* NNPP flays decision, describes it as absurd, dangerous
*President took proactive action – former Reps Member
Pro-democracy and civil rights advocacy group, Human Rights Writers Association of Nigeria (HURIWA) has joined many other groups, individuals and institutions in Nigeria in condemning the declaration of a state of emergency in Rivers State by President Bola Tinubu, describing the action as unconstitutional.
HURIWA said the usurpation of the constitutional powers of the State Governor and the House of Assembly by the illegal appointment of a military administrator in Rivers state is the same thing as the military takeovers that happened in neighbouring West African States of Niger, Mali and Burkina Faso.
National Coordinator of the group, Emmanuel Onwubiko in a statement on Wednesday – today, March 19 – said: “HURIWA absolutely rejects the unconstitutional exercise of strange and undemocratic powers of suspension as announced by the president who was similarly elected and inaugurated just like the Governors and legislators in the Houses of Assembly.
“This unconstitutional takeover of another branch of government in Rivers state under Governor Siminalayi Fubara by an elected civilian president and his grotesque, nebulous and sham decision to bring back a retired Naval chief to exercise the same powers of an elected Governor is a calculated attempt to establish a dictatorship.”
HURIWA’s statement came just as the New Nigeria People’s Party (NNPP) waded into the controversy with an outright condemnation of what it described as not only unconstitutional but also “an absurd political decision and a very dangerous precedent.
NNPP’s National Publicity Secretary, Ladipo Johnson, in a statement earlier today, argued that the situation in Rivers “clearly not degenerated to the level warranting a state of emergency”, adding that except for the inherent political interest in the State, a more reasonable solution could have been applied rather than an emergency rule.
However, in his own reaction, a former Member of the House of Representatives from Akwa Ibom State, Hon. Robinson Uwak has commended President Bola Tinubu for imposing a state of emergency in Rivers State and suspending Governor Sim Fubara.
President Tinubu in a broadcast on Tuesday, citing Section 305(5) of the constitution, announced the suspension of Governor Fubara, his deputy, Ngozi Odu, and members of the state assembly for a period of six months, while a retired naval chief, Ibokette Ibas was appointed as administrator of the state.
According to Uwak, the president acted wisely in order to forestall a total breakdown of law and order and destruction of critical oil infrastructure in the oil-rich state.
But lamenting the development, HURIWA pointed out that what is more unfortunate about the development is that the judiciary which should take down this anti-democratic development, “is in the pockets of the presidency and some key ministers.”
“So it is unlikely that an independent and correct pronouncement on this illegal declaration of a state of emergency in Rivers state can be determined under this toxic atmosphere of complete state capture,” HURIWA agonized in the statement by Comrade Onwubiko.
Besides, the association said the decision by the president smacks of filthy hypocrisy given the fact that few years back when President Goodluck Jonathan declared a state of emergency in Adamawa, Borno and Yobe States in May 2013, “Jonathan rightly jettisoned the illegal counsel of some power grabbers to remove the elected governors and dissolve other democratic structures in the affected states.”
The human rights writers’ body recalled that “Tinubu, who was in the opposition political party then, flatly condemned President Goodluck Jonathan.”
A plethora of constitutional provisions, “back our assertion that the State as a tier of government does not answer to the federal government as they are separate and coexist as federating units and the President has authority only over the federal cabinet and any attempt to usurp and collapse the power of an elected Governor, even if temporarily, is unlawful and should be rejected by the National Assembly.
“The President, even in exercising the powers donated to his office in section 305 of the Constitution, lacks the legal powers to suspend another elected head of a branch of government inaugurated under the provisions of the Grund Norm.”
The group expressed deep concern that this unlawful suspension sets a dangerous precedent for a power crazy dictator masked as democratically elected president.
“We are convinced that a state of emergency in Rivers state is uncalled for since there is no clear evidence of any total breakdown of law and order,” HURIWA stressed.
“We think that since the Rivers state House of Assembly whose majority of the members are loyalists of the minister of the FCT, had made it impossible for Governor Siminialayi Fubara to present the 2025 budget, the National Assembly has the power to take over powers of the State Assembly and allowing it to be hijacked by the federal executive Council in which one of the prominent protagonists in the political instability in Rivers state is a member (minister of FCT) amounts to a coup against democracy.
“This suspension is in Violation of Section 1(2) of the 1999 Constitution (As Amended), which expressly prohibits any forceful takeover of government outside democratic and constitutional processes.
“The Constitution, according to that provision, says “The Federal Republic of Nigeria shall not be governed, nor shall any person or group of persons take control of the government of Nigeria or any part thereof, except in accordance with the provisions of this Constitution.”
Suspending a sitting State Governor violates this provision, as no state of emergency grants the President the power to remove or suspend a duly elected official.
“The nation’s apex court has consistently ruled that the declaration of a state of emergency does not empower the President to remove elected officials during the period of the emergency. In the case of A.G. Federation v. A.G. Lagos State (2013) LPELR-20974(SC), the Supreme Court ruled that: “Under no circumstances shall the democratic structures be suspended or dissolved, even in a state of emergency.”
