The controversy surrounding the emergency rule imposed in Rivers State has sparked a fierce debate across Nigeria, with former President Goodluck Jonathan and Nobel Laureate Wole Soyinka both condemning the suspension of elected officials in the state. President Bola Tinubu’s decision, which followed escalating political tensions in Rivers, has drawn criticism from several quarters, with some arguing that it undermines the country’s democracy and violates the principles of federalism.
On March 18, President Tinubu declared a state of emergency in Rivers State, citing a breakdown of governance due to the ongoing conflict between Governor Siminalayi Fubara and the state lawmakers. The president also pointed to attacks on oil facilities as another contributing factor. As part of the emergency measures, Tinubu suspended Governor Fubara, his deputy Ngozi Odu, and all members of the Rivers State House of Assembly, appointing retired Vice Admiral Ibok-Ette Ibas as the state’s sole administrator.
Tinubu’s decision was made in accordance with Section 305 of Nigeria’s 1999 Constitution, which allows the president to declare a state of emergency in any state to restore peace and order. Forty-eight hours after the declaration, the National Assembly approved the emergency rule, though the move faced opposition from some lawmakers.
While the declaration of a state of emergency is a legal provision, it has raised significant concerns, particularly among opposition groups and civil society organizations. Critics argue that the decision sets a dangerous precedent and could be seen as an overreach of presidential powers.
Former President Jonathan, speaking at the Haske Satumari Foundation Colloquium in Abuja, expressed his disappointment over the suspension of elected officials in Rivers State. Jonathan, who hails from the Niger Delta region, stated that the suspension of democratic institutions could tarnish Nigeria’s image and harm its investment prospects. He also decried the abuse of power by government officials, accusing the executive, legislature, and judiciary of failing to act in accordance with the country’s democratic principles.
Jonathan highlighted that the actions of the key political actors in Nigeria were undermining the country’s democracy. He also highlighted the impact on the judiciary, saying it was troubling when individuals could dictate decisions to the courts, further eroding public trust in the legal system. He cited his own experience in 2013 when he declared a state of emergency in Borno, Yobe, and Adamawa states due to the Boko Haram insurgency but did not suspend democratic institutions in those states.
Nobel Laureate Wole Soyinka also criticized the emergency rule, saying it violated the spirit of federalism. In an interview with The Africa Report, Soyinka argued that the 1999 Constitution granted too much power to the president and that a national discussion was needed to address the imbalance. He expressed concerns that the concentration of power at the federal level was detrimental to Nigeria’s pluralistic society and called for a national conference to discuss the country’s governance structure.
The Senior Special Assistant to the President on Media and Publicity, Temitope Ajayi, responded to the criticisms from Jonathan and Soyinka. While acknowledging their status as respected statesmen, Ajayi defended President Tinubu’s actions, asserting that the president was merely exercising his constitutional powers to preserve the integrity of the country. According to Ajayi, the president’s decision was made to prevent the situation in Rivers State from escalating into chaos and threatening Nigeria’s stability.
Ajayi also referenced the Supreme Court’s ruling that there was no functioning government in Rivers State in accordance with the constitution, justifying the president’s intervention. He emphasized that Tinubu was fulfilling his duty to safeguard the nation, and his actions were aimed at maintaining peace and security in Rivers State.
While the presidency has defended the emergency rule, the decision has sparked widespread opposition. Many governors, particularly those from the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), have condemned the suspension of elected officials. The Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), the Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC), and civil society groups have also expressed strong disapproval.
The #BringBackOurGirls movement, led by Aisha Yesufu, has called for the reversal of the emergency rule. Yesufu argued that the suspension of elected officials was illegal and violated the country’s constitution. She warned that if Nigerians allowed the president and the National Assembly to get away with such actions, it would set a dangerous precedent for future governments.
“We have to safeguard our democracy,” Yesufu said. “The democracy that we have today—many people died for it. It is only fair that we ensure the rule of law is followed, and that processes are not bypassed for political gain.”
Anthony Ubani, Executive Director of FixPolitics, also condemned the emergency rule, calling it a threat to Nigeria’s democratic future. Ubani vowed that legal challenges would be filed against the president’s actions, asserting that the suspension of elected officials in Rivers State was unconstitutional and a form of dictatorship.
In response to the emergency rule, several civil society groups and rights activists have mobilized for mass protests. The Take-It-Back Movement, led by Sanyaolu Juwon, has announced plans for a nationwide protest on April 7. Juwon accused Tinubu’s administration of steering the country toward authoritarian rule, citing the suspension of elected officials in Rivers as an example of the government’s overreach.
The Youth Rights Campaign and other civil society organizations have also expressed strong opposition to the emergency rule. They argue that the president’s actions amount to an attack on Nigeria’s democracy and called on the judiciary to review the case and ensure that constitutional principles are upheld.
Peluola Adewale, the National Secretary of the Democratic Socialist Movement (DSM), described the emergency rule as a “coup on the people of Rivers State” and urged the Nigeria Labour Congress and Trade Union Congress to lead protests against the unconstitutional decision. He also called for a united effort by civil society organizations to defend the democratic rights of Nigerians.
The ongoing debate over the emergency rule in Rivers State reflects broader concerns about the concentration of power in the hands of the president. Critics argue that the Nigerian constitution, as it stands, grants too much authority to the executive, undermining the balance of power between the federal and state governments. As the debate continues, many Nigerians are calling for reforms that will ensure the protection of democratic institutions and prevent future abuses of power.
In the coming days, legal challenges are expected to be mounted against the president’s actions, with civil society groups and political opponents pushing for the reinstatement of the suspended officials in Rivers State. The outcome of these challenges could have significant implications for the future of Nigeria’s democracy and its governance framework.
As the nation grapples with this crisis, one thing is clear: the actions taken in Rivers State have sparked a crucial conversation about the state of Nigeria’s democracy and the need for greater accountability from those in power.
