Former Secretary to the Government of the Federation, Babachir Lawal, has claimed President Bola Tinubu is unsettled by the formation of an emerging opposition coalition led by former Vice President, Atiku Abubakar and ex-Kaduna State Governor, Nasir El-Rufai, ahead of the 2027 general election.

In an interview with Punch, Lawal alleged that the Presidency is deeply concerned about the growing momentum of the opposition alliance and has been actively seeking ways to disrupt it.

Naija News reports that Lawal’s statement comes amid rising speculation about a potential political realignment within the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC), particularly involving factions from the defunct Congress for Progressive Change (CPC), which merged with other parties to form the APC in 2013.

There has been growing concern following the defection of some CPC-aligned members to the Social Democratic Party (SDP), further fueling speculation of an impending split in the ruling party.

In late April, Atiku Abubakar and Nasir El-Rufai led a delegation to meet with former President Muhammadu Buhari in Kaduna.

Though the visit was officially described as a post-Sallah courtesy call, many observers viewed it as a strategic move to secure Buhari’s support for the new opposition coalition.

Other prominent members of the delegation included former Governors Aminu Tambuwal (Sokoto), Gabriel Suswam (Benue), Jibrilla Bindow (Adamawa), and Achike Udenwa (Imo).

Despite repeated dismissals by the Presidency and the APC regarding the coalition’s strength, Lawal insists that the growing political force of the opposition privately rattles Tinubu and his allies.

“This political party we are forming — most of those comments about Tinubu being unbeatable — are like people peering through tinted glass and assuming they know what’s happening inside.

“Tinubu knows we can defeat him. Even those around him who are sincere know he’s an endangered species in terms of the 2027 Presidency. We still hear what they say behind closed doors. There’s panic,” Lawal said.

Lawal further pointed to the alleged censorship of anti-government songs as evidence of the administration’s insecurity. He specifically mentioned the banning of songs by popular Nigerian musician Idris Abdulkareem, calling it a sign of “insecure people frightened even by small things.”

“They’ve gone bananas out of desperation. A scared man has no rules of engagement,” Lawal added.

Lawal also emphasised that Atiku, El-Rufai, and other members of the opposition coalition are well-acquainted with Tinubu’s political strategies, having worked closely with him in the past.

“We’ve stayed together before. If people still say I was the one sent to buy Tinubu’s presidential election form, then it means we know each other well.

“Atiku and Rauf Aregbesola were once political allies of Tinubu too. We know the methods used in Nigeria to win elections — and the tactics used to make the opposition lose,” he said.

However, the APC National Secretary, Ajibola Basiru, dismissed the threat posed by the opposition coalition, calling it a gathering of “internally displaced politicians.”

In a phone conversation with Punch, Basiru stated, “There is no coalition. It’s a figment of the imagination of some individuals who think they are important. It’s just an association of internally displaced politicians.”

The National Assembly has urged the Supreme Court to dismiss the suit filed by 11 governors of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), challenging the declaration of a state of emergency in Rivers State.

Naija News gathered that the federal legislature, in its preliminary objection, contended that the suit was procedurally flawed and lacked merit.

In a document dated April 22, 2025, obtained by Punch on Sunday, the National Assembly argued that the court lacks the jurisdiction to entertain the suit and called for the plaintiffs to be penalised with a ₦1 billion fine for filing a “frivolous and speculative” case.

The suit, filed by the PDP governors, seeks to challenge President Bola Tinubu’s powers to suspend a democratically elected state institution and replace it with an unelected one.

The National Assembly contends that the suit should be dismissed for failing to meet legal standards.

On March 18, 2025, President Tinubu declared a state of emergency in Rivers State, suspending Governor Siminalayi Fubara, Deputy Governor Ngozi Odu, and all elected members of the State House of Assembly for an initial six-month period.

Following the suspension, Tinubu appointed Rear Admiral Ibokette Ibas (retd.) as the sole administrator to oversee the state’s affairs.

The National Assembly had ratified the President’s declaration through a voice vote, but the PDP governors are challenging both the powers of the President and the process used to approve the state of emergency.

In suit number SC/CV/329/2025, the PDP governors from Adamawa, Enugu, Osun, Oyo, Bauchi, Akwa Ibom, Plateau, Delta, Taraba, Zamfara, and Bayelsa States approached the Supreme Court to challenge the President’s authority to suspend a democratically elected state government and replace it with an unelected appointee.

