The Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) has strongly criticized the recent declaration of a state of emergency in Rivers State by President Bola Tinubu, calling the move “unconstitutional” and a dangerous precedent for Nigeria’s democracy.

In a statement released on Tuesday, the NBA, through its President, Afam Osigwe, SAN, emphasized that the President lacks the constitutional authority to remove an elected governor, deputy governor, or state lawmakers under the guise of an emergency rule.

“The 1999 Constitution does not grant the President the power to remove an elected governor, deputy governor, or members of a state’s legislature under the guise of a state of emergency,” the NBA asserted.

The association further stated that the Constitution provides clear procedures for the removal of a governor and deputy governor as per Section 188, and similarly, the removal of members of the House of Assembly and dissolution of parliament is governed by constitutional provisions and electoral laws.

The NBA questioned whether these constitutional procedures were followed in the current situation.

The NBA pointed out that while Section 305 of the Constitution allows the President to declare a state of emergency, it also stipulates strict conditions and procedural safeguards to prevent any infringement on democratic governance and fundamental human rights.

“The political crisis in Rivers State does not meet the constitutional threshold of a complete breakdown of public order to justify a state of emergency,” the statement read.

It added that the declaration of emergency does not automatically dissolve or suspend elected state governments, and the President is not empowered to unilaterally remove elected officials, describing such actions as a “fundamental breach of Nigeria’s federal structure.”

Naija News reports that the NBA also highlighted that a declaration of a state of emergency must be ratified by the National Assembly within a specified timeframe, as outlined in Section 305(2) of the Constitution.

“A proclamation issued by the President under this section shall cease to have effect if it is not approved by a resolution of the National Assembly within two days when the National Assembly is in session, or if the National Assembly is not in session, within ten days after it reconvenes,” the statement quoted from the Constitution.

The NBA stressed that without National Assembly approval, the declaration of a state of emergency in Rivers State remains “constitutionally inchoate and ineffective.”

The NBA strongly warned that suspending elected officials under emergency rule sets a dangerous precedent that undermines democracy.

“The purported removal of Governor Fubara, his deputy, and members of the Rivers State House of Assembly is unconstitutional, unlawful, and a dangerous affront to our nation’s democracy,” the statement declared.

The association called on the National Assembly to reject any unconstitutional attempt to ratify the removal of Rivers State officials, stressing that such a move could be misused to unseat elected governments in the future.

It urged all stakeholders, including the judiciary, civil society, and the international community, to closely monitor the situation in Rivers State.

In conclusion, the NBA reiterated its commitment to upholding the Constitution and protecting Nigeria’s democracy.

“The removal of elected officials under the pretext of emergency rule is unconstitutional and unacceptable. Nigeria’s democracy must be protected at all costs, and the Constitution must be upheld as the supreme legal authority in all circumstances,” the statement concluded.

President Goodluck Jonathan did not suspend governors when he declared a state of emergency in three north-eastern states in 2013 because it was unconstitutional, according to Mohammed Bello Adoke, the former attorney-general of the federation.

Adoke dedicated a whole chapter to the issue in his memoir, ‘Burden of Service: The Reminiscences of Nigeria’s Former Attorney-General’, published in 2019 by Clink Street (London & New York).

He said the 1960 constitution empowered the federal government to make its own laws on emergency rule and that allowed the Tafawa Balewa administration to suspend the premier of the Western region in 1962.

“While the 1961 State of Emergency Act allowed for the removal of Premiers,” Adoke wrote, “the 1979 Constitution and, subsequently, the 1999 Constitution, spelt out how to declare a State of Emergency. The removal of a Governor is definitely not included in the provisions.”

On Tuesday, President Bola Tinubu declared a state of emergency in Rivers state and suspended Governor Simi Fubura as well as the state house of assembly.

Below are excerpts from the book.

STATE OF EMERGENCY

On 13 May 2013, the President declared a State of Emergency in three of the North Eastern states of Adamawa, Borno and Yobe owing to the Boko Haram insurgency that was ravaging those areas. The security situation was getting out of hand in those states, despite the efforts of the Armed Forces to contain the terrorist group. There was already political tension in Northern Nigeria arising from the 2011 presidential election. Some pol- iticians had been credited with inciting statements, including that they would make the country “ungovernable” if Jonathan won. They claimed that he had “stolen” the turn of the North. With the unrelenting insecurity and violent situation, which, in fact, worsened two years after the 2011 elections, Nigeria found itself in disequilibrium. The President needed the declaration of State of Emergency in the troubled states in order to deal with the insurgency.

When the issue came up, there were discussions as to the extent the President could go. However, since the insurgency was not spread all over those states, the local government areas most affected were identified. Rather than declare total emergency in the states, the President limited it to those local government areas so that security manpower could be concentrated there to contain the situation. He also did not remove or suspend any Local Government Chairman or Governor. For the first time in Nigeria’s history, an emergency was declared with the political leadership in place.

