535
By Lizzy Chirkpi
Former Vice President Atiku Abubakar has raised serious constitutional concerns over the gazetted version of the Tinubu Tax Act, following the Senate’s confirmation that the published law does not accurately reflect what was passed by the National Assembly.
In a statement issued on Sunday, Atiku described the situation as a grave breach of Nigeria’s lawmaking process, insisting that any law published in a form and not duly approved by the legislature is invalid. According to him, “a law that was never passed in the form in which it was published is not law. It is a nullity.”
Citing Section 58 of the 1999 Constitution, the former vice president stressed that the procedure for making laws is clear and exclusive, requiring passage by both chambers of the National Assembly, presidential assent, and only then gazetting. He emphasised that gazetting is merely an administrative act and cannot create, amend, or legitimise a defective law.
“Where a gazette misrepresents legislative approval, it has no legal force,” Atiku said, warning that any alterations made to a bill after its passage without legislative consent amount to “forgery, not a clerical error.”
He further argued that no administrative action by the Senate President, Godswill Akpabio, or the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Tajudeen Abbas, can remedy such a defect. According to him, re-gazetting a flawed law without re-passage by the National Assembly and fresh presidential assent would remain unconstitutional.
Atiku criticised what he described as efforts to hastily re-gazette the law while legislative investigation is being stalled, saying such actions undermine parliamentary oversight and set a dangerous precedent. “Illegality cannot be cured by speed,” he said.
He maintained that the only lawful solution is for the bill to undergo fresh legislative consideration, be re-passed in identical form by both chambers, receive fresh presidential assent, and then be properly gazetted.
The former vice president clarified that his position is not an attack on tax reform itself but a defence of constitutional order. “This is not opposition to tax reform. It is a defence of the integrity of the legislative process and a rejection of any attempt to normalise constitutional breaches through procedural shortcuts,” he said.