Protocol, Power and the Constitution: Why Boundaries Matter in a Federal Republic – Lanre Ogundipe

“ There is no greater tyranny than that which is perpetrated under the shield of law and in the name of justice.” – Montesquieu

The incident in Ile-Ife involving the First Lady of the Federal Republic Senator (Mrs) Oluremi Tinubu and the Governor of Osun State, Senator Ademola Adeleke, has exposed a fault line in Nigeria’s democratic culture: the uneasy tension between symbolic proximity to power and constitutionally vested authority. The concern raised by this moment is not cosmetic. It is constitutional.

Constitutional Authority Versus Ceremonial Visibility

Under the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended), executive powers of a state are vested in a governor by virtue of Section 176(2) and Section 5(2). These provisions establish the governor as the chief executive authority of the state, deriving legitimacy directly from the electorate.

Equally important is Section 14(2)(a), which affirms that sovereignty belongs to the people from whom government derives its authority. Governors therefore exercise delegated popular sovereignty, not derivative privilege.

By contrast, the office of the First Lady is not created, recognised, or regulated by the Constitution. This is not to diminish the social relevance of the position, but to underscore a legal reality: there is no constitutional chain of command between the spouse of the President and any elected public office holder.

This distinction is pivotal in any serious discussion of protocol. Protocol as a Constitutional Culture

Protocol is not an ornament of governance. It flows from the principle of separation of powers enshrined in Sections 4, 5, and 6 of the Constitution. While these sections deal with legislative, executive and judicial powers, the spirit behind them is instructive: power must be structured, limited, and accountable.

Publicly directing how an elected governor should behave, by a person who holds no constitutional executive authority, risks creating the appearance of an informal, extra-constitutional hierarchy.

Such appearances matter in law as much as in politics. Constitutional democracies survive not only by what is legal, but by what becomes normalised.

The Limits of Influence

There is no statutory prohibition preventing the First Lady from making public remarks. However, constitutional theory draws a sharp distinction between influence and authority.

Authority arises from:

Electoral mandate

Constitutional conferment

Statutory delegation

Influence arises from:

Proximity

Visibility

Social capital

When influence begins to mimic authority in public settings, constitutional discipline is tested.

The Governor and the Burden of Office

This discourse must also fairly interrogate the conduct of elected officials themselves. Public office attracts not only legal responsibility but constitutional expectation.

While the Constitution does not prescribe personal demeanour, the weight of office creates implied obligations of dignity, restraint, and symbolic seriousness. Those who bear constitutional power must embody it.

That said, correction of perceived lapses should flow through institutional mechanisms, not public rebuke by non-constitutional actors.

Federalism and Institutional Autonomy

Nigeria operates a federal system in which state governments are not administrative appendages of the federal centre. This principle is protected by Section 4(6) and judicially affirmed through multiple Supreme Court decisions on federal autonomy.

Any act, symbolic or otherwise, that suggests subordination of a governor to an unelected federal personality — even indirectly — contradicts the spirit of Nigerian federalism.

Conclusion: Law, Not Proximity, Must Remain Supreme

This moment in Ile-Ife should be read not as a scandal, but as a constitutional warning.

Democracy is weakened when :

Influence impersonates authority

Etiquette overrides structure

Proximity competes with mandate

ADVERTISEMENT

Nigeria’s Constitution does not recognise spouses of office holders as centres of power. It recognises the people, the law, and the offices created by the law.

Respect must return to that order.

For in a republic governed by law, no one borrows authority by association — authority is earned by election and defined by the Constitution.

Lanre Ogundipe
Public Affairs Analyst;
Former President Nigeria and African Union of Journalists
December 9, 2025