A coalition of political leaders and stakeholders has strongly condemned President Bola Tinubu’s declaration of a State of Emergency in Rivers State, calling it a blatant abuse of power and an unconstitutional maneuver to remove a democratically elected government.
At a joint press conference in Abuja on Tuesday, former Vice President Atiku Abubakar led the charge against what he described as an “autocratic federal overreach,” stating that Tinubu had succumbed to political favoritism rather than upholding his oath to govern impartially.
“The president’s illegal and unconstitutional proclamation was presumably driven by the insidious political crisis in Rivers State, which culminated in the recent Supreme Court ruling,” Abubakar said. “However, rather than allowing the law to take its course, he has chosen to impose federal control over a duly elected government. This is a brazen assault on democracy.”
The controversy follows the protracted political battle between Rivers State Governor Siminalayi Fubara and his predecessor-turned-rival, Nyesom Wike, who is now a minister in Tinubu’s cabinet.
The rift led to the defection of 27 lawmakers from the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) to the All Progressives Congress (APC), resulting in a prolonged leadership crisis in the state assembly.
While the Supreme Court recently ruled on aspects of the dispute, stakeholders argue that the declaration of a State of Emergency was an overreach and a deliberate attempt to sideline Fubara’s administration.
“The Nigerian Constitution does not grant the president the power to remove an elected governor, deputy governor, or state legislature,” the political leaders said in a joint statement. “Section 188 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) provides a clear impeachment process that must be initiated by the State House of Assembly, not through presidential decree.”
The move has been widely criticized as a dangerous precedent that could allow future presidents to arbitrarily remove state governors, eroding Nigeria’s federal system.
Legal experts and opposition figures argue that Tinubu’s invocation of emergency powers does not meet constitutional requirements.
Section 305 of the Constitution, which grants the president authority to declare a state of emergency, limits such actions to extreme circumstances like war, external aggression, or a total breakdown of public order.
“There is no war in Rivers State. There is no widespread violence. There is no existential threat to Nigeria’s sovereignty,” Abubakar stated.
“This is nothing but a manufactured crisis designed to consolidate power.”
The declaration also bypassed a key constitutional requirement – approval from a two-thirds majority in both houses of the National Assembly. Without this approval, the proclamation should be deemed null and void.
Critics argue that the true motive behind the emergency declaration is political control rather than security concerns.
The federal government has justified its decision by citing alleged threats to national infrastructure, particularly pipeline vandalism.
However, political stakeholders dismissed this reasoning as “laughable,” pointing out that securing national assets falls under the jurisdiction of federal security agencies, not state governments.
“The police, military, and DSS are all under the control of the president,” the joint statement read.
“If there are security breaches, the responsibility lies with the federal government, not Governor Fubara.”
The coalition of political leaders, including members from different parties and civil society groups, has demanded an immediate reversal of the emergency declaration. Their key demands include that the president must revoke the proclamation and allow the governor, deputy governor, and State Assembly to resume their constitutional duties; Lawmakers must vote against legitimizing an unconstitutional power grab; the courts must swiftly strike down the proclamation to prevent future abuse of emergency powers, and Nigerians, civil society organizations, and democracy advocates must resist the creeping return to authoritarian rule.
The political leaders warned that Tinubu’s action could destabilize the Niger Delta, a region with a history of unrest and economic significance due to its oil production.
They cautioned that manufacturing political crises in such a fragile region could undo years of peace-building efforts.
“The federal government should not stoke fires that could engulf the nation,” the statement concluded. “Rivers State is not a conquered territory, and Nigeria is not a dictatorship.”
Apart from Atiku, other notable politicians present were former Kaduna State Governor, Nasir el-Rufai; former Secretary to Government of the Federation, Babachir Lawal; former Governor of Imo State, Emeka Ihedioha, former Director General of the Progressives Governors Forum, Salihu Usman, and former minister of Police Affairs, Adamu Waziri.
Former Governors Kayode Fayemi and Rotimi Amaechi sent in apologies for their absence at the event.
READ MORE FROM: NIGERIAN TRIBUNE