The recent situation where both President Bola Tinubu and Vice President, Kashim Shettima were out of the country at the same time highlights an unsettling gap in leadership coordination.
President Tinubu left for the United Kingdom and later France for a holiday, while Vice President Shettima departed for Sweden on an official visit. Although such trips may have their own merit — diplomatic and personal — having both top leaders absent from the country at once creates a governance void that should not be taken lightly.
In many countries, including those with strong institutional frameworks like the United States, it is a general practice that either the President or Vice President remains within the country at all times. This ensures that if a crisis were to arise, the executive arm of government would remain functional, with the necessary decision-making power present on home soil. The United States, for instance, is particularly careful about keeping one of its top leaders in the country to safeguard national security and maintain stable governance.
The presidency in Nigeria, however, defended this recent occurrence by referencing previous instances when both leaders were abroad at the same time. But just because it has happened before does not make it right now. If anything, it signals a leadership culture that is too willing to excuse poor planning by relying on past mistakes. Repeating an error is not a justification; it merely highlights an ongoing organizational flaw that should have been addressed long ago. Nigerians deserve better from their leaders, especially given the immense responsibility of governing a nation of over 200 million people.
This issue is not just an administrative oversight — it’s a sag in leadership organization. It reflects poor planning and a disregard for the duties owed to the Nigerian people. Governance is not a personal estate that can be run on autopilot while those in power are away. It requires active presence, vigilance, and a commitment to handling issues as they arise. By having both the President and Vice President out of the country at the same time, the nation is left vulnerable. It’s legitimate to ask: Who exactly was in charge during their absence? Who was running the day-to-day affairs of the country while the top two leaders were, in essence, disengaged? These are critical questions because the absence of clear leadership could lead to confusion or mishandling of situations that require immediate attention.
In the future, the Presidency must ensure that such lapses do not occur again. Either the President or Vice President should always remain in the country when the other is traveling, whether for official duties or personal reasons. It’s essential that Nigerians feel secure knowing that their leaders are accessible, present, and capable of responding to emergencies at any given moment. This is not simply a matter of public perception; it is a core element of effective governance.
While international trips — whether for holidays or official purposes — are important for personal well-being and national diplomacy, they must be balanced with the need for continuity in leadership at home. Nigerians deserve leaders who treat their positions with the seriousness and respect it requires, not with the casual attitude that seems to have marked these recent events.
The Presidency should stop treating Nigeria as though it were a personal homestead. It is a nation, with real challenges and real people relying on strong, present leadership. Future actions must reflect a deeper understanding of this responsibility. In the end, the strength of a government is not only in its ability to engage abroad but also in its consistent, reliable presence at home.
