State of Emergency: Some contentious issue and how I see it

At exactly, 7pm local time on Tuesday, 18th of March 2025, the President and Commander-in-Chief of the Armed forces of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu, following a protracted political logjam in Rivers State, declared a state of emergency, in a nationwide broadcast, suspending the State Governor, His Excellency, Siminalaye Fubara, and his deputy, Ms. Ngozi Odu. Also suspended were members of the State’s House of Assembly (legislative arm of the state government), led by Rt. Hon. Martin’s Ahamewule, for six months. The President hinges the power to do so, on the provision of section 305 of the 1999 constitution.

While I agree with the submission that, section 305 did not stipulate that the President should or can remove an elected Governor or any other elected official for that matter, it does not also discourage it. Many people who know, and those who think they know, have been expressing varying opinions on the matter, both on traditional, and social media. While some applauded the President for being decisive in bringing to an end, what has come to constitute existential threat to democracy in Rivers State in particular, and Nigeria in general, some decried what they term as constitutional breach, through the suspension of duly elected public officials.

Let me give a bit of background to about stalemate between the Governor and the State House of Assembly. At the peak of the political quagmire, the lawmakers who are believed to be loyalists to the immediate past Governor of the State, and current Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, Mr. Nyesom Wike, had days before, initiated an impeachment move against the Governor for what they term, gross misconducts, which include failure to present the 2024, and 2025 budget before the House for passage, as required by the law. Before then, the Governor had fallen out with his predecessor, and political benefactor, who railroaded the Governor into office, Wike, over the control of the party structure in the State. A majority of the lawmakers, and commissioners pitched their tents with Wike.

The Governor, following a suspicion that the house was going to seat, to initiate an impeachment proceeding against him, went on in a preemptive move, to demolish the State’s legislative chamber sometimes in November 2023. This was later followed by a bifurcation of the Assembly into a group of 27 (loyal to Wike), and 4 (loyal to Governor Fubara). The Governor, refused to recognise the former, on account of an allegation of defection to another party in contravention of the electoral act 2022, until the Supreme Court ruled, affirming their statuses as bona fide members of the House. This led to their seat being declared vacant by the minority 4 recognised by the Governor. But the Supreme Court, recently ruled that there was no evidence of defection against the 27 others, thereby, validating their being authentic members of the House. While the Governor had shown willingness to comply with the apex court’s judgment, the lawmakers were bent on taking their pound of flesh, having left them with no salary and allowances for more than a year.

This, sort of heightened the tension, which led to a threat, by militants who are believed to be his supporters, to vandalise the oil pipeline, in case the Governor were impeached. And before anyone could say, “Rivers” bombs have started going off, damaging critical oil infrastructure.

Therefore, President Tinubu, in order to be seen to be doing something about the tensed situation, declared a State of Emergency in a nationwide broadcast. Following the suspension of the political gladiators. President Tinubu then, appointed retired Vice Admiral Ibok-Étè Ibas, as the sole Administrator for a period of 6 months. This does go down well with many people who cited the example of when President Goodluck Jonathan, when did the same in 2013 in Adamawa, Borno and Yobe States. They argue that there is no where it is stated in the constitution that a President is empowered to remove or suspend any democratically elected office holder. Thus, they deem the President’s action to be illegal. Some believe the President is right in the eyes of the law to have suspended the Governor and lawmakers, replacing them with a Sole Administrator.

The way I see it:

While almost all politically neutral people agree with the President declaring a state of emergency is the way to go, a substantial number, most of whom are opposition politicians, also disagree with the suspension of a democratically elected Governor, and members of the House of Assembly. They argue that he has no such power to suspend those critical democratic institutions.

The section 305 which the president relies on, remains silent on removal or suspension of democratically elected officials, during a State of Emergency. But, to me, the silence of the constitution on the issue, gives room for discretionary enforcement of the law. It is therefore the prerogative of the President to decide whether to go that route or not. This is especially so, when the Governor himself is a part of the problem to be solved. Are the critics of President Tinubu saying, even when the Governor is a party to the conflict, he should be allowed to continue to occupy the seat, and the members of the House of Assembly carry on with their impeachment proceeding, while critical national assets are being damaged as a result of the move?

The critics are quick to point out that Dr. Goodluck Jonathan declared State of Emergency in Adamawa, Borno, and Yobe States without suspending any of the Governors in 2013. For that, I say, he deserves commendation. But that does not mean everybody would follow that template, where there is a room for the exercise of discretion. Besides, the situations were not the same, as that of Rivers State. While the former was as a result of war against insurgency, the latter is a conflict between two arms of the government. Again, the law operates in letter and spirit. Unless we want to be mischievous, how can a State of Emergency be declared in Rivers State, leaving the Governor and the House of Assembly members in the saddle? Will you still expect that the aim of restoring order would be achieved? The law would have been effective in letter, but not in spirit.

Some people would argue that, it is clearly stated in sections 188, and 189, under what conditions a Governor may be removed. But it was not (stated) in section 305, on which the President relied for his action in respect of the Rivers State Governor and members of the House of Assembly. The condition for invoking sections 188, and 189, are not the same as those under which section 305 would be invoked. Again, in this case, it is not removal, but suspension, for a specified period of time, during which normalcy is expected to have been restored, and they revert to the status quo.

A “State of Emergency” is defined as: “a situation of national danger or disaster in which a government suspends normal constitutional procedures in order to regain control.”

Please, underline this phrase: “Suspend Normal constitutional procedure.”

So the section in question being referred to as stipulating how a governor could be removed, is among those constitutional procedures that would be suspended in the case of a State of Emergency in Rivers State. Therefore, the removal of the above-mentioned officials has not violated any part of the constitution, in my own opinion.

Role of the National Assembly:

Assuming we have a National Assembly with men and women who alive to their lawmaking responsibilities, and not one where matters that could pass as beer parlour gossips are elevated to a status of parliamentary debate, now is the time to take a look at the electoral law, examine it to see what can be expunged from, or infused into it, to discourage politics of prebendalism (godfatherism). Not that alone. Even the contentious section 305 should be examined with a view to eliminating the ambiguity that has rendered the action of the President in Rivers State controversial.

It is ironic to see a Wike who emerged from the shadow of a political godfather in Rotimi Amaechi, taking pride in having superintended over the funeral of prebendal politics in Rivers State, to now become another notorious godfather — a menace he claims to have eliminated.

If the National Assembly could do away with irrelevant issues, and focus more on how to render prebendalism an unprofitable venture in Nigerian politics, the embarrassment we witness in Rivers State would not be in vain. Our gain would be that it drew our attention to it such that a decisive action was taken to eradicate it.

Another non-issue:

Another non-issue that some people, whether out of ignorance, mischief, or a combination of both, are saying in respect of the Rivers State shenanigans-induced impeachment is that, the President must sack Wike as a Minister, before he can be seen to be fair. How? Why? Is Wike an official of the Rivers State Government? Even if you strongly believe that there is an affinity between him and the lawmakers, it is not a valid ground to want to compel the President to relieve him of his appointment as a Minister. If the incumbent Governor fails to get it right in terms of how he plays his politics with his political godfather or benefactor, that is his cup of tea. If you’re calling for Wike’s removal as a result of his perceived influence over the “recalcitrant” lawmakers, then may be all ordinary citizens who are not supporting the estranged Governor, but believed to be in support of the lawmakers, should also be sentenced to death then. So in the eyes of the law, Nyesom Wike is not a party to the crisis, and should not be sacked as a result. And emotions would not make him one. It is like asking Fubara to sack one of his appointees because the appointee is believed to be a party to a conflict in his neighbourhood. That would be unfair on both the Governor, and the appointee. So, please let us be reasonable here. It would amount to petty jealousy for anyone to be calling for Wike’s removal as a Minister of the FCT to balance the purported equation in the casualty of the State of Emergency in Rivers State. If he is believed to be involved by proxy, at least, his tools (the lawmakers loyal to him) have also been suspended. So what are we talking about?

State of Emergency to the advantage:

In all, Fubara is the greatest beneficiary of the declared State of Emergency. This is because, there is no how he was going to escape being impeached by those who are desperate to nail his political coffin. But as it stands right now, frayed nerves may have been calmed before September when the suspension would be lifted, and hopefully, a political solution found.

Please keep in mind, however, that “it is all politics” (apologies to Simon Kolawole). If the State of Emergency elapses, and the suspended lawmakers and Fubara return to their respective offices, and the impeachment move revived, nothing may be able to stop them. And if that happens, and another Ijaw man is picked as his successor, then Fubara’s base becomes weakened, and that may spell the end of story for the Governor, politically.

On PDP’s Complaint about Wike:

One thing I don’t understand about the opposition party, People’s Democratic Party (PDP) is the kind of “Wikephobia” that has gripped the party recently. The annoying thing is that, they’ve refused, or they are afraid of wielding the big stick despite his perceived “gross anti-party activities” since 2022 when he lost the party’s presidential ticket to Atiku. There has been no punitive measure, whatsoever, meted out to him as a result. Instead, they’re busy blaming the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) for allegedly using him to destabilise the party. Very puerile an argument. Is he bigger, or more powerful, than the party?

If I may ask, what happens to Sule Lamido’s dismissal of his relevance with a declaration of “Wike being just one PDP member in Rivers State, with one-vote, whose defection cannot affect the party’s electoral fortunes in the State”? Where has that cockiness gone?

Why can’t they place Wike on an indefinite suspension? Or better still, why can’t they expel him from the party, instead of their perennial pediatric tantrums? How has the once-most-powerful party in Africa fallen, to become so spineless that an individual now holds them to ransom like this?

I think I know an answer to all these questions. And that is: the ideological glues with which the party has been held together are “Money, Money, and Money”. Money answereth all things. But it seems, once they were out of power with no access to the Federal treasury, maintaining their internal cohesion seems to have become a challenge for the party. That explains why, Ali-modu Sheriff, the Borno State “money bag”, once held the party by the jugular. It took the intervention of another “money bag” in the shape of Wike, then the Governor of Rivers State — one of the richest States in Nigeria, to save them from the vise-like grip of the former Borno State Governor, had on the party then.

Ever since then, Wike has been behaving like a spoilt brat who is beyond reproach, with the party watching helplessly. Perhaps, they’re still hoping against hope that Wike may still come around, and be useful in their drives to capture power at the centre, once again. Meanwhile, the man is already in bed with the ruling APC as the Minister for the FCT, at least, to sustain his political relevance, both at local and the national levels. And that is working, to a devastating effect for him.

How PDP handle Wike’s issue would determine, where they go from here. It would determine, whether they will bounce back, or go under. Power is, indeed, transient.

Abubakar writes from Ilorin, Kwara state. He can be reached via 08051388285 or [email protected]