Lagos — One of the wittiest expressions I have ever heard is: "What part of 'no' don't you understand?" Ever since President Umaru Musa Yar'Adua disappeared from Aso Rock on November 23, 2009, we've been told week in, week out that he would soon arrive. In fact, you would think the presidential jet, on its way to Abuja, had just stopped over in Cairo to refuel.

At a time, we were told he would even perform the Hajj and climb Mount Arafat. We have been told all sorts of stories - he is eating, he is smiling, he is laughing, he is sitting, he is dancing. All sorts. But it does not take a genius to realise that all these stories were cooked up and spiced up to buy time - to tell us that the man would soon be back, to calm frayed nerves, to create the impression that there is nothing much to worry about. Obviously, we've been misled and fed with lies all along.

However, the writing on the wall is now very clear - this game of deceit and time-buying has come to an end. We do not have the capacity to tarry anymore. The ship of state cannot afford to anchor for too long. By failing to inform the National Assembly of his sick leave, Yar'Adua did not properly transfer power to Vice-President Goodluck Jonathan. What that means, effectively, is that there is a limit to what Jonathan can do. We can go on deceiving ourselves about Justice Dan Abutu rulings and "delegation" of powers by the President, but it is very clear that some people are just having fun at our expense. The people holding us hostage do not want an Acting President but a "Delegated President". It's a joke. They want to go to Jeddah and come back and say "the President said " - and then the VP will be asked to carry out instructions of doubtful origin. We say no, let the right thing be done.

What part of 'no' don't these people understand?

I am ready to yield some ground to Yar'Adua. I am ready to believe that he actually wanted to send in a vacation letter last year but was persuaded by his advisers not to do so. I understand that he was told by one of his advisers to remember the case of the former Cameroonian President, Ahmadou Ahidjo, who was ill and travelled to France for medical treatment in 1982. The then Prime Minister, Paul Biya, took over as Acting President. To Ahidjo's surprise, Biya began to run the state without recourse to him. Biya, according to the story told to Yar'Adua by this aide, stopped picking Ahidjo's calls, always claiming to be in a meeting. The day Biya finally spoke to him, he advised Ahidjo to stay back and take care of his health. Effectively, Ahidjo was ousted as President. He eventually resigned and Biya became substantive President. This story, I was told, eventually persuaded Yar'Adua not to turn in a vacation letter.

But that was then. Seventy-six days without a president is not exactly what Nigeria deserves in this day and age. The country is too big for one individual - or his wife or associates, whoever they may be - to hold down for selfish reasons. There is an element of insult and contempt in this impunity. Almost everybody who is somebody in this country has spoken that the President should do the right thing. What part of 'no' don't these people understand? Even Nigerians who would otherwise have been advancing ethnic and regional positions have come out plainly to say Yar'Adua should send a letter to the National Assembly. Former heads of state have spoken. Senators have spoken. Some retired politicians, led by Senator Anyim Pius Anyim, have spoken. Civil society groups have spoken. Media owners have spoken. Editors have spoken. Even, belatedly, governors have spoken.

So what's the game?

The last time we were told our head of state was "as fit as fiddle" - when he was actually not - was in 1998. General Sani Abacha was rarely seen in public those days. There were rumours that he was not in good health. But his Chief Press Secretary, Chief David Attah, told journalists his boss was "as fit as fiddle". What happened? Only the Chief Security Officer (CSO), a certain Major Hamza Al-Mustapha, had access to Abacha. He would enter the room and come out and declare: "His Excellency said " and that was law! It was so bad that generals and members of the Provisional Ruling Council were taking instructions from Al-Mustapha. Most of the state-sponsored assassinations, we later learnt, were without the knowledge of Abacha. Somebody kept issuing orders on his behalf. I have a feeling that this is what the Yar'Adua people want to do again. They want to keep the man locked up somewhere in Jeddah or Abuja and keep telling us "the President said". No, enough of this.

I have heard some people criticise Jonathan for not seizing the initiative, for not acting in the absence of his boss. If he had been carrying out the duties of the President all along, nobody would have noticed the power vacuum, it has been argued. After all, former Vice-President Atiku Abubakar did not wait for any letter to act whenever President Olusegun Obasanjo travelled out in those days in search of one foreign investor or the other. It is argued that if Atiku were Jonathan, nobody would have noticed the vacuum. To some extent, I agree with this argument. However, I cannot remember Atiku sending any bill to the National Assembly. I cannot remember Atiku swearing in Permanent Secretaries. I cannot remember Atiku signing the Appropriation Bill.

I cannot remember Atiku making a major policy decision such as deregulation or monetisation. So as good as that argument is, we also have to understand that naturally, there are limitations. Even if Atiku had taken all those decisions, would they have been legal?

I understand why Jonathan is also trying to be careful. All those pushing him to seize power and act beyond what the constitution permits him to do may also be trying to dig his grave. If Yar'Adua returns tomorrow, who says he would not move for the impeachment of Jonathan for breaching the constitution? All he would need to do is show that the man acted beyond his powers. What would be Jonathan's defence? That he thought he had the powers? Those who are trying to argue that by Section 5 of the constitution, the President can ask the VP to do anything should also tell us what the President has so far asked the VP to do. If it becomes an impeachment case, can the VP provide any evidence to show that he was directed by Yar'Adua to carry out a particular task? How would he even be sure it is the President that issued such an instruction? Are we going back to the era of Al-Mustapha where the CSO was practically the President?

Whoever has access to the President - whether it is the CSO or his wife or the King of Saudi Arabia - should kindly inform him that the game is over. We have been deceived for over two months now that the President would soon come back, he would soon do video conference, NTA would soon put him on network news, he would soon send a letter the truth is: we are sick and tired of this game. The destinies of 140 million Nigerians are a stake. The forward movement of this potentially great country is hanging in the balance. The economy is looking for direction.

They told us he signed the Supplementary Budget. If the signature was forged, the same forger should forge a vacation letter to the leadership of the National Assembly today. To be sure, I wish the President all the best. In fact, I want him to send in a vacation letter and face his health issues squarely for the next four months. What I find ridiculous is the attempt by some chaps to use his sickness as a ticket to rule Nigeria indirectly by passing on dubious instructions to the VP in the name of "the President said". We say no to that. And, if I may ask, what part of 'no' don't they understand?