AAC sues Tinubu over alleged failure to transfer presidential powers to Shettima during his European vacation. The case is now before the Federal High Court.
AAC takes Tinubu, National Assembly to court
The African Action Congress (AAC) has sued President Bola Tinubu over his European vacation. The party filed the suit at the Federal High Court in Abuja, challenging what it described as Tinubu’s failure to formally transfer presidential powers to Vice-President Kashim Shettima.
AAC filed the case through its National Legal Adviser, Inibehe Effiong. The suit names Tinubu, Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice Lateef Fagbemi, Senate President Godswill Akpabio, House Speaker Tajudeen Abbas and the National Assembly as defendants.
The suit carries number FHC/ABJ/CS/2353/2026, although some reports identify it as FHC/ABJ/CS/2358/2026.
Party questions Tinubu’s vacation
AAC wants the court to determine whether Tinubu could leave Nigeria without sending a written declaration to the Senate President and House Speaker.
The party relies on Section 145(1) of the 1999 Constitution. It alleges that Tinubu left Nigeria for Europe on August 30, 2026, and stayed away until September 28 without transmitting the required declaration.
AAC also argues that the National Assembly failed to act after Tinubu’s absence exceeded 21 days. It wants the court to determine whether lawmakers should have passed a resolution allowing Shettima to perform the president’s functions.
The party is also asking the court to stop Tinubu from taking future vacations without first transmitting the required declaration.
Presidency says Tinubu remained in charge
Tinubu left Nigeria on August 30 for what the Presidency described as a “working vacation.” The Presidency has maintained that the President continued to direct government affairs while abroad.
It also said Tinubu remained in contact with government officials during his trip. However, AAC argues that such communication does not replace the constitutional process for transferring presidential powers.
The dispute therefore centres on how Section 145 applies when a president stays outside Nigeria for an extended period.
Court yet to decide case
The Federal High Court has not yet ruled on AAC’s claims. The party’s allegations therefore remain matters for the court to determine.
The case could clarify whether Tinubu needed to formally transfer power to Shettima during the trip. It could also clarify the National Assembly’s constitutional role when a president remains away for more than 21 days.
For now, the court will decide whether the actions challenged by AAC breached the 1999 Constitution.
