Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) Adamson Adeboro has clarified the constitutional implications of Professor Pat Utomi’s decision to form a “shadow government,” stressing that while criticism of government is permissible, naming a parallel cabinet violates Nigeria’s constitutional framework.
Speaking in an interview with ARISE NEWS on Monday, Adeboro explained that the Nigerian Constitution recognises only the presidential system of government, leaving no room for parliamentary-style arrangements such as a shadow cabinet.
“The provisions of the Nigerian Constitution are very clear. It does not expressly prohibit it, but what it provides for is a presidential system of government and not a parliamentary system of government. Hence, what is not included is excluded,” Adeboro said.
When asked if the issue was merely the name “shadow government,” Adeboro argued that both the label and the act were problematic. “He has the right to criticise the government, but saying you are forming a shadow government is crossing the line,” he declared.
He further noted that although Utomi enjoys the constitutional right to criticise government actions, such rights must be exercised within legal boundaries.
“Prof. Pat has the absolute right to criticise the government, but the criticism must be situated within the provisions of the Constitution. If you look at Section 1 of the 1999 Constitution, it says nobody shall govern Nigeria or any part except by the method prescribed by the Constitution. The method prescribed is the presidential system of government,” he stated.
Adeboro argued that by naming individuals to positions in a purported shadow government, Utomi went beyond lawful criticism. He said, “Clearly, you have a right to criticise, to suggest to government, but is it to the extent of naming individuals to man positions in the shadow government? To say you are forming a shadow government is clearly against the law.”
On what lies ahead for Professor Utomi, Adeboro said the case remains open to further legal challenge. “He can appeal since it was in the High Court that the decision was made,” he concluded.
Nancy Amaka
Follow us on:
