Why President can adjust existing laws — Pinheiro, SAN

2026-02-24 - 17:26

By Henry Ojelu A Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Kemi Pinheiro, has said that the President possesses constitutional powers to modify existing laws where necessary to bring them into conformity with the provisions of the Constitution. Pinheiro, in a statement on Tuesday, explained that Section 315 of the 1999 Constitution provides transitional powers enabling the President, described as the “appropriate authority,” to make adjustments to laws inherited at the commencement of the Constitution. According to the senior lawyer, the provision of the Constitution, often referred to as the Grundnorm, allows the President to make modifications where required. “I believe one could also argue thus: that pursuant to the provisions of the GrundNorm, particularly Section 315 and its skillfully drafted provisos, the President can in fact make amendments to the law—dare I say—as he sees fit,” he stated. He cited the relevant constitutional provisions, noting that Section 315 stipulates that existing laws shall continue to have effect with such modifications as may be necessary to align them with constitutional provisions. Pinheiro reproduced portions of the section, which state that an existing law shall be deemed an Act of the National Assembly to the extent that it relates to matters on which the National Assembly is empowered to legislate. He also pointed to subsection (2), which provides that the appropriate authority may at any time make such modifications in the text of any existing law as considered necessary or expedient to bring it into conformity with the Constitution. The senior advocate further noted that subsection (4) of the same section defines the “appropriate authority” as the President in relation to any law of the Federation. Despite highlighting the modification powers, Pinheiro clarified that executive orders do not override Acts of the National Assembly under the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended). He explained that an executive order is a binding directive issued by the President or a state governor, usually directed at the executive arm of government and its Ministries, Departments and Agencies to implement policies or enforce existing laws. According to him, although executive orders are not expressly provided for in the Constitution, they often carry the force of law and are used to enhance administrative efficiency. Pinheiro, however, stressed that such orders cannot supersede legislation enacted by the National Assembly. He noted that an Act of the National Assembly is a law duly passed by both chambers of the legislature and assented to by the President, adding that the Constitution vests law-making powers in the National Assembly under Section 4. “This, therefore, means that an executive order, which is not even a law, cannot outplay an Act of the Parliament,” he said. The senior lawyer also anchored his position on the supremacy of the Constitution, citing Section 1(3), which provides that any law inconsistent with the Constitution shall be declared null and void to the extent of its inconsistency. He added that even where an Act of the National Assembly conflicts with constitutional provisions, such law could be invalidated by the courts, referencing past judicial pronouncements on provisions of the Petroleum Act. Pinheiro’s intervention comes amid the controversy trailing the executive directive issued by President Bola Tinubu halting revenue deductions by the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited and other agencies. The directive has sparked opposition from the Petroleum and Natural Gas Senior Staff Association of Nigeria, which accused the President of breaching provisions of the Petroleum Industry Act through the revenue retention order. However, defending the presidential action, the Special Adviser to the President on Information and Strategy, Bayo Onanuga, argued that critics were misinterpreting the hierarchy of laws under the Constitution. He maintained that the President’s directive was anchored on the Constitution, which he said takes precedence over any other law, including the Petroleum Industry Act. According to him, those opposing the move were focusing solely on the PIA without considering the supremacy of the Constitution, stressing that no law enacted by the National Assembly can override the provisions of the Constitution.