A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF THE SECTION 144 OF THE 1999 CONSTITUTION: MUSA YAR’ADUA AS A CASE STUDY

A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF THE SECTION 144 OF THE 1999 CONSTITUTION: MUSA YAR’ADUA AS A CASE STUDY

GENERAL INTRODUCTION

This thesis is a study of the provisions of section 144 of the constitution of Nigeria,1 especially in relation to the events that occurred during the period of President Yar’Adua’s illness. President Yar’Adua became the president of Nigeria in 2007. Before then, he was governor; he was the governor of Katsina State. He emerged president in the 2007 elections. While he was governor, he usually took trips outside the country due to his health. After he became president, the trips continued. During the protracted period of illness in 2009, it was revealed that the president had a condition known as pericarditis. This is the inflammation of the pericardium, the membrane, or sac

that surrounds the heart.2 Acute pericarditis is usually the result of a viral, fungal, or bacterial infection, although other diseases, such as chronic kidney failure, also may be the cause. The president spent over 90 days in a Saudi hospital, battling for his life.3 Meanwhile, back at home, there was neither a president, nor an acting president, which as in this case, the constitution calls for in the case of the absence of the president. It got to a point that the health of the president became a shrouded issue and in spite of several outcries and questions thrown at the National Assembly and the Federal Executive Council, it appeared that there was no answer from anyone. Worst of all, the right people who were in the right position to answer questions pertaining to the condition of the president’s health started to play the mute servants. This threw the nation into a period of political castigations and accusation. Even the international radar was on Nigeria with calls from notable

countries like the United States and Britain calling for a decisive action to be taken by Nigeria in order to salvage the democracy of the nation. It is noteworthy to state here that the phrase ‘permanent incapacity’ is not defined as it is in any dictionary or textbook that this writer came across during this thesis. However, defined separately, the English Thesaurus4 says that while ‘permanent’ means abiding, constant, enduring, and incapacity means disability, inability, incapability, unfitness. The combination of these words can mean especially in this context, ‘abiding disability, constant inability, enduring unfitness.’ These definitions captures perfectly the condition of the president which was a valid ground for the Federal Executive Council to pass the resolution declaring the president incapable as provided by section 144 of the constitution.

TOPIC: A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF THE SECTION 144 OF THE 1999 CONSTITUTION: MUSA YAR’ADUA AS A CASE STUDY

Chapters: 1 - 5
Delivery: Email

Number of Pages: 85

Price: 3000 NGN

In Stock

Buy the Complete Material Now