I had advised the President that he was free to declare a full or partial State of Emergency as provided in Section 305 of the Constitution which states that the President may, by an instrument published in the Official Gazette of the Federation, issue a proclamation of a State of Emergency in the Federation or any part thereof. Subsection 2 states that the President shall, after the publication, transmit the Gazette containing the proclamation, including the details of the emergency, to the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives, each of whom “shall forthwith convene a meeting of the House to consider and decide whether to pass a resolution approving the proclamation.”

The Constitution specifically stipulates that the President shall have powers to declare a State of Emergency only when the Federation is at war, is in imminent danger of invasion or is involved in a state of war, and there is an actual breakdown of public order in the Federation or any part, to such extent as to require extraordinary measures to restore peace and security. That is, the occurrence of imminent danger or disaster, or natural calamity affecting a community, or a section of the community in the Federation, qualifies as emergency warranting such a proclamation. Under Subsection 4, the Governor of a state may, with the support of two-thirds majority of the state House of Assembly, request the President to issue a proclamation of emergency in the state, when there is in existence any of the listed situations.

PUBLIC CRITICISM

President Jonathan, predictably, came under criticism from commentators who felt he should have removed the Local Government Chairmen as well as Governors in the affected states. Why declare a State of Emergency and retain the Governors? That was what many commentators said. The opportunity for Jonathan’s foes to describe him as a weak leader emerged yet again! Historically, State of Emergency was employed more as a political weapon to settle scores with opposing forces, not necessarily to address issues of actual or imminent threat to security. Nigerians were more familiar with that nefarious employment of the provision. The fact that Governors in Nigeria cannot be held responsible for any breakdown of law and order is lost on these critics. Governors are the Chief Security Officers of their states only in name; they do not have the requisite constitutional power of control over the secu- rity agencies. Removing them during emergency, to my mind, was simply illogical.

The mentality that a Governor must be removed was most likely derived from what happened in 1962 when, owing to a crisis in the Western Region, government structures broke down. The Premier, Chief S. L. Akintola, had refused to vacate office for his replacement, Alhaji Dawodu Soroye Adegbenro, after being removed by the Regional House of Assembly. The Federal Government had stepped in and appointed Dr Moses Majekodunmi as the Administrator of Western Region, rather than allow Adegbenro to take over as Premier. It was a highly tense political situation. Although Akintola was still a member of the Action Group (AG), his sympathy for the Northern Peoples Congress (NPC), which controlled the Federal Government, earned him a restoration to office.

EXAMPLE FROM FIRST REPUBLIC

Another situation was when President Obasanjo removed Chief Joshua Dariye as Governor of Plateau State in 2004 after declaring a State of Emergency in that state. Chief Akin Olujinmi, then AGF, sought to justify the removal by referring to the Emergency Powers Act of 1961, which provided for the removal of a Premier, the equivalent of a Governor. On 25 May 2004, he was reported to have stated: “Well… you are looking at the Constitution. There are other laws that you have to read along with the Constitution. We have what you call the Emergency Powers Act of 1961. That power was evoked in 1962 in the old Western region, when we had a similar declaration made, and we had Dr Majekodunmi appointed as administrator of the Western Region at that time, so that law is still in existence today. Under that law when you declare a state of emergency, you can appoint an administrator to run the affairs of the state.” (THISDAY newspaper, 25/05/2005, page 40).

I respectfully disagree with that contention. The Emergency Powers Act of 1961 was derived from the 1960 Constitution. They did have an enabling law that gave the Prime Minister the power to declare a State of Emergency and, in the process, remove the Premier and appoint an Administrator to superintend the management of the Region’s affairs. By the time Chief Olujinmi was invoking the Act in 2004, it had become spent.

Because declaration of State of Emergency had been wrongly used by Obasanjo to remove Governors whom he had political differences with, those who thought they loved Jonathan more than he loved himself kept clamouring for it to be used to checkmate Governors. But when I came into office, I took cognisance of the fact that I swore to an oath to abide by the Constitution. I also vowed that as the custodian of the Nigerian Constitution, who must be the legal adviser to all arms of government, I must do what was right.

Irrespective of the pressure, I refused to allow the political persuasion of the government of the day to colour my judgment. I advised the President that while he could declare a State of Emergency, that did not warrant the removal of a Governor. The Governor is the Chief Security Officer of the state, but the Police is centralised under the leadership of the Inspector General. That means Chief Security Officer is nothing but a ceremonial description.

Also, to remove a Governor could bring the President into conflict with the National Assembly. It is not in the interest of the President to take a decision that would not be approved by the National Assembly. That would tend to diminish his executive powers. He must jealously guard his turf and ensure that whatever he does is constitutionally justified. There was no way we would have been able to constitutionally justify the suspension or removal of a Governor through the instrumentality of the proclamation of a State of Emergency, having regard to the provision of Section 305 of the 1999 Constitution.

