By Rt. Hon. Remmy Hazzan, PhD, FNIVS, RSV
By all accounts, the buzz about Lagos State Governor Babajide Sanwo-Olu potentially resigning is just that; a buzz. There hasn’t been a single official word from the Governor, the Lagos State Government, or any relevant authority indicating that he plans to step down before his term is up. So, any talk around this topic should be handled with care and a commitment to honesty.
However, in the world of politics, silence can be deafening. When rumours of this scale start circulating, constitutional experts dive into the legal implications, while political analysts try to unravel the strategic motives behind the unfolding drama. It’s at this crossroads of constitutional law and political maneuvering that things get really intriguing.
If Governor Sanwo-Olu were to resign for any reason, the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended), is crystal clear. Section 191(1) states that if the Governor’s position becomes vacant due to resignation, death, impeachment, or permanent incapacity, the Deputy Governor steps right in as the new Governor.
There’s no need for a new election, and the Constitution doesn’t provide for an acting Governor in these situations. The Deputy Governor simply takes over. In this scenario, that would mean Dr. Obafemi Hamzat would step up as the new Governor of Lagos State, finishing out the remainder of Governor Sanwo-Olu’s term.
Typically, a succession like this would seem pretty straightforward. The Fourth Alteration to the Constitution brought about a major change that has reshaped the legal framework. Section 182(3) clearly states: “A person who was sworn in to complete the term for which another person was elected as Governor shall not be elected to such office for more than a single term.”
This amendment was put in place to avoid a scenario where someone could hold the Governor’s office for an extended period, sidestepping the intended two-term limit simply because they stepped in through succession.
The implications of this are significant. As soon as Dr. Hamzat takes the Oath of Office to finish Governor Sanwo-Olu’s term, Section 182(3) kicks in. Legally, he would be able to run for the 2027 governorship election. However, if he wins, that four-year term would be his only elected term as Governor, and he wouldn’t be able to seek another term afterward.
This legal outcome isn’t just a matter of political debate; it’s a direct result of the Constitution. This constitutional fact has sparked a wave of political speculation. If Dr. Hamzat’s governorship is limited to the remainder of the current administration plus just one elected term, the political scene in Lagos after that is bound to attract a lot of attention.
This is where political analysis starts, and constitutional clarity ends. One name that often comes up in these discussions is Seyi Tinubu, the son of Nigeria’s President. Some analysts suggest that a shortened term for Hamzat could open the door for another candidate to step forward sooner. Others, however, believe that such speculation is jumping the gun, considering how unpredictable Nigerian politics can be.
It is important to state, however, that there is presently no official declaration by Seyi Tinubu expressing an intention to contest the governorship of Lagos State. Neither has any political party formally adopted or endorsed such a succession plan.
Any assertion that the alleged resignation is designed to pave the way for his future ambition remains speculative and unsupported by verifiable evidence.
History teaches us that politics is rarely accidental. Decisions are often made with one eye on the present and another on the future. Nevertheless, history also teaches that carefully crafted political calculations do not always produce the anticipated outcomes. Unexpected events, internal party dynamics, judicial interventions, shifting alliances, and ultimately the electorate have repeatedly altered even the most sophisticated political strategies.
What therefore emerges is a distinction that every serious observer must maintain. The constitutional consequences of a gubernatorial resignation are certain; the political motivations behind such a resignation, if it ever occurs, are not. One belongs to the realm of law, the other to the realm of political conjecture.
If the rumour ultimately proves unfounded, the discussion will remain an interesting constitutional exercise. If, however, it materialises, Lagos State may witness one of the most
consequential constitutional transitions in its recent political history, with implications extending well beyond the completion of the present administration.
Until then, caution is imperative. Constitutional provisions should guide our legal conclusions, while political analysis should remain firmly anchored in facts rather than assumptions. In a democracy governed by the rule of law, rumours may stimulate debate, but only official actions can alter constitutional realities.
Indeed, the political chessboard of Lagos State continues to attract national attention. Whether the current speculation represents an ordinary rumour, a carefully calculated political strategy, or simply another chapter in Nigeria’s vibrant democratic discourse is something that only time and perhaps history, will conclusively reveal.
FOLLOW US
