In a significant development that has sparked widespread discussion across Nigeria’s political and legal circles, renowned human rights lawyer and Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Femi Falana, has categorically stated that President Bola Ahmed Tinubu lacks the constitutional authority to send the Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Professor Mahmood Yakubu, on terminal leave. This assertion, made on September 27, 2025, comes amid swirling speculations and reports suggesting that the presidency was contemplating such a move as part of a broader strategy to influence the leadership of the electoral body ahead of future elections. Falana’s intervention has reignited debates about the independence of INEC, the sanctity of Nigeria’s democratic institutions, and the delicate balance of power between the executive and independent agencies.
Background and Context of the Controversy
The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) is Nigeria’s electoral umpire, tasked with the critical responsibility of overseeing elections at all levels of government, from local councils to the presidency. Established under the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended), INEC is designed to operate as an independent body, free from undue interference by any arm of government or political actors. The commission’s chairman, appointed by the president subject to confirmation by the Senate, holds a pivotal role in ensuring that elections are free, fair, and credible.
Professor Mahmood Yakubu, a respected academic and administrator, has served as INEC Chairman since his appointment in 2015 by former President Muhammadu Buhari. His tenure has been marked by significant milestones, including overseeing the 2019 and 2023 general elections, as well as numerous off-cycle governorship and legislative elections. However, his leadership has not been without controversy. Critics have often pointed to logistical challenges, allegations of electoral malpractices, and delays in result transmission during elections as areas where INEC, under Yakubu’s watch, has fallen short of public expectations. Supporters, on the other hand, argue that Yakubu has navigated the complex and often volatile terrain of Nigerian politics with commendable diligence, introducing technological innovations like the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System (BVAS) to enhance electoral integrity.
Recent reports, particularly in the lead-up to Falana’s statement, suggested that President Tinubu was considering placing Professor Yakubu on terminal leave, a move perceived by many as a precursor to his removal from office. Terminal leave, in the context of public service, typically refers to a period of leave granted to an official before the formal end of their tenure, often used as a subtle mechanism to ease them out of office. Such a move, if executed, would have far-reaching implications for Nigeria’s democratic process, especially given the proximity to the 2027 general elections. It is against this backdrop that Femi Falana, a legal luminary known for his fierce advocacy for the rule of law, weighed in on the matter.
Falana’s Legal Position
In a detailed statement issued on September 27, 2025, Falana argued that any attempt by President Tinubu to place Professor Yakubu on terminal leave would be unconstitutional and a direct affront to the principles of separation of powers and institutional independence. Citing relevant provisions of the Nigerian Constitution, Falana emphasized that the INEC Chairman’s appointment and removal are governed by strict legal frameworks designed to insulate the commission from political manipulation.
Section 157 of the 1999 Constitution outlines the process for the removal of the INEC Chairman. It stipulates that the president can only remove the chairman with the support of a two-thirds majority of the Senate, and such removal must be based on specific grounds, such as misconduct, incapacity, or other serious breaches of duty. Falana pointed out that terminal leave is not a recognized mechanism for removing an INEC Chairman, as it bypasses the constitutional requirement for Senate approval. He described the rumored move as an “executive overreach” that could undermine the credibility of INEC and erode public trust in Nigeria’s democratic institutions.
Falana further referenced Section 154(3) of the Constitution, which guarantees the independence of INEC by stating that the commission shall not be subject to the direction or control of any authority or person in the performance of its functions. By attempting to sideline the INEC Chairman through terminal leave, Falana argued, the presidency would be violating this constitutional safeguard, effectively exerting undue influence over an institution meant to operate autonomously.
Political Implications of the Controversy
The speculation surrounding Professor Yakubu’s tenure comes at a time of heightened political tension in Nigeria. President Tinubu, who assumed office on May 29, 2023, following a contentious election, has faced significant scrutiny over his administration’s handling of democratic institutions. Critics have accused the government of attempting to consolidate power by influencing key agencies, including the judiciary, the Central Bank of Nigeria, and now, potentially, INEC. The suggestion of placing Yakubu on terminal leave has fueled fears that the administration may be seeking to install a more pliable figure as INEC Chairman to secure an advantage in future elections.
The 2023 general elections, which Tinubu won under the platform of the All Progressives Congress (APC), were marred by controversies, including allegations of voter suppression, irregularities in result collation, and technical glitches with INEC’s result transmission system. Opposition parties, notably the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and the Labour Party (LP), challenged the outcome in court, though the Supreme Court ultimately upheld Tinubu’s victory. The lingering dissatisfaction from that election has kept INEC under intense scrutiny, with many Nigerians calling for reforms to strengthen the electoral process.
Falana’s intervention has added a new dimension to this discourse. As a respected voice in Nigeria’s legal and civil society space, his comments carry significant weight and are likely to galvanize public opinion against any perceived interference with INEC’s independence. Civil society organizations, political analysts, and opposition figures have echoed Falana’s sentiments, warning that any attempt to remove Yakubu outside the constitutional framework could trigger a crisis of confidence in Nigeria’s democracy.
