NIGERIA was in a lather last week over President Muhammadu Buhari’s medical vacation letter to the National Assembly. The letter dated May 7, 2017 was to notify the lawmakers of the president’s trip to consult with his doctors in the United Kingdom once again. Unlike before, this time the letter contained words that a few lawmakers, particularly Senator Mao Ohuabunwa (PDP, Abia North), felt were inappropriate. The observation was probably caused by the fact that in previous letters to the National Assembly, the president, quoting Section 145 of the 1999 constitution, indicated that the vice president would ‘perform the functions of my office’. This time, however, the May 7 letter indicated that the vice president would ‘co-ordinate the activities of the government’.
Senate President Bukola Saraki disallowed the semantic storm from overwhelming the proceedings of the day. The import of the letter was understood, he said, and since the letter cited the relevant provision of the constitution, there was no ambiguity at all. Neither Speaker Yakubu Dogara nor any member of the House of Representatives gave the matter any serious or speculative notice. The proper thing had been done, they apparently concluded. In a few minutes, both the senate and the lower chamber had been done with the matter, and had moved to other more pressing matters. But in the larger society, the storm brewed and legal experts met minds over the deeper and probably hidden import of the letter.
The lawmakers were right to have smartly and quickly dispelled that mild semantic confusion before it became turgid. The mood of the country, particularly the polarisation of the polity along generally North–South divide, could be soured by an extended and ill-tempered consideration of the ordinary and hidden meanings of the president’s letter. If on previous occasions the president wrote of the vice president performing the functions of his office, many were left wondering why the president would this time around want the vice president to co-ordinate the activities, not of his office, but of the government. The January 17 and May 7 letters are of course different, and the intentions behind them probably also different. There is no amount of semantic bullying that would convince the observant that the two are the same, or that since the constitution is clear on the matter, it does not matter what the president wrote.
A few commentators have blamed presidential aides who drafted the letter for the needless confusion. They assumed that the writer(s) were probably trying to avoid being monotonous, or that the meaning and significance of a part of the May 7 letter were lost on them. But the fear of those who felt uncomfortable with the letter is that the sentences could in fact have been deliberately crafted, even if the futuristic purpose to which its drafters intended to put it might not altogether be clear. Sadly, it is customary of Nigerians to paper over the cracks. So, rather than calmly and good-naturedly discuss the disharmony noticed in the letter, some commentators and angry Buharistas described the word usage in the letter as nothing but a storm in a teacup. This dismissive characterisation of the letter, they hoped, would put the matter to rest and help the country avoid a needless crisis.
The value of Senator Ohuabunwa’s observation is that if there is a next time, the presidency, or any other level of government making a recourse to the same constitutional cover, would write what they mean and mean what they write. The constitution is clear about what Section 145 means, and there should be no ambiguity whatsoever. But it was precisely the president’s May 7 letter that needlessly introduced elements of confusion. The problem is not the constitution, nor observers like Senator Ohuabunwa who felt disquieted by the president’s letter. There is virtue in making presidential communications simple, writing it simply, keeping it uncomplicated even if it becomes repetitive. Now, whether the president likes it or not, or whether he means a different thing from the sceptics’ interpretation or not, some Nigerians will read hidden meaning to the letter.
In Sections 147 and 148 of the constitution, which deal with the appointment of ministers and the business of government, the word co-ordination indeed crops up. In Section 148 (2)(b), the constitution provides that: “The president shall hold regular meetings with the vice president and all the ministers of the government of the federation for the purposes of — co-ordinating the activities of the president, the vice president and the ministers of the government of the federation in the discharge of their executive responsibilities…” So, co-ordination has its own constitutional significance elsewhere. The country may be bigger than any group of people or vested interest, as some have argued in order to calm frayed nerves, but it helps considerably when supposedly enlightened presidential aides communicate with the precision and altruism required of their positions. If they embrace opacity, they must not blame those who denounce their shortcomings or read meaning into their intricate phrases.
In many circles, the unspoken conviction is that complex politicking is afoot in the presidency, politicking that has become a tangled skein due to the president’s illness and inability to function optimally. Unable to attend both regular and irregular meetings, not many are convinced that decisions taken by him meet the standard constitutional requirement of presidential independence and sound judgement. And fearing that Nigerians were becoming inquisitive and nervous, presidential aides have started to fret, get defensive, and in some instances become unduly and even irrationally indignant. They have probably begun to feel the burden of heading off any campaign to get the president declared incapacitated.
However, Section 144 of the constitution makes it extremely tough to declare the president incapacitated. Given the mood of the country at the moment and the president’s popularity, not to say the cabinet that often speaks inaudibly and can’t call its soul its own, it is hard to see the executive council making a declaration indicating that the president can’t discharge the functions of his office. That declaration, should it be made, is expected to trigger the composition of a verifying medical panel. The country is, however, a long way from that process, notwithstanding the alarming signals the president’s illness gives.
Indeed, apart from suggesting that the president’s May 7 letter was designed to obfuscate the matter of his medical condition and also take attention away from possible machinations underway in the presidency consequent upon the president’s unending fatigue, it is unlikely that presidential aides who have gone to elaborate lengths to throw red herrings along the way would be eager to disclose the president’s ailment. They will not; and they will encourage the president not to reveal details of his condition in order not to give fillip to those who might wish to ‘play politics’ with his health. The constitution does not make it mandatory for him to shed light on his condition, so no one will take on that thankless job, and there will be no updates from anywhere on the matter. In fact, worse, should matters deteriorate, a resignation, such as some have prematurely called for, will not be likely.
The position is, therefore, clear. There will be no apologies about the use of words in the president’s May 7 letter, though it misled many and triggered a needless controversy. There will be no updates on the president’s health, regardless of the severity of his decline, should it come to that. Nothing radical or fundamentally new will come from Acting President Yemi Osinbajo, for it is the custom in such matters for someone occupying his position to tread gingerly. Some machinations will still continue in the presidency, for the president himself had cleverly structured the place in such a way as to constrict a caucus outsider. And despite the presidency’s shortcomings, everyone will hope for the sake of peace and stability that the president’s health hold up till 2019.
If in times like these it is judged inappropriate for the president’s opponents to speak harshly of him and his health, it seems even more indefensible for his supporters to speak of his re-election chances in some two years to come. President Buhari’s health is far from robust. To suggest in any way that he and his supporters should begin to entertain the possibility of his return in 2019 is not only insensitive, it is misplaced enthusiasm. There are unplanned, on the spur of the moment situations when a leader would sacrifice his life, position or office for his country in order to advance a cause or emplace an ideology. At such moments, nothing else would matter to the leader, not his comfort, not his health, not anything. President Buhari’s supporters and the successes he has achieved so far convince them he is that kind of man. Perhaps he is. But neither his May 7 letter, nor his appointments, nor even the structure of his presidency, nor yet his sometimes astonishing views, give sceptics the hope that he is or can yet be that man.
The post Storm in Buhari’s semantic teacup appeared first on The Nation Nigeria.