When the President Buhari directed the present cabinet to report to him, through his Chief of Staff, Abba Kyari now late, it provoked public commentary from some Nigerians. Some believe rightly or wrongly, that it is an abdication of responsibility.
The President reportedly justified the directive on the ground that it was necessary to speed up the process of decision-making within the administration. Beyond the stated raison d’etre, however,it is worthwhile to interrogate the legal or constitutional status of the office of the Chief of Staff to both the President and State Governors.
During the nineteenth century, United States Presidents had few aides. Thomas Jefferson had one messenger and one secretary, both of whose salaries were paid by the President personally, these roles were usually fulfilled by their relatives, most often their sons or nephews. James K. Polk notably had his wife take the role.
In 1875 during the tenure of President Buchanan the Congress created an official office called the “Private Secretary at the White House” and funded the position. The occupant role combined personal and professional assignments that were highly delicate and required great skill and discretion.
ln1953,President Eisenhower re-designated the position as chief of a staff to the President. The duties of the United States White House Chief of Staff vary greatly from one administration to another and in fact,there is no legal requirement that the president should fill the position. Because of these duties,the chief of staff has at various times been labeled “The Gatekeeper.”
ln the United States, the current official title is Assistant to the President and Chief of Staff. Originally, the duties now performed by the chief of staff belonged to the president’s private secretary. The Chief of Staff generally works behind the scenes to solve problems, mediate disputes and deal with issues before they are brought to the Chief Executive. Often, chiefs of staff act as a confidante and adviser to the chief executive, acting as a sounding board for ideas.
In Nigeria, this office was first introduced with the return of civil rule in 99 under President Obasanjo.It appears to have been borrowed from, if not exactly modelled after, the position of the Chief of Staff to the President of the United States. Unlike the United States, the Nigerian Presidents since 1999 have Permanent Secretary, Private Secretary and Chief of Staff.
The late President Yar’Adua appointed only the Private Secretary and abandoned the office of Chief of Staff. His successor Jonathan appointed. Private Secretary and Chief of Staff who were political and the permanent secretary who was accounting officer and a career civil servant as well, the same pattern President Buhari follow.
Unlike what is obtainable in United States the Office of the Chief of Staff to the President (or a State Governor) is neither specifically recognised nor created by either the Constitution or the Public Service Rules,or an Act of the National Assembly or a law enacted by a State House of Assembly. At least, none that I’m aware of.
To that extent, the validity of those offices depends on whether their occupants can be said to belong to the personal staff of the President or State Governors, as the case may be, within the contemplation of Sections 171(1) (e) and 208(1)(d), respectively, of the Constitution.
It is conceded that the definition of “personal staff” under the Constitution (like every other word or phrase used therein) should be given a broad and liberal interpretation. However, I believe that the remit of the Chief of Staff to the President outlined above belies that view.
This is because, to my mind, those functions are clearly official. However, assuming without conceding, that the CoS belongs to personal staff of the President (or a State Governor), he or she is,at best,in the same category as a Personal Assistant which itself is not recognised under the Constitution: only the offices of Special Advisers to the President and State Governors, are-by virtue of Sections 151 and 196, respectively, of the Constitution.
Is the Chief of Staff to the President (or a State Governor), a Special Adviser to either of them? If he (or she) is not, then that position would be alien to the 1999 Constitution, unless it can fairly be interpreted as merely a means of exercising the executive powers of the Federation (or State), within the contemplation of Section 5 (1)(a) and 5(2)(a), respectively, of the Constitution. These clauses permit the President and State Governors to delegate their powers to, inter alia, officers in the public service of the Federation or of the State, as the case may be. Unfortunately, the definition of such officers in Section 318(1) of the Constitution excludes the Chief of Staff.
I humbly posit that the creation of the office of the Chief of Staff to both the President and State Governors is ultra vires and unconstitutional and for the occupant to be coordinating the activities of Ministers is an abuse of office, b
ecause of enormous power the occupant enjoin,it’s appropriate therefore for the National Assembly to made in my opinion, Sections 148(1) and 193(1) of the Constitution provide a surprisingly handy solution. They provide that the executive powers of the Federation or the States shall be exercised directly by the President/Governors or through the Vice-President/Deputy Governors, Ministers/Commissioners or officers in the public services of the Federation/State, respectively. In other words, the President and State Governors can simply confer the functions of a CoS on the Vice-President/Deputy Governors, a Minister or Commissioner, stating clearly that he or she is responsible for the day-to-day administration of the State House or Government House, as the case may be. We cut but pasted wrongly.
-Olufemi Aduwo is president and permanent representative, Centre for Convention on Democratic Integrity Convention on Democratic Integrity
Email. olufemi.aduwo@ccdiltd.org