OBASANJO WANTED EMERGENCY RULE IN OGUN

The issue of the State of Emergency has always been hugely controversial. The essence of declaring an emergency, as we know it, is that there is an extraordinary situation that has defied the standard laws, processes and procedures for restoring order. And to restore order, one is forced to resort to exceptional measures. It was never meant to be used as a political instrument to punish and remove recalcitrant or ‘disloyal’ Governors. The issue ought to have been settled by Attorneys-General over the decades, but probably because of the many years Nigeria was under military rule, no one has paid any serious attention to it.

While the 1961 State of Emergency Act allowed for the removal of Premiers, as Chief Olujinmi alluded to, the 1979 Constitution and, subsequently, the 1999 Constitution, spelt out how to declare a State of Emergency. The removal of a Governor is definitely not included in the provisions. Obasanjo, still thinking State of Emergency could rightfully be used politically and illegally the way he had applied it during his tenure, tried to mount some pressure on President Jonathan in his early days in office in 2010 to apply it to the crisis in Ogun, his home state.

In that case, the Governor of Ogun State, Otunba Gbenga Daniel, had fallen out with Obasanjo over who would control the state executive of the PDP ahead of the 2011 elections. The House of Assembly had also been divided, so Otunba Daniel could not function effectively, especially regarding getting the approval necessary for the N100 billion bond he wanted to get from the capital market. All the intrigues raging through Ogun State had led to a shutdown of the House of Assembly Complex. Government practically ground to a halt.

Obasanjo tried to exert a lot of pressure on Jonathan, urging him to declare a State of Emergency. He wanted Jonathan to suspend Daniel and appoint an Administrator to return things to normalcy. When the President asked for my view, I felt the crisis had not reached a boiling point where he would need to declare a State of Emergency. I further pointed out that there were enough provisions under Section 11 of the Constitution to deal with situa- tions where a House of Assembly of a state is unable to sit. The Constitution provides for the functions of such a State Assembly to be taken over by the National Assembly.

Also, even if there were a need to declare a State of Emergency, it would have been to give some extraordinary powers to the Governor and suspend parts of Chapter 4 of the Constitution which relate to fundamental human rights, as opposed to the removal of the Governor. As I pointed out earlier, the removal of a Governor is nowhere provided for in the mechanism for implementing a State of Emergency. It would have amounted to employing extra-constitutional means to remove a Governor.

One of the arguments I used in convincing the President was to draw his attention to the fact that he also had the power to declare a State of Emergency all over the Federation. I then asked that: “For instance, Mr President, if the country is at war, and you have to declare a State of Emergency, would you remove yourself from office and appoint an Administrator to oversee the affairs of the country?” He agreed with me. He could see that it was illogical to remove a Governor on account of a State of Emergency being declared.

Since we had successfully warded off the use of State of Emergency as a political tool in the Ogun case, it was not too difficult applying the same principles to other suggestions from the marauding hawks. There was still a big battle ahead, nevertheless. As the Boko Haram insurgency continued unabated in the North-East, the hawks told President Jonathan that the State of Emergency, declared by him in May 2013 and renewed in November of the same year, was not effective because the Governors of Adamawa, Borno and Yobe were not removed. Ironically, the three Governors were all of the APC, the leading opposition party.

The potential political gain was glaring. The hawks piled pressure on the President to extend the State of Emergency by another six months and remove the three Governors. This would take us into 2014, when the politicking for the 2015 general election would be in top gear. Two Ministers even drafted a Declaration of Emergency speech and took it to the President. They named three retired Generals to be appointed as Administrators of the affected states. President Jonathan then decided to ask me to make a presentation to the FEC on my position, apparently because he did not want to do anything illegal.

When I got to Council, I marshalled my argument that removing a Governor was not part of the constitutional provisions in declaring a State of Emergency. I told them I do not play politics with matters of law. I also said declaring an emergency was, constitutionally, a shared responsibility between the President and the National Assembly, with the legislature having a superior dominion. While the President can trigger the process, it must be approved by the National Assembly within two days if they are in session and a maximum of ten days if they are not, in which case the President would request that they reconvene to approve his declaration. If the lawmakers refused to approve it, I warned, that would be the end and it would appear to diminish the powers of the President.

A heated debate broke out. Two Ministers, one of them a lawyer that never practised and the other a full-time politician, stood up to me and started an unnecessary argument, insisting that the President could do and undo. The President had to call the house to order as emotions ran high. In the end, President Jonathan decided that he would not violate the Constitution. He did not extend the emergency, much less remove the Governors. In any case, as the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces, he could deploy troops without the approval of the National Assembly.

‘I BECAME AN ENEMY’

I became an enemy of many people in government who accused me of misleading the President. After the FEC meeting, some ministers began instigating the Ijaw leader, Chief Edwin Clark, against me. They said it was “one man” with a “bogus title” of “Attorney-General of the Federation” who prevented the President from removing the Governors and replacing them with Administrators. From what filtered to me, Clark was very angry with me and even suggested that the President “should remove that Attorney-General.” But the President always had my back.

