BETWEEN THE DOCTRINE OF NECESSITY, THE TWENTY-FIFTH AMENDMENT AND PRESIDENT BUHARI’S STATE OF HEALTH

BY: ORIMOLOYE, Ifeoluwa

Although, I am always ashamed to admit this, but I must say that the African continent is in a critical state which is caused by no other enemy other than the continent itself. The moment we say that we are imitating the developed countries, we either dogmatically, extremely or fanatically imitate them, and at times we inadequately or most inappropriately imitate them. That is why, whenever anything is transferred to us in form of an ideology, we follow them dogmatically or fanatically, ignoring our own established and indigenous ideologies which are of benefit, given the kind of society we live in. These ideologies later-on erode our values as a people.

On the other hand, transmitted ideologies that might be beneficial to the society are sacrificed on the altar of politics, loyalty, selfishness and other sentimental realities. This is the case of the political ideologies of the far more advanced United States that we are always striving to imitate.

It is no longer news that the health of the President of Nigeria is in a very parlous state. It is also no longer news that there seems to be a cover-up on the actual state of health of the President. We may dismiss the last statement only as a conspiracy theory only if we can take the Presidential spokespersons at their words. But, by their antecedents and conflict-ridden statements, the spokespersons have given considerable or reasonable reasons why they should not be trusted. Albeit, this is far from the point that I am trying to make here.

The motive behind the twenty-fifth amendment and the doctrine of necessity is of prime focus here. By studying both provisions critically, it will be observed that these provisions became necessary in view of the fact that there is always a need for the Country to be governed efficiently at any given time, without any lapses or deficit arising from one person’s incapacity. That is, I am of the firm believe that the provisions arose from the fact that the whole country must not be thrown into ransom in the likelihood of a ‘key’ citizen’s ill-health.

That is for instance why, in the United States the twenty-fifth amendment was adopted in the Year 1967. The amendment permits the Vice President to assume the position of the President, in the event that the President is incapacitated, dead or removed from office. That is, when the President is unable to discharge his duties. How then does one know that the President is unfit to discharge his duties?

This question can be answered by adopting the following instances as a precedent:
1. President George W. Bush’s transfer of powers to Vice President Dick Cheney at the time when he underwent a colonoscopy. He reclaimed the powers on the recommendation of his physician and after writing a letter to the Congress. This occurred on two occasions: in the year 2002, and 2007 respectively.

2. In the year 1987, Reagan was almost removed from office on the basis of laziness and ineptitude on his part. According to his Biographer, he was placed under “close watch to see if he was losing his mental grip.” The idea was shelved when he was realized to be in perfect command of himself.

Also, in Nigeria, the twenty-fifth amendment became applicable at a critical time in the Nation’s history when President Musa Yar’adua was indisposed. The Senate was then compelled to pass the “doctrine of necessity” which became the country’s own twenty-fifth amendment, paving way for the emergence of the then Acting President Goodluck Jonathan.

The key words here being ‘leadership deficit’ and ‘necessity’. Irrespective of the President’s actual state of health, it would be understood that the country is not currently being governed the way it is supposed to be governed, judging from the way things are. That is, like a chieftain of the APC once said, the President’s actual state of health is taking a toll on the country. The President missed three consecutive FEC meetings as important as these meetings are in determining the direction in which the Country should be steered.

Also, regardless of the President’s actual state of health, it is known to all that the President is only at the recovery stage. Recovery does not portend that the President is fit. This is because recovery itself is a process. Therefore, it is only wise, that the President should give the recovery process a boost by attending to his health and not governance. He must give his health the needed priority.

In solving the riddle associated with the amendments, I would say that as much as the President’s actual state of health is in serious doubt or contention, or as much as there is a widespread apprehension arising from the President’s actual state of health, just as we are witnessing, then there is a need to invoke the Nigerian version of the 25th amendment, in the interest of the Citizens of the Federal Republic of Nigeria and in the interest of the ailing President. The President can then resume his duties when he has fully recovered and is seen to be fit to discharge his duties by all. Until then, it is necessary to invoke the “doctrine of necessity” in order not to plunge this country into a crisis arising from leadership deficit.

we are tired of this zoo, we want out.

ogbeni ife......pele ooo