President Bola Tinubu had on March 18, 2025, declared a state of emergency in Rivers State, suspending Governor Siminalayi Fubara, his deputy, Dr. Ngozi Odu, and all elected members of the State House of Assembly for an initial period of six months. He also appointed Vice Admiral Ibok-Ete Ibas (rtd) as the sole administrator of the state.
However, 11 governors from the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) have dragged the Federal Government to the Supreme Court over the move. The plaintiffs—governors of Adamawa, Enugu, Osun, Oyo, Bauchi, Akwa Ibom, Plateau, Delta, Taraba, Zamfara, and Bayelsa—are asking the court to determine the constitutionality of the President’s action.
In suit number SC/CV/329/2025, filed through their respective Attorneys General, the governors are seeking clarification on whether the President has the constitutional power to suspend elected officials and replace them with an unelected administrator under the guise of a state of emergency.
The plaintiffs also asked the court to determine whether such actions do not violate key provisions of the 1999 Constitution, including Sections 1(2), 5(2), 176, 180, 188, 305, 90, and 105.
In a counter affidavit sworn by Taiye Hussain Oloyede, Special Assistant to the President and Ministry of Justice, the Federal Government said the emergency proclamation was based on “verifiable facts” and followed repeated but unsuccessful attempts by President Tinubu to mediate the crisis.
The affidavit cited the demolition of the State House of Assembly complex, threats by militants, attacks on oil installations, and a complete legislative paralysis as key factors prompting the decision.
“Governance had ground to a halt in Rivers State. There was no functioning government. Despite the President’s efforts to engage the parties involved, they remained intransigent,” the affidavit read.
According to Oloyede, the governor’s demolition of the Assembly building effectively denied 27 lawmakers opposed to him a venue to meet. He added that militants issued threats against perceived opponents of the governor, while the governor neither condemned nor distanced himself from such threats.
“The political crisis in Rivers State was public knowledge. The governor and lawmakers were at loggerheads, and the impasse crippled governance,” he stated.
He further stressed that the President acted within his constitutional powers and that the action was not politically motivated or targeted at opposition states.
“The plaintiffs are reacting to imaginary fears. The President has not threatened to impose emergency rule on any of their states. President Tinubu is a firm believer in the rule of law and exercises his powers strictly within the bounds of the Constitution,” the affidavit added.
Meanwhile, the National Assembly, in a preliminary objection filed on April 22, asked the Supreme Court to dismiss the suit, describing it as “frivolous and speculative.” The lawmakers also asked the court to award N1 billion in costs against the plaintiffs.