With such a President as your boss, you would always be confident to tell him the truth. If he had resorted to using State of Emergency as a political bazooka, he probably would have had his way as a bully, but he could never have written his name in the hearts of millions who still adore him especially when they compare him with other Nigerian leaders who used their powers to terrorise and subjugate their perceived political opponents. It must be a compliment to President Jonathan that President Buhari has also avoided deploying the State of Emergency as a tool in Rivers, Kwara and Akwa Ibom States, despite the political benefits. It is a worthy legacy.

Governors elected on the platform of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) have asked President Bola Tinubu to reverse the suspension of Rivers governor Siminalayi Fubara.

The PDP Governors’ Forum described Fubara’s suspension as a “grievous mistake” and an “atrocious and retrograde decision”.

On Tuesday night, Tinubu declared a state of emergency in Rivers following the prolonged political crisis in the south-south state.

The president also suspended Fubara, his deputy and the members of the state assembly.

Tinubu nominated Ibok-Ete Ibas, a retired vice-admiral, as the administrator of Rivers state.

In a statement issued on Wednesday, Bala Mohammed, governor of Bauchi and chairman of the PDP Governors’ Forum, said the declaration of a state of emergency in Rivers is an “utter misgiving”.

Mohammed said Tinubu’s “silence on the active role played” by Nyesom Wike, minister of the federal capital territory (FCT), in the political crisis in Rivers was “golden and enabling”.

“He (Wike) has become a law unto himself because he was playing out your script. Now we know. This is totally unstatemanly, biased, and divisive,” the statement reads.

“We state categorically that this unwarranted but premeditated attack on Rivers State and the Peoples Democratic Party and other opposition parties is today, the greatest threat to democracy in our dear country, Nigeria and it is an ill wind that will blow no one any good.

“It is a dangerous course of action that will not only endanger our hard-won democracy but will exacerbate the crises in the nation, deepen mistrust, elevate security threats, destroy the economy, and our national cohesion and stability.

“The Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) in its response signed by its President, Mazi Afam Osigwe, SAN, has already expressed grave concern about the purported suspension by the President of the Governor of Rivers State, the Deputy Governor, and the Members of the Rivers State House of Assembly.

“The NBA affirmed their commitment to upholding the Constitution, defending democratic governance, and ensuring that the rule of law prevails in Nigeria.

“President is therefore called upon to listen to wise counsel and the voice of reason, as well as accept that he made grievous mistakes and acted in haste, and reverse this atrocious and retrograde decision before it is too late.

“This authoritarian shenanigan is unacceptable and cannot stand.”

Mohammed said the forum aligns with the NBA and would approach the court to interpret section 305 (3) of the constitution.

Akin Rotimi, spokesperson of the house of representatives, says President Bola Tinubu consulted the national assembly before announcing a state of emergency in Rivers state.

On Tuesday, the president declared a state of emergency in Rivers following the prolonged political crisis in the south-south state.

Tinubu also suspended Fubara, his deputy, and the members of the state assembly.

The president nominated Ibok-Ete Ibas, a retired vice-admiral, as the administrator of Rivers state.

In a statement, Rotimi said the national assembly “was duly consulted” by the president before reaching the decision.

He said Tinubu met with the leadership of the national assembly, including Senate President Godswill Akpabio; Abbas Tajudeen, speaker of the house; Benjamin Kalu, deputy speaker; Michael Bamidele, senate leader; and Julius Ihonvbere, leader of the house; and Nuhu Ribadu, national security adviser (NSA), before the broadcast.

Rotimi said Kayode Egbetokun, the inspector-general of police (IGP); Adeola Ajayi, director-general of the State Security Service (SSS); and Mohammed Mohammed, director-general of the National Intelligence Agency (NIA), also attended the meeting.

“During this meeting, they were fully briefed on Mr. President’s intentions, and all present unanimously expressed their support,” the statement reads.

Rotimi added that Tinubu’s letter informing the house of representatives of his decision and seeking approval on the state of emergency in Rivers in line with section 305 of the constitution has been transmitted to the green chamber and would be read during plenary on Wednesday for further legislative action.

The Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) says the revocation of its land occupancy rights by the Federal Capital Territory Administration (FCTA) is an attempt to “stifle opposition parties” in the country.

In a letter dated March 13, Chijioke Nwankwoeze, director of land administration at the FCT administration, said the revocation of the secretariat land title was due to “non-payment” of ground rent.

 
Ground rent is a yearly fee landowners pay for the right to occupy and use their property. 

Nwankwoeze said the PDP has failed to pay the annual ground rents due on the property from January 1, 2006, to January 1, 2025.

Speaking with journalists in Abuja on Tuesday, Debo Ologunagba, the PDP spokesperson, said the land title revocation is a threat to democracy.