The plaintiffs seek the Court’s determination on several constitutional issues, including whether the President can lawfully suspend or interfere with the offices of a governor and deputy governor, and whether the National Assembly’s approval of the state of emergency through a voice vote contravenes constitutional requirements for a two-thirds majority.

The plaintiffs in the suit are seeking the following declarations:

1. That the President cannot lawfully suspend or interfere with the offices of governors and deputy governors or replace them with unelected appointees under the guise of a state of emergency.

2. That the National Assembly cannot approve a state of emergency declaration by a simple voice vote without a two-thirds majority.

3. A perpetual injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with state offices through state of emergency proclamations.

4. An order nullifying the state of emergency proclamation in Rivers State as published in Official Gazette No. 47 of 2025.

The governors are asking for “An order of perpetual injunction restraining the defendants from suspending or approving the suspension or in any way interfering with the offices of the Governor, the Deputy Governor and /or the House of Assembly of any of the Plaintiffs States by way of a Proclamation of State of Emergency or in any manner whatsoever or by any method howsoever.

“An order setting aside and nullifying the Official Gazette No.47 of 2025, State of Emergency (Rivers State) Proclamation, 2025 made by the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria and wrongfully approved by the 2nd Defendant and upon which the ominous threat by the 1st defendant against the Plaintiffs is predicated.”

However, in its preliminary objection, the National Assembly faulted the plaintiffs’ suit and urged the Supreme Court to dismiss it, arguing that the court lacks the jurisdiction to entertain the case, particularly against the second defendant (NASS).

Declaring that it holds a memorandum of conditional appearance, the National Assembly argued that due process was not followed in instituting the suit, emphasising that the plaintiffs failed to issue the statutorily required three-month pre-action notice to the Clerk of the National Assembly, as mandated under Section 21 of the Legislative Houses (Powers and Privileges) Act, 2017.

It stated, “A person who has a cause of action against a Legislative House shall serve a three-month’s notice to the office of the Clerk of the Legislative House disclosing the cause of action and reliefs sought.”

Additionally, NASS argued that the plaintiffs did not secure resolutions from their respective State Houses of Assembly, a prerequisite for approaching the Supreme Court under its original jurisdiction provisions outlined in the Supreme Court (Original Jurisdiction) Act, 2002.

Citing alleged threats referenced in the plaintiffs’ suit, which borders on a statement attributed to the Attorney-General during a press briefing, NASS noted that since the threat did not emanate from them or their officers, the suit has no business with them.

The objection read, “Considering the affidavit in support and the threats alleged, which did not come from the 2nd Defendant, there is no cause of action against it.

“This is a suit relating to an alleged threatened declaration or proclamation of State of emergency in the plaintiffs’ States by the Honourable Attorney General and Minister of Justice. This is allegedly as a result of the statement of the 1st Defendant in a press briefing held March 19, 2025, wherein he is said to have stated that after Rivers State, ..it can be anybody’s turn tomorrow…,’ None of the alleged threat or statement is alluded to the 2nd Defendant or any of its officers.”

The N’Assembly further contended, “With the objection amongst others submitted, due process of instituting the action in the suit was not followed by the plaintiffs before taking this steps against the 2nd Defendants as the plaintiffs failed to issue the requisite three months pre-action notice to the Clerk of the National Assembly and took no steps to obtain the resolutions of the Houses of Assembly of each of the States to enable the plaintiffs each join to approach this busy Court pursuant to the provision of the Supreme Court (Original Jurisdiction) Act 2002 on the matters.”

NASS asserted that the plaintiffs were attempting to use the Supreme Court to dictate how it exercises its constitutional role, particularly regarding the use of voice votes to ratify states of emergency under section 305 of the 1999 Constitution.

The objection described the suit as speculative and an abuse of the court process.

It also stated, “In the suit, the Plaintiffs seek to use the court to curtail the manner in which the 2nd defendant votes or make approval to ratify proclamations of State of Emergency declared pursuant to section 305 of the CFRN 1999, to get the 2/3 majority of their votes.

“It also seeks that the Court dictates how much roles are to be performed by the 2nd Defendant. The suit seeks to restrain the 2nd defendant from using voice votes to get majority approval for future or anticipated Proclamations of States of Emergency in the States of the Plaintiff.

“The suit also seeks by perpetual injunction, to restrain the second defendant’s Houses (Senate /House of Assembly) from carrying out their constitutional duties of approval of Proclamations of State of Emergency and seeks that the approval given by the 2nd Defendant on the 20th day of March, 2025, ratifying the proclamation of State of Emergency in Rivers State be set aside for being wrongfully approved.”

