Former President Goodluck Jonathan has strongly criticized the recent suspension of elected officials in Rivers State by President Bola Tinubu, warning that such actions could harm Nigeria’s reputation both domestically and internationally. Jonathan voiced his disappointment over the move during his speech as the Chairman at the Haske Satumari Foundation Colloquium in Abuja on Saturday.
Jonathan expressed concerns that the suspension, which involved the removal of Governor Siminalayi Fubara, his deputy Ngozi Odu, and all elected members of the Rivers State House of Assembly, painted the country in a negative light. He suggested that such decisions, especially when taken by those in power, undermine the country’s image and could discourage both foreign and local investments.
President Tinubu’s action came after a period of rising political instability in Rivers State, an oil-rich region in Nigeria’s South-South geopolitical zone. The state has been grappling with political turmoil due to ongoing disputes between the governor and the state’s lawmakers.
In response to the situation, President Tinubu declared a state of emergency in Rivers State, effectively suspending the state governor, deputy governor, and all members of the state House of Assembly for an initial period of six months. In a statement, the president emphasized that the decision was taken to restore peace and stability to the state and ensure that governance could continue without disruption.
In addition to the suspension, President Tinubu appointed retired Vice Admiral Ibok-Ette Ibas as the state’s administrator, who will oversee the affairs of the state during this period of emergency. Tinubu stated that this measure was essential to address the ongoing challenges in Rivers and ensure the security and welfare of its citizens.
Tinubu also clarified that the judicial arm of government in Rivers State would remain unaffected by the state of emergency and would continue to function in line with its constitutional duties.
Jonathan’s comments came shortly after the President’s announcement, as he spoke about the importance of the country’s image on the global stage. Though he acknowledged that it is not typical for former presidents to intervene in current political matters, Jonathan felt compelled to speak out due to the growing number of calls from concerned Nigerians. Many people, particularly from his home region of the Niger Delta, wanted him to weigh in on the political crisis unfolding in Rivers State.
Jonathan lamented that political developments such as this send a troubling signal to the world. He explained that a country’s image is often shaped by the actions of its key political institutions – the executive, legislature, and judiciary. According to Jonathan, when these institutions fail to uphold democratic processes and allow individuals or groups to interfere in the functioning of the state, it undermines public trust in the country’s political system and its institutions.
He was particularly critical of the influence that some individuals exert on the judiciary. Jonathan stressed that when the judiciary is manipulated or pressured to make decisions based on political interests, it erodes public confidence in its ability to dispense justice impartially. This, he noted, is a major concern for Nigerians, as well as for the international community, which closely watches developments in the country.
President Tinubu’s declaration was made in accordance with Section 305 of the 1999 Constitution of Nigeria, which allows the president to declare a state of emergency in any state in the country in order to restore order and peace when the situation demands it.
The president also made it clear that the state of emergency was an unavoidable decision, aimed at resolving the political crisis in Rivers State. Tinubu emphasized that the proclamation had been published in the Federal Gazette and forwarded to the National Assembly, as required by the Constitution.
The president expressed hope that the emergency measure would bring about peace and stability in Rivers, urging all political players in the state to respect the constitutional framework and work towards restoring order. He also stated that this intervention was necessary to prevent the situation from escalating further and potentially affecting the broader political climate in Nigeria.
Rivers State has long been a critical political and economic hub in Nigeria due to its vast oil reserves and strategic location. However, the state has also been a flashpoint for political struggles, often marked by disagreements and conflicts between the executive and legislative branches of government.
In recent months, tensions have escalated between Governor Siminalayi Fubara and members of the state House of Assembly, with accusations of corruption, mismanagement, and interference in the duties of the state legislature. These disputes have created an environment of instability, hindering effective governance and prompting calls for intervention.
The state of emergency declared by President Tinubu is seen as an attempt to restore order in the face of this escalating crisis, with the hope that the appointment of an administrator will bring a semblance of stability while political processes are restructured. However, many political observers and stakeholders, including former President Jonathan, are concerned about the long-term implications of such a move, especially when it involves the suspension of elected officials.
Jonathan’s comments on the situation in Rivers State have sparked a broader national debate on the balance between presidential powers and the independence of state governments. While some view the intervention as necessary to resolve a crisis, others argue that it sets a dangerous precedent for federal overreach into state affairs.
Critics of the suspension argue that it undermines the democratic process by removing elected leaders without due process and accountability. They point out that Nigeria’s democracy is built on the principle of allowing voters to choose their leaders, and any attempt to override this process could lead to a loss of public confidence in the system.
At the same time, some political analysts believe that the president’s decision, although controversial, was a necessary step to prevent further violence and instability in Rivers State. They contend that the state of emergency provides a temporary solution that will allow for peace to be restored, and then pave the way for proper elections and the return of governance under the rule of law.