Ologunagba said the revocation affected both party buildings—Wadata Plaza in Wuse Zone 5, which currently serves as the national secretariat, and the uncompleted 11-storey edifice in the Central Business District.

“The attempt by the All Progressives Congress (APC)-led government to revoke the right of occupancy of the national secretariat of the PDP is highly condemnable,” Ologunagba said.

“It is aimed at stifling opposition in this country and, of course, a drive towards totalitarianism, and it is a threat to democracy.

“It is an attempt to stifle opposition.”

Ologunagba added that the national working committee (NWC) of the PDP would take a position on the revocation after an emergency meeting.

The ongoing political crisis in Rivers State can be traced back to October 2023, when tensions between Governor Siminalayi Fubara and his predecessor, now the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) Minister Nyesom Wike, escalated.

Naija News reports that the situation worsened on 29 October 2023, when a section of the Rivers State House of Assembly Complex was bombed, further heightening the political tensions.

Fubara and Wike have been engaged in a prolonged power struggle over control of political structures in the state, with both sides vying for influence.

On 7th October 2024, the conflict took a more violent turn when three local government secretariats were set on fire, intensifying fears of further unrest.

In December 2023, the political crisis deepened when 27 lawmakers from the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) “defected” to the All Progressives Congress (APC), sparking a constitutional debate over their actions. The Rivers State High Court ruled that the seats of the defecting lawmakers were vacant, a decision that was later challenged and led to a series of ongoing legal battles.

These events have culminated in the president’s decision to declare a state of emergency in the state to restore stability and address the ongoing political unrest.

According to The Nation, here is a timeline of the Rivers political crisis:

29 October 2023 – A section of the State House of Assembly Complex went into flames after suspected arsonists bombed it. This was on the eve of the impeachment attempt on Governor Fubara.

30 October 2023 – Some lawmakers, backed by Wike, initiatedimpeachment proceedings against Fubara

31 October 2023 – President Bola Tinubu mediated in the political rift between Fubara and Wike at the Presidential Villa, Abuja. The mediation failed after a short while.

11 December 2023 – The 27 pro-Wike lawmakers announced their defection from the PDP to APC, citing divisions within the PDP.

12 December 2023 – A State High Court in Port Harcourt, via an order, cleared the way for Governor Fubara-backed four-member Assembly to hold legislative business without interference by the Amaewhule-led faction.

13 December 2023 – Edison Ehie, the speaker of the four-member faction, declared vacant the seats of the 27 pro-Wike lawmakers who defected to the APC, setting the tone for another phase of the political fight.

Fubara presented the N800 billion 2024 budget to the four-member assembly.

14 December 2023 – Fubara signed the N800 billion 2024 appropriation bill into law. The Attorney General and Commissioner for Justice in the state, Zacchaeus Adangor, resigned, citing “personal principles.”

15 December 2023 – More Wike’s loyalists resigned as commissioners, increasing the tally to nine.

18 December 2023 –Fubara and Wikesigned a peace deal at a meeting convened by President Tinubu at the Presidential Villa, Abuja.

20 December 2023 – The lawmakers withdrew theimpeachment notice against Governor Fubara.

31 December 2023 – Ehie, the factional speaker, who led a four-member Fubara-backed assembly, resigned.

4 January 2024 –Ehie withdrew a contempt suit against pro-Wike lawmakers, suggesting the political crisis in the state was approaching an end.

17 January 2024 – Rivers Assembly reconfirmed the nine pro-Wike commissioners who resigned from the cabinet in December

22 January 2024 – A Federal High Court in Abujaset aside the state’s N800 billion budget signed into law in December 2023 by Governor Fubara.

26 January 2024 – The Rivers Assembly stripped Governor Fubara of the power to appoint caretaker committees for local government councils after the assembly rejected the governor’s veto against its legislation.

24 April 2024 – Governor Fubara reshuffled cabinet, and redeployedthree Wike-backed commissioners. The commissioners rejected their redeployment and resignedhours later.

6 May 2024 – Governor Fubara declared that Rivers had no House of Assembly.

8 May 2024 – Victor Oko-Jumbo, a lawmaker from Bonny Constituency, emerged as the speaker of a three-member Rivers Assembly, creating more confusion and deepening the political crisis in the state.

10 May 2024 – Fubara relocated the legislative business of the Assembly to the Government House in Port Harcourt. A State High Court in Port Harcourt barred Wike’s allies from parading themselves as lawmakers.

13 May 2024—Governor Fubaravowed to probe the administration of his predecessor, Wike

15 May 2024 – Five more commissioners resigned, citing various reasons.

21 May 2024 – A State High Court in Port Harcourt nullified the amended Rivers local government law, which granted tenure extension for the local government council officials in the state

7 June 2024 – Rivers State Government approved N19.6 billion for the reconstruction of the Rivers House of Assembly Complex, six months after it was demolished.