NASS further added, “The 2nd Defendant/Applicant having observed the several deficiencies in the suit of the Plaintiffs which go contrary to the provisions of the laws and the jurisdiction of the Court raises objection and submits that the 11 States (Plaintiffs) approached the Court wrongly and in abuse of court process.”

It predicated its objection on six grounds, stating that the plaintiffs’ suit lacks a cause of action.

The National Assembly further stated that the plaintiffs lack locus standi to proceed against the second defendant on the issues raised in the suit.

It also argued that the plaintiffs failed to comply with due process as stipulated under section 2, Schedule 2 of the Supreme Court (Additional Original Jurisdiction) Act, 2002.

The 2nd defendant noted that the “court lacks jurisdiction.”

In an affidavit supporting the notice of preliminary objection, a legal officer in the Directorate of Legal Services in the National Assembly, Godswill Onyegbu, argued that due process was not followed in instituting the suit.

Onyegbu maintained that no dispute exists between the plaintiffs and either the Government of Nigeria or the second defendant, (NASS).

He further deposed that, “The plaintiffs did not obtain the required resolutions from the Houses of Assembly in their respective states to authorise the suit under the Supreme Court’s original jurisdiction.

“There is no cause of action against the second defendant, as no threat emanated from the second defendant’s office.

“That the plaintiffs lack the locus standi to institute this suit as none of the plaintiffs has shown that it has suffered anything far and above any other persons or people of Rivers State.

“There are no disputes involving questions of law or fact upon which the existence or extent of a legal right depends between the parties.

“The plaintiffs have not established any legal rights against the second defendant to warrant equitable relief such as a perpetual injunction.”

He noted that the Supreme Court lacks jurisdiction to hear the matter against the second defendant as constituted.

In addition to requesting the dismissal of the suit, Onyegbu called for a cost of ₦1 billion to be awarded jointly and severally against the plaintiffs in the interest of justice.

“That the Plaintiffs’ States’ Houses of Assembly did not pass any resolution by a simple majority of the members present and sitting at the time of the resolution authorising the plaintiffs to institute this action.

“That the plaintiffs have not established any legal rights against the 2nd defendant to enjoy the equitable remedy of perpetual injunction.

“That the suit of the plaintiffs is speculative, unfounded, frivolous and a vexatious waste of resources, time and energy of the 2nd defendant.

“That the present court lacks the jurisdiction to entertain this matter as presently constituted against the 2nd defendants.

“That it is in the best interest of justice for the Court to dismiss or strike out this suit against the 2nd defendant with a cost of N1b only, jointly and severally against the plaintiffs,” the affidavit read.

Industry experts divided

’It’s politically targeted at the North’

The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) is intensifying its investigation into alleged financial mismanagement at the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited (NNPCL), focusing on approximately $2.96 billion allocated for refinery repairs.

Several high-ranking former officials, including former Managing Directors of the Port Harcourt, Warri, and Kaduna refineries, are under scrutiny, with multiple arrests already reported.

A source close to the investigation told Sunday Vanguard that the scope of the investigation is wide.

He said: “The investigation into alleged financial mismanagement at NNPCL is advancing rapidly and covers a wide scope. We have already uncovered compelling evidence of significant misappropriation of funds, including large sums traced to the personal accounts of former officials.”

The source further said:”A key focus of our probe is the $2.96 billion earmarked for refinery repairs. We are meticulously tracking the flow of these funds to establish how they were diverted.”

As of the time of filing this report, it remains unclear whether Mele Kyari, the immediate past Group Chief Executive Officer/Managing Director of NNPCL, has been arrested or has voluntarily presented himself for questioning.

The investigation is specifically examining funds allocated for the quick-fix maintenance of Nigeria’s refineries, which have long suffered from persistent operational challenges.

Preliminary findings indicate that $1.56 billion was allocated to the Port Harcourt Refinery, $740 million to the Kaduna Refinery, and $657 million to the Warri Refinery.

As the EFCC prepares for further arrests in the coming days, the agency is working closely with NNPCL to secure critical financial records and interview key witnesses.

“This is not a superficial inquiry. It is a determined effort to root out corruption and hold those responsible fully accountable. The stakes are high, as this investigation is vital to restoring integrity and public confidence in the oil sector,” the source stressed.

Meanwhile, the Commission has formally requested detailed financial records from NNPCL, including documentation of emoluments and allowances, to support its ongoing investigation.

EFCC spokesman, Dele Oyewale, could not be reached for comment, as he is currently on official assignment abroad.
However, experts in Nigeria’s oil and gas industry were divided on the matter.

