#Oped: Why presidents and vice -presidents rarely have to travel by Dr. Kabir Adamu

In the theater of Staterskraf, symbolism and caution often have as much weight as written law. One such matter of high symbolic and practical consequence – often overlooked – is the simultaneous absence of a country’s president and vice president of the national area. Although few constitutions completely prohibit this appearance, political wisdom and national security requirements are strongly against it. At a time when global volatility, transnational threats and domestic uncertainties are constant companions, the need for leadership continuity has never been more critical. When both the president and vice president – or their equivalent – are out of the country, it sends a worrying signal: that the state’s cabin is temporarily unmanned. The risk of a vacuum The most immediate concern is the risk of a leadership vacuum in the event of an emergency. Natural disasters, civil unrest, military crises or even economic shocks are not waiting for leaders to return to international commitments. If both the president and vice president are abroad-especially without transferring power to another official, critical decision-making can delay or delay in constitutional ambiguity. In countries where succession is unclear or politically disputed, this scenario can lead to a crisis of legitimacy. Even where follow -up plans are well established, the optics of absent leadership during a national emergency can erode public trust. A safety imperative national security is another central problem. In unstable environments, or regions experiencing rising terrorism, rebellion or geopolitical tension, the simultaneous absence of the top two leaders can be interpreted by hostile actors as a window of opportunities. The risk is not just theoretical: history is full of moments when opportunistic movements through adversaries with the perceived political or institutional weakness have been determined. Even in more stable democracies, safety protocols often determine that the president and vice president avoid traveling on the same aircraft – just in the case. It is a principle of continuity of government that has a long guided policy in countries such as the United States. Such caution must be universal. The politics of absence there are also political costs. In particular, perception is policy. If citizens are suffering-whether it is economically, socially or security-related, the image of both leaders abroad can be politically tone-deaf. Opposition figures are fast hitting, which turns absence to apathy. In the worst case, it promotes a dangerous sense of neglect among the rulers. Indeed, travel diplomacy has its place, and leaders must engage the world. But leadership also requires presence – not just in policy, but in geography. Where one is physically present, it often says more than what is written in any community. Tradition, not just the law that many constitutions are silent on this issue, does not make it insignificant. In practice, many countries observe informal but respected traditions: to ensure that the president or vice president lives in the country at all times. These norms are not born of legal necessity, but of hard -earned political experience. It reflects an understanding that continuity in management is not just a bureaucratic formality – it is the basis of stability. For example, Nigeria does not prohibit simultaneous journey through its top leaders. But the practice is avoided more frequently, precisely because it is at risk of undermining institutional confidence in a country that is already with complicated security and management challenges. Similarly, in Kenya, the president and deputy president usually stumble their travel schedules. In France and India, careful coordination between heads of state and the government ensures constant presence at the helm. The call to codification in an era of increasing political uncertainty and asymmetric threats, countries will do well to move from informal convention to formalized protocol. Whether through executive guidelines, legislative frameworks or constitutional amendments, this, a clear rule that ensures leadership presence on home land at all times, will strengthen management and strengthen national resilience. In the end, the question is not just about where a leader is traveling – but about the architecture of trust between the state and its people. In management, presence is power. And in times of uncertainty, even symbolic absence can be a dangerous luxury. Dr. Kabir Adamu, CEO of Beacon Security and Intelligence Limited, an Abuja -based security risk management and intelligence firm with presence in various African countries.