18 June 2024 – Fubara, in a statewide broadcast, directed outgoing council officials to vacate office immediately following the expiration of their tenure.

19 June 2024: Governor Fubara inaugurated the chairpersons of the caretaker committees for the 23 local government areas in the state.

25 June 2024 –Dynamite exploded near Hotel Presidential along Aba Road, Port Harcourt, during a protest in solidarity with Wike.

4 July 2024—The Appeal Court in Abuja reinstated the pro-Wike lawmakers. The appellate court said the lower court lacked jurisdiction to grant the ex parte order it issued.

9 July 2024 – Pro-Wike lawmakers gave Governor Fubara a seven-day ultimatum to re-present the 2024 budget to them for consideration, their first legislative action after reinstatement.

21 July 2024 – A Federal High Court in Abuja declined pro-Wike lawmakers’ prayer to stop Governor Fubara from spending state funds.

13 August 2024 – Wikevowed never to support Fubara again in his political life, saying his successor was “ungrateful”.

25 August 2024 – APP in Rivers State asked Governor Fubara to seek re-election in 2027 under the party platform, claiming that the PDP had lost relevance in the state.

4 September 2024 – Justice I.P.C Igwe of a State High in Rivers orders Rivers State Independent Electoral Commission (RSIEC) to conduct local elections in the state, using the 2023 voters register.

20 September 2024 – A Federal High Court in Abuja dismissed a suit seeking to sack pro-Wike lawmakers.

21 September 2024 – Governor Fubara’s allies picked APP forms for local elections, following PDP’s boycott of the exercise.

30 September 2024 – A Federal High Court in Abuja barred INEC from releasing voters’ register to RSIEC for local elections and further barred the police from providing security for the exercise.

4 October 2024 – Governor Fubara visited the RSIEC office and allegedly foiled an attempt by the police to “cart away” materials meant for the local elections. Police barred operatives from providing security for the election.

5 October 2024 – Fubara conducted local elections in the state where chairmanship candidates of APP won in 22 local councils in Rivers while Action Alliance won in one.

6 October 2024 – Fubara inaugurated chairpersons at Government House.

7 October 2024 – Police unsealed local government secretariats after four months.

8 October 2024 – Governor Fubara constituted a seven-man judicial panel of enquiry to investigate the cause of post-election violence and make recommendations for the state government.

10 October 2024 – The Court of Appeal in Abuja affirmed the nullification of Rivers 2024 budget. The appellate court affirmed pro-Wike lawmakers as the legitimate legislative authority in the state.

Governor Fubara filed an appeal at the Supreme Court, insisting the seats of the defected lawmakers remain vacant.

February 2025 – The Supreme Court restored Amaewhule’s position as the speaker, reinstated the others as legitimate members of the assembly, and nullified the local election organised by Fubara’s administration.

The lawmakers subsequently gave the governor 48 hours to re-present the budget.

The Governor had vowed to implement the order of the Supreme Court despite disagreeing with the verdict.

His efforts to re-present the budget were unsuccessful as the lawmakers denied him access to the assembly quarters last Wednesday.

On Monday, the battle took a new twist when 26 lawmakers served a notice of alleged misconduct against Governor Fubara and his deputy, Ngozi Odu.

The notice of misconduct against the duo marks a resumption of the impeachment plot against them.

18 March 2025 – President Bola Ahmed Tinubu suspended Fubara and Odu for six months and declared a state of emergency in the state.

Otive Igbuzor, executive director of the African Centre for Leadership, Strategy and Development (Centre LSD), says it does not speak well of Nigeria’s democracy that nine million of the country’s 200 million population played the decisive role in electing President Bola Tinubu in 2023.

According to the final tallies of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) from all 36 states and Abuja, Tinubu garnered about 36.6 percent or 8.79 million valid votes, while Atiku Abubakar of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), trailed behind with 29.1 percent or 6.98 million of valid votes.

Peter Obi of the Labour Party (LP) received 25.4 percent or about 6.1 million votes.

Speaking in Abuja on Tuesday at a political dialogue on election credibility threshold in Nigeria, organised by the LSD, Igbuzor said more Nigerians need to be involved in the electioneering process.

“It doesn’t speak well of the country’s democracy that nine million Nigerians, representing 26 percent of the country’s 200 million population, played the decisive role in the election of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu at the polls,” he said.

“So, that pillar of our work is very important for us. Why is it that people don’t vote in Nigeria, and what can we do to make them vote?

“And then the last pillar, pillar four, is monitoring key stakeholders in the electoral process. And this, what we are doing today, is dealing with the credibility of elections.

“So, we want to have indices to measure credibility. And our aspiration is that we will create an index, just like we have a poverty index, so if there is an election in the US, we go to the US and use the index to measure it.

“If there is an election in Ghana, we go to Ghana and use the index to measure it. That is our aspiration.”

He said notwithstanding the challenges associated with democratic rule in the polity, it is still better than military rule.