Reacting to the probe in an interview with Sunday Vanguard, yesterday, Iledare Wumi, Professor Emeritus in Petroleum Economics and Policy Executive Director, Emmanuel Egbogah Foundation, said: “I am not in a position to provide a definitive statement or to judge matters of guilt or innocence regarding the public allegations of funding misalignment relative to intended objectives.

“However, the documented operational inefficiencies of the NNPCL refineries remain a significant concern. The substantial financial outlays committed since 2021 to the repair and refurbishment of these facilities highlight the broader consequences of transactionalism in Nigeria.

“This leadership approach, which seems to characterize governance in the Nigerian oil and gas sector, continues to undermine the growth objectives outlined in the Petroleum Industry Act, PIA.

“Looking ahead, I firmly believe that a shift in leadership mindset towards a shared vision, focused on prosperity for future generations is essential. Only a transformational mindset can reject the practice of retaining public funds in financial institutions for personal gain.

“The prevailing transactionalism is inadequate to effectively govern Nigeria’s oil and gas sector. Perhaps a restructured NNPCL, with a deliberate and meaningful change, will mark the beginning of a truly transformative era for the Nigerian oil and gas industry.”

On his part, an Abuja-based oil and gas expert, who pleaded anonymity, said: “The investigation is politically-motivated against the North, whose politicians have vowed to oppose President Bola Tinubu in the next presidential election.

“The investigation would likely compel many northerners to defect to the ruling APC and support President Tinubu’s second term bid. From all indications, it is partly targeted at weakening opposition and attracting more loyalists.”

Suspended gov’s push for survival

Since March 18, 2025 when President Bola Ahmed Tinubu declared a state of emergency, there has been relative peace in Rivers State.

The eventual suspension of Governor, Siminalayi Fubara, his deputy, Prof Ngozi Ordu, and the entire Legislative Arm of government is the biggest setback that may likely affect the economy and other social fabrics of the state.

For close to two months, Fubara has been stripped of the paraphernalia of office as governor elected by his people in 2023.

Having understood what it means to stay inactive without political power for this long, the suspended governor has chosen to go full throttle to seek for genuine peace with his mentor, Nyesom Wike, the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, FCT.

It was reported that on April 18, Fubara came down from his high horse and went to meet Wike in his Abuja residence to ask for forgiveness.

Why the suspended governor chose to meet with the Minister in the company of some respected Yoruba political leaders like Governor Dapo Abiodun of Ogun State and former Governor Segun Osoba, among others, other than the elders in Rivers State, is relatively understandable.

The FCT Minister believes that some of the elders in Rivers State were those stoking the embers of crisis between him and Fubara.

Political problems

These elders, nearly all of them, had political problems with Wike in 2023 because of the presidential candidate of the PDP, Alhaji Atiku Abubakar, in the run-up to the general elections.

After the PDP presidential congress, where Atiku emerged as the favorite to confront the APC candidate, Bola Ahmed Tinubu, Wike felt betrayed and refused to support Atiku.

A time was also when Wike thought he could be compensated with the running mate slot, again, PDP backtracked and went for Dr. Ifeanyi Okowa, then governor of Delta State.

Okowa has since defected to the APC he contested against as the PDP vice presidential candidate.

Recall that the Atiku supporters had all abandoned Rivers and relocated to Abuja to give support to his dream of becoming the next President.

Wike was the man alone at home showcasing Fubara in the campaigns to become governor.

Some of the Atiku supporters openly condemned the choice of Fubara as governor, wondering what political sense Wike was mooting to play up a political neophyte as the next governor of a sensitive state like Rivers.

While Wike attempted to calibrate his political structure in support of Tinubu of APC, the likes of Prince Uche Secondus, a former National Chairman of the PDP, Dr. Abiye Sekibo, Sir Celestine Omehia, Rt. Hon Austin Opara, Senator Lee Meaba and Tele Ikuru, among others, formed a formidable political bloc against Wike in the state.

But when the table turned and Wike became the FCT Minister and relocated to Abuja, these elders took the reverse flight back to Port Harcourt and suddenly began to give Fubara the energy to stand up to a man who made him governor against all odds.

This set of politicians formed what looked like an iron cast structure for Fubara with a deliberate design to castigated Wike in the war against then governor.

This same bloc of politicians was alleged to have asked the governor to have a rethink in his implementation of the 8-point peace agreement initiated by President Tinubu. This presidential move could have, according to some analysts, ushered peace into the state a long time ago.

