Prolonged Absence: AAC Sues Tinubu Over Failure to Hand Over Power

The African Action Congress, AAC, has filed a suit at the Federal High Court in Abuja against President Bola Tinubu over his alleged failure to transfer presidential powers to Vice-President Kashim Shettima during his prolonged stay in Europe.

The case, filed on Monday, September 28, 2026, was brought through an originating summons by the party’s National Legal Adviser, Inibehe Effiong. The suit is marked FHC/ABJ/CS/2353/2026.

Other defendants in the case are the Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Lateef Fagbemi; Senate President Godswill Akpabio; Speaker of the House of Representatives, Tajudeen Abbas; and the National Assembly.

Tinubu travelled out of Nigeria on August 30 for what was initially announced as a three-week working vacation in Europe. His stay was later extended after the Presidency announced on September 21 that his return would be delayed by a few more days. As of Monday, September 28, the President had not returned to the country.

In its case, the AAC is asking the court to determine whether Tinubu was required to send a written declaration to the Senate President and the Speaker of the House of Representatives before proceeding on the extended vacation.

The party argued that such a declaration would allow the National Assembly to pass a resolution authorising Shettima to perform the functions of President in an acting capacity. The AAC is asking the court to declare that the alleged failure to make the declaration amounts to a breach of Section 145(1) of the 1999 Constitution.

The party is also challenging the National Assembly’s alleged failure to pass a resolution allowing Shettima to act as President after Tinubu’s absence went beyond 21 days. It wants the court to determine whether that failure is contrary to the Constitution.

The AAC further asked the court to issue a permanent order preventing Tinubu and future presidents from going on vacation without complying with the provisions of Section 145 of the Constitution.

The party’s case places before the court questions about the constitutional procedure for transferring presidential duties when the President is away from the country for an extended period.

The court has yet to fix a date for hearing the suit.