On his part, Iroro Izu, a lecturer in the department of political science and international relations at Nile University, recommended that transparency and accountability checkers should be developed and used to gauge the operational credibility of the key stakeholders in future elections.

Izu also called on the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to create more polling units to make voting centers easier, more convenient, and more accessible.

“As recommended by the Mohammed Uwais electoral reform commission, INEC should be unbundled to several independent entities for purposes of efficiency and effectiveness to the end that one of such entities will deal with election offences,” he said.

“Another will deal with political parties’ conduct, especially in the area of primary elections; also, a third entity could be in charge of massive re-orientation of citizens, politicians, security personnel, and other stakeholders.

“Civil society organisations with vast experience in election matters should be engaged in the training and retraining of election workers and in election monitoring.

“INEC, as an impartial player in the election enterprise, could use any legal measure to execute and achieve its mandate.

“Traditional rulers and religious leaders should be co-opted in sensitisation campaigns and appeals to the consciences of all stakeholders involved in the election business.

“The law should be guaranteed to ensure the conduct of all elections in one day to avoid continued subtle disenfranchisement of many as a result of lethargy or voter fatigue.

“INEC should make it an official policy to prioritise the use of political science and statistics graduates in election duties.

“This is because most times INEC staffers who engage in questionable dealings during elections do so out of ignorance of how the process should work. It is true that they are trained, but most times the training period is too short, abrupt, and inconclusive.”

Vice-President Kashim Shettima says the federal executive council (FEC) has approved N158 billion for the procurement of electric vehicles for the north-east.

Speaking on Tuesday while receiving a delegation from the Harvard Kennedy School alumni on a Nigeria-Ghana trek at the presidential villa, Abuja, Shettima said FEC gave the approval last week.

The vice-president said the federal government is investing heavily in electric vehicles to ease the hardship caused by petrol subsidy removal.

“We are investing massively in green technology – electric buses, electric cars and electric tricycles. Just two weeks ago, the Federal Executive Council approved an expenditure of N158 billion for the procurement of those items for the North East and it will be replicated in other sub-regions of the country,” he said.

Shettima also commended President Bola Tinubu’s decisive leadership, saying that the removal of the petrol subsidy was a crucial step towards economic growth.

He, however, assured that measures being put in place to address the challenges caused by the subsidy removal such as alternative energy sources, and investment in green technology will soon improve the living standard of Nigerians.

“When we assumed the mantle of leadership, the greatest albatross around the neck of the Nigerian government over the past 50 years had been subsidy on petroleum products. We came to a point where we either get rid of the subsidy or the subsidy will get rid of the Nigerian nation,” Shettima said.

“So, my boss (President Tinubu) took the bullet, and we knew that if we failed to address the fuel subsidy scam within the first three weeks of the administration, we wouldn’t dare to do that again. In his inaugural address, he took the bullet and announced the removal of the fuel subsidy. And we should know the consequences of unveiling a masquerade; they came after us. We stood our ground and the fuel subsidy was gone.”

He also highlighted the administration’s fiscal reforms, including the unification of exchange rates, which he said has curbed corruption in the foreign exchange market.

Shettima urged the delegation to ignore the negative narratives about Nigeria and focus on the development strides of the government.

Also speaking, Jumoke Oduwole, minister of trade, industry, and investment, said Nigeria is leveraging its trade policy under the World Trade Organisation (WTO), with a strong focus on the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA).

Oduwole said while oil and gas remain a significant revenue source, the country is shifting its focus toward export diversification, particularly in the technology sector, which now contributes approximately 70 percent to Nigeria’s gross domestic product (GDP).

‘THERE’S STABILITY IN ALL SECTORS DUE TO TIMELY POLICIES’

Responding to questions on government policies and the economy’s direction, Wale Edun, minister of finance and coordinating minister of the economy, said the country’s economic trajectory has improved significantly under Tinubu’s leadership.

“Today, there is stability in all sectors of the economy due to timely and sound policies, reduction in frivolous spending, removal of petroleum subsidy that was draining the government of up to 5% of the GDP and drawing from the Central Bank far beyond the limits,” Edun said.

According to Edun, inflation rates are declining, exchange rates have stabilised, and the cost of food and energy is becoming more affordable, while the fiscal deficit shows there is a commitment to prudence by the government.

On her part, Olu Verheijen, special adviser to the president on energy, said the energy sector has undergone significant structural reforms.

Verheijen added that although the sector contributes less than 10 percent to Nigeria’s GDP, it remains a crucial source of foreign exchange earnings and fiscal income.

The presidential aide said a key policy focus of the Tinubu administration is to position energy as a catalyst for economic diversification and revenue generation, aiming to boost productivity and earnings across various sectors.

The Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) has rejected a state of emergency declared by President Bola Tinubu in Rivers state.

The opposition party says the president does not have the power to suspend Siminalayi Fubara, an elected governor.