Nevertheless, in his wisdom, Fubara has come to clearly realize that only genuine peace devoid of intrigues can resolve the lingering political tension in Rivers.

This explains why he has chosen to walk the path of peace alone without the involvement of the Rivers elders.

Undoubtedly, the suspended governor has seen that Wike has what it takes to take the fight to its conclusion which was initiated to end in impeachment but the intervention of the president with the tool of state of emergency to stop what would have been the end of Fubara’s political career.

Wike has the financial war-chest. He enjoys the backing of Tinubu. He is a master strategist in all forms and shapes.
Dealing with a man of this political caliber would only call for wisdom and that is exactly what Fubara chose to do even if it meant standing alone.

In his last media chat in Abuja, Wike had made it clear that if Fubara should genuinely apologize to him, he would let go. A fortnight ago, the governor made a trip to London enroute Frankfurt, Germany where he met with the president in a closed door meeting.

Details

The details of their discussion in that meeting were not divulged but close sources believe that it was the prelude to a symbiotic agreement for the betterment of Tinubu’s re-election in 2027 while Fubara returns as governor.

Having met with the president, Fubara never rested on his oars.

He went on a remorseful visit to Wike to let him know how sorry he was and begged for forgiveness.
It is not clear what lies in the offing after the two high stake meetings.

But Nigerians are of the opinion that having shown sufficient regrets for his actions or inactions, Fubara deserves to be reinstated.

There are speculations that Tinubu, who is alleged to be under intense pressure by prominent Nigerians, may reinstate the suspended governor by May 29. “Everything is in the realm of speculations”, said Prince Ogbonna Nwuke, a former member of the House of Representatives.

“I think as a democrat, the president should use the May 29, which is a big day in our country’s political history, to convince the whole world that he is indeed a true democrat by reinstating Governor Fubara , his deputy and the House of Assembly”.

On her part, Ann Kio Briggs, spokesperson for Ijaw Republican Assembly, IRA, believes that reinstatement of Fubara on May 29 would make more sense to the people of the state.

“He has to be reinstated on May 29, being Democracy Day, so that the governor can join his colleague governors to celebrate his second year in office”.

Briggs explained that the entire Rivers people will appreciate Tinubu if he could “bring back our governor on May 29. That is our Democracy Day. It will bring a lot of succor to the people of the state who have suffered as a result of the crisis in the past two years”.

History

Corroborating the IRA’s spokesperson, the President of Ijaw National Congress, INC, Prof Benjamin Okaba, said Tinubu would make history if he reinstates Fubara on May 29 as with stringent lines drawn to demarcate power play between the two warring factions.
“Fubara’s visits to the President and Wike are welcome developments. The president can make history by returning Fubara earlier than expected”, he said.

“Besides, he should make himself the president of all Nigerians, not to a particular person. Let the Minister mind his job in Abuja and allow the Rivers people to enjoy the governor they voted for.

“I am not interested whether Fubara wants to defect to APC or not. After all, our politicians do not have ideology. And the country is cascading to a one party state. “What we want is his return to power for the interest of Rivers people”.

For Dr. Joseph Ambakederimo, Convener of the South-South Reawakening Group, SSRG, “Fubara has shown that he is a man of peace. He has shown enough remorse and deserves to return to his duty post.

“The stakes are high. Expectations are also high. Nigerians are eagerly waiting to hear what Mr. President will have to tell us on Democracy Day.

“I know that the president won’t disappoint. Our prayer is that Fubara should be returned to power. I was privileged to meet with him recently in Port Harcourt and I saw a man who was ready to do anything for the sake of peace”.

More than anything else, what is more worrisome to the Rivers people is the terms of agreement between the FCT Minister and the suspended governor for the return of peace in the state and his subsequent return to power.

There are speculations that appointment of commissioners must be shared in a formula that will give the Abuja bloc a comfortable stand.

This same formula will apply to the appointment of all offices when normal democratic institutions are restored.
For local government elections which were earlier scheduled to be conducted on August 9, “the Minister’s interest will be highly protected”, a source privy to the arrangement hinted.

“The template has been set already. There is a change in the Rivers State Independent Electoral Commission, RSIEC.

“Interested contestants would be selected, it does not matter which political parties they belong. They will be there to serve the interest of those who nominated them”.

How then will Fubara’s second coming to office look like? Is he going to be a puppet governor who will dance whenever the string is pulled from outside the state?

What will be the political fate of the Atiku supporters (elders) when normalcy returns and Fubara returns to the saddle? All eyes are on May 29 while Nigerians sit on edge.