Going through the 1999 constitution considering the conditions for removal of office of a VP one can not help but see Abacha written all over it.

Section 144 of the 1999 constitution is dedicated to removal of office of both the President and VP.

But scroll down to section 146(3) and we have another separate condition dedicated to the removal of office of the VP:

(3) Where the office of Vice-President becomes vacant:-

(a) by reason of death or resignation, impeachment, permanent incapacity or removal in accordance with section 143 or 144 of this Constitution;

(b) by his assumption of the office of President in accordance with subsection (1) of this section; or

(c) for any other reason,

What is intriguing about Section 146:3 is the subsection "c" highlighted above which states that the VP can be removed by "any other means".

I am very sure Abacha was thinking of his experience with Diya when he added that clause.

What is left to understand here is what constitutes to "any other means"?

Obasanjo tried using this same section to sack Atiku as VP but both the public backlash and stiff Atiku lobby groups within the NASS staunchly opposed Atiku's sack.

Going down to state level we can also use the turbulent 8yrs of Bola Tinubu's tenure where he sacked (not impeached) 3 deputy governors.

Any lawyers in the house should pls help us find out what "any other means" mean.

Go and sack him now.

yemmight:
Go and sack him now.

His sack letter is currently being drafted by Saraki and there is nothing an afonja nematode like you can do about it