On Tuesday night, Tinubu declared a state of emergency in Rivers following the prolonged political crisis in the south-south state.

The president also suspended Fubara, his deputy and the members of the state assembly.

The president nominated Ibok-Ete Ibas, a retired vice-admiral, as the administrator of Rivers state.

In a statement condemning the state of emergency in Rivers, Debo Ologunagba, PDP spokesperson, said suspending an elected governor is “unconstitutional”.

“The PDP outrightly rejects this attempt by the President to override the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended) and undermine the votes and will of the people of Rivers State by seeking to depose a democratic government and foist an undemocratic rule in the State,” the statement reads.

Ologunagba said the appointment of an administrator to govern the state is a “clear attack on our nation’s democracy, an abrogation of the votes and democratic right of the people of Rivers State to choose their leader under the Constitution”.

“The action of Mr. President therefore clearly borders on an attempt at state capture. It is the climax of a well-oiled plot to forcefully take over Rivers State for which the All Progressives Congress (APC) has been bent on stoking crisis to ensure that democracy is ultimately truncated in the State,” Ologunagba said.

“Nigerians are invited to note that the situation in Rivers State and the reasons adduced by the President cannot justify the declaration of a state of emergency in the State under the 1999 Constitution, rendering the declaration completely incompetent.

“The PDP alerts that the unwarranted imposition of emergency rule in Rivers State is part of the larger vicious plot to foist a siege mentality across Nigeria, decimate opposition, impose a totalitarian one-Party State and turn the country into a fiefdom

“In any case, nothing in Section 305 of the 1999 Constitution relied upon by the President in the declaration grants him the exclusive powers to declare or execute the declaration of a state of emergency without recourse to the statutory approval of the National Assembly.

“Mr President should recognize that his order to an unelected individual to forthwith take over the government of Rivers State is illegal and a clear recipe for crisis, threat to the peace and stability of not only Rivers State but the entire nation.

“For emphasis, Governor Fubara was democratically elected for a tenure of four years which tenure cannot be unconstitutionally abridged.”

Ologunagba said Ibas not to take any “action or step which is capable of derailing smooth democratic” in Rivers state.

Says Amaewhule, 26 Lawmakers Not Members Of PDP

Rivers State chapter of the Peoples’ Democratic Party, PDP, has threatened to expel the minister of the Federal Capital Territory, FCT, Nyesom Wike if the political crisis engulfing the state continues unabated.

PDP alleged that the former governor had committed several anti-party activities that the various organs of the party should not hesitate to commence a process of either suspending him or be expelled from the party.

Speaking during a press conference in Port Harcourt on Tuesday, the acting state chairman of the PDP, Robinson Ewor also dismissed the Supreme Court judgment to the extent that Martins Amaewhule and 26 other lawmakers actually defected from the party to the All Progressives Congress, APC.

“Supreme Court made three essential orders. At this stage, Supreme Court erred in law. The FCT minister is in the cabinet of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu and you know no man can serve two Gods. Even the bible says it, you will satisfy one, you won’t satisfy the other one.

“Because Nyesom Wike is serving in the government of Ahmed Tinubu, there is no way his loyalty will be in PDP any more. His loyalty 100 percent is in APC. What constitutes anti-party activity is that if you take actions that brings the party to disrepute. That is anti-party activity. The FCT minister has taken several actions that have brought the PDP to disrepute.

“The party will take action at the appropriate time. You have organs of the party. We have the NEC, NWC and the state executive committees. The party organs trickles down to the wards. You know the challenge Wike created in this state for us as a party. The day we properly take over the party in the state, we will discipline Nyesom Wike for anti-party including suspension or expelling him from the party.

“The party will do that at the appropriate time. We will expel him from the party depending on the gravity of the offence”, Ewor said.

The PDP acting chairman said the position of the party is that “Martins Amaewhule and co defected from the PDP to the APC. He announced on the floor of the House of Assembly. He deposed to the affidavit in Abuja High Court. Supreme Court erred in law. Amaewhule and 26 others are not members of our party.

“If they were members of our party, the Supreme Court had ordered you to go and receive the budget but what are they doing now? Even the President had acknowledged that the 27 lawmakers had defected from the PDP. It is not about what the Supreme Court said”.

The party however hailed Governor Siminalayi Fubara for his commitment to implementing the judgment of the Supreme Court for the good of Rivers people and appealed to the 27 lawmakers to see reason and also comply in a way that would be for the betterment of the state.

“Though the Supreme Court said that Martins Amaewhule and 26 others never defected from the PDP, we have sufficient evidence including affidavit they deposed to. Martins Amaewhule read their defection letter on the floor of the House of Assembly. Tony Okocha, the then APC chairman received them. We as a party can tell you that they are no more our members. The Supreme Court has given what they asked and what they did not ask for”.

The party appealed to the FCT Minister, Nyesom Wike to sheathe his sword and allow peace to return to the state so that Governor Fubara can concentrate on governance.