Lawyers yesterday disagreed over the constitutionality or otherwise of President Bola Tinubu’s swift deployment of the nation’s military troop to the Republic of Benin to avert a planned coup.

In his reaction, Dr Joseph Nwobike (SAN) said that: “The President acted swiftly and in the best interest of the region. In matters like this, it is more expedient to act swiftly to protect democratic values than to be detained by rules of constitutional procedure.

“I think that he must have secured anticipatory approval from the leadership of the National Assembly before proceeding on the basis of a note verbale from the legitimate authority of the Republic of Benin.

I also believe that Nigeria occupies a significant position in West Africa, which position imposes on her the duty to protect democratic values and institutions in the region. “The President should be commended rather than being vilified, in this particular instance.”

Also reacting, another lawyer, Dr Abdul Mahmud said that: “President Tinubu’s deployment of Nigerian troops to the Republic of Benin on the strength of a note verbale was not constitutionally grounded. “A diplomatic request cannot override Section 5(5) of the 1999 Constitution, which bars the President from sending members of the armed forces on combat duty outside Nigeria without the approval of the Senate.

“The situation in Benin involved an internal military crisis, which placed the deployment well within the category of operations that require such approval. “By acting without Senate approval, the President stepped outside the constitutional framework he swore to uphold.

“Sections 1(1) and 1(3) affirm the supremacy of the Constitution, and the oath of office binds him to protect and defend it. A note verbale carries no legal force within Nigeria’s constitutional order, and cannot justify a deployment that the Constitution expressly regulates.”