Historical Precedents and Comparative Analysis
The current controversy is not the first time questions have been raised about the independence of Nigeria’s electoral body. Historically, INEC has faced accusations of being susceptible to political pressures, particularly under military and civilian administrations that sought to manipulate electoral outcomes. For instance, during the military regime of General Sani Abacha in the 1990s, the electoral commission was widely seen as a tool of the junta, used to legitimize flawed processes. In more recent times, the tenure of Professor Attahiru Jega, Yakubu’s predecessor, was marked by significant reforms, but also by allegations of external influence in certain elections.
Falana’s argument draws on these historical lessons, emphasizing that the independence of INEC is not merely a legal principle but a cornerstone of democratic governance. He cited examples from other democracies, such as India and South Africa, where electoral commissions are insulated from executive control through robust legal frameworks. In India, for instance, the Election Commission operates with a high degree of autonomy, and its commissioners can only be removed through a process akin to that of a Supreme Court judge. Similarly, South Africa’s Independent Electoral Commission is protected by constitutional provisions that ensure its impartiality.
By contrast, Nigeria’s experience has been mixed, with successive governments often accused of attempting to exert influence over INEC. Falana’s position is that allowing the president to unilaterally place the INEC Chairman on terminal leave would set a dangerous precedent, effectively giving the executive a backdoor mechanism to control the electoral process. This, he warned, could have ripple effects beyond Nigeria, potentially undermining the country’s standing as a democratic leader in Africa.
Reactions and Public Discourse
Falana’s statement has elicited a range of reactions from stakeholders across Nigeria. Civil society groups, such as the Transition Monitoring Group (TMG) and the Nigeria Civil Society Situation Room, have commended the lawyer for his timely intervention, describing it as a defense of democratic principles. In a joint statement, these groups called on President Tinubu to respect the rule of law and refrain from any actions that could compromise INEC’s independence.
Opposition parties have also seized on the issue to criticize the administration. The PDP, in a press release, accused the APC-led government of attempting to “capture” INEC ahead of the 2027 elections. The party’s national publicity secretary, Debo Ologunagba, argued that the rumored move against Yakubu was part of a broader strategy to weaken democratic institutions and entrench one-party rule. Similarly, the Labour Party called for vigilance among Nigerians, urging citizens to resist any attempts to undermine the electoral process.
On social media platforms like X, Nigerians have expressed mixed sentiments. Some users have praised Falana for his legal clarity, with hashtags like #ProtectINEC and #DemocracyUnderThreat trending in the wake of his statement. Others, however, have questioned whether Yakubu’s leadership of INEC has been effective enough to warrant such defense, pointing to the challenges of the 2023 elections as evidence of the need for new leadership.
The presidency, for its part, has remained silent on the matter, neither confirming nor denying the rumors about Yakubu’s terminal leave. This silence has only fueled speculation, with analysts suggesting that the administration may be weighing its options in light of Falana’s public challenge.
Broader Implications for Nigeria’s Democracy
The controversy surrounding Professor Yakubu’s tenure raises fundamental questions about the state of Nigeria’s democracy and the resilience of its institutions. At its core, the issue underscores the tension between political power and institutional autonomy, a recurring theme in Nigeria’s post-independence history. The independence of INEC is particularly crucial given Nigeria’s diverse and often polarized political landscape, where elections are high-stakes contests that can determine the distribution of power and resources.
Falana’s intervention serves as a reminder that democracy thrives on checks and balances, and that no single arm of government should have unchecked authority over institutions like INEC. His argument also highlights the importance of public vigilance in safeguarding democratic norms. As Nigeria approaches the 2027 elections, the actions of the Tinubu administration in the coming months will be closely watched, both domestically and internationally, for signs of commitment to democratic principles.
Moreover, the debate over Yakubu’s tenure touches on broader issues of electoral reform. Many Nigerians have called for a comprehensive overhaul of the electoral system, including the adoption of full electronic voting, stronger legal protections for INEC’s independence, and greater transparency in the appointment of electoral officials. Falana himself has been a vocal advocate for such reforms, arguing that Nigeria’s democracy cannot afford to remain stagnant in the face of evolving global standards.
Conclusion
Femi Falana’s assertion that President Tinubu lacks the power to send INEC Chairman Professor Mahmood Yakubu on terminal leave has brought to the fore critical issues about the independence of Nigeria’s electoral body and the sanctity of its democratic institutions. By grounding his argument in the provisions of the 1999 Constitution, Falana has not only challenged the rumored move by the presidency but also sparked a broader conversation about the rule of law, separation of powers, and the future of Nigeria’s democracy.
As the nation grapples with these questions, the role of civil society, the media, and the judiciary in holding the government accountable cannot be overstated. The outcome of this controversy will likely have far-reaching implications for Nigeria’s political landscape, particularly as the country prepares for the next round of elections. For now, Falana’s voice serves as a clarion call for vigilance, reminding Nigerians that the defense of democracy requires constant effort and unwavering commitment to constitutional principles.
