration to the Senate President and Speaker of the House of Representatives.
It also seeks a determination on the constitutional consequences where such a declaration is not transmitted and the President remains away for the period contemplated by the Constitution.
According to the affidavit supporting the action, President Tinubu travelled out of Nigeria on August 30, 2026, for a working vacation in Europe.
The Presidency later announced that the vacation had been extended.
The AAC contends that no written declaration transferring functions to Vice President Kashim Shettima was transmitted to the National Assembly before or during the period complained of. That remains the party’s allegation before the court.
What AAC wants from the court
The party is seeking declarations that the alleged failure to transmit the written declaration was unconstitutional and contrary to Section 145.
It also wants the court to determine whether the National Assembly should have convened and passed a resolution empowering the Vice President to perform presidential functions after the period specified under Section 145.
AAC further seeks a perpetual injunction restraining President Tinubu and future presidents from proceeding on vacation without complying with the constitutional procedure it says Section 145 requires.
No hearing date had been fixed as of the latest available reports. The Guardian Nigeria
Presidency says government continued to function
The Presidency has rejected suggestions that President Tinubu’s physical absence prevented him from performing his duties.
Special Adviser on Information and Strategy, Bayo Onanuga, said the President remained engaged with government business during what the Presidency described as a working vacation and continued to issue directives from abroad.
The Presidency’s position is that modern communications allow the President to remain operational without being physically present in Abuja.
That political explanation is distinct from the legal issue now placed before the Federal High Court.
The court is not simply being asked whether government activity continued while Tinubu was abroad. It is being asked to interpret the formal constitutional mechanism prescribed by Section 145 for temporary transfer of presidential functions.
The case could therefore provide judicial clarification on whether physical absence on vacation necessarily triggers the transmission requirement, how the constitutional period should be calculated and what role the National Assembly is expected to play where the President does not voluntarily transmit the declaration.
For now, AAC’s claims remain allegations requiring judicial determination, and no court has held that President Tinubu or the National Assembly violated Section 145 in relation to the vacation at issue.
Related Stories
READ MORE: Supreme Court Restores Electoral Act Rules on Primaries
READ MORE: Cybercrimes Act Under Fresh Scrutiny Over Arrests, Journalism and Free Speech