In the case of A.G. Plateau State v. A.G. Federation (2006), the Supreme Court invalidated the removal of elected officials during a state of emergency in Plateau State.
“In 2013, former President Goodluck Jonathan declared a state of emergency in Borno, Yobe, and Adamawa states, yet he did not remove or suspend the governors. He stated that “all democratic structures remain intact” while security operations intensified.”
“The Constitution is unequivocal in its provisions regarding the removal of a duly elected Governor. Section 188 clearly outlines the impeachment process, which is the sole legal mechanism for removing a Governor, and it is exclusively the prerogative of the State House of Assembly. Nowhere in the Constitution is the President granted the authority to suspend a Governor or the Deputy.
“Besides, Section 11(4) and (5) of the Constitution allows the National Assembly to intervene in the affairs of a State House of Assembly only in cases where the Assembly is unable to perform its functions due to the crisis.
“Even in such circumstances, this provision does not extend to suspending an elected Governor or Deputy. Additionally, Section 308 grants immunity to Governors and their Deputies from civil or criminal proceedings while in office, which absolutely renders the so-called suspension of the Governor and his Deputy a nullity.”
HURIWA said the constitutional provisions on the declaration of a state of emergency by the President did not give the president the power to suspend a Governor.
Specifically, in Chapter 8. Part 2. Section 305. Procedure for proclamation of state of emergency, provides as follows:
(1) Subject to the provisions of this Constitution, the President may by instrument published in the Official -Gazette} of the Government of the Federation issue a Proclamation of a state of emergency in the Federation or any part thereof.
(2) The President shall immediately after the publication, transmit copies of the Official ¬Gazette of the Government of the Federation containing the proclamation including the details of the emergency to the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives, each of whom shall forthwith convene or arrange for a meeting of the House of which he is President or Speaker, as the case may be, to consider the situation and decide whether or not to pass a resolution approving the Proclamation.
(3) The President shall have power to issue a Proclamation of a state of emergency only when ¬
(a) the Federation is at war;
(b) the Federation is in imminent danger of invasion or involvement in a state of war;
(c) there is actual breakdown of public order and public safety in the Federation or any part thereof to such extent as to require extraordinary measures to restore peace and security;
(d) there is a clear and present danger of an actual breakdown of public order and public safety in the Federation or any part thereof requiring extraordinary measures to avert such danger;
(e) there is an occurrence or imminent danger, or the occurrence of any disaster or natural calamity, affecting the community or a section of the community in the Federation;
(f) there is any other public danger which clearly constitutes a threat to the existence of the Federation; or
(g) the President receives a request to do so in accordance with the provisions of subsection (4) of this section.
(4) The Governor of a State may, with the sanction of a resolution supported by two-thirds majority of the House of Assembly, request the President to issue a Proclamation of a state of emergency in the State when there is in existence within the State any of the situations specified in subsection (3) (c), (d) and (e) of this section and such situation does not extend beyond the boundaries of the State.
(5) The President shall not issue a Proclamation of a state of emergency in any case to which the provisions of subsection (4) of this section apply unless the Governor of the State fails within a reasonable time to make a request to the President to issue such Proclamation.
(6) A Proclamation issued by the President under this section shall cease to have effect ¬
(a) if it is revoked by the President by instrument published in the Official Gazette of the Government of the Federation;
(b) if it affects the Federation or any part thereof and within two days when the National Assembly is in session, or within ten days when the National Assembly is not in session, after its publication, there is no resolution supported by two-thirds majority of all the members of each House of the National Assembly approving the Proclamation;
(c) after a period of six months has elapsed since it has been in force: Provided that the National Assembly may, before the expiration of the period of six months aforesaid, extend the period for the Proclamation of the state of emergency to remain in force from time to time for a further period of six months by resolution passed in like manner; or
(d) at any time after the approval referred to in paragraph
(b) or the extension referred to in paragraph (c) of this subsection, when each House of the National Assembly revokes the Proclamation by a simple majority of all the members of each House.
NNPP condemns emergency rule in Rivers
Ladipo Johnson, the NNPP spokesman, insisted that “the presidential fiat invoking Section 305 of the 1999 Constitution is arbitrary in the circumstances, to say the least, particularly on the conditions precedent and implications for democracy and development of the country.”
“It is clearly a dangerous precedent which can only be interpreted as an absurd political manipulation on the part of the federal government,” Johnson stressed.
“Why the rush to proclaim a State of Emergency without the conditions precedent as required by law? Doesn’t the president’s action vitiate the rule of law he talked about in his speech?
“Hasn’t he, by this rash action, shown us that he does not fully understand the long term implications or have the requisite skills required to rule a complex country like Nigeria? Or is it about his Party’s much-touted political interest in Rivers State ahead 2027?
“These are questions germane to this unfortunate decision which, of course, sends frightening signals both locally and internationally regarding the rule of law and overall state of things in our union.”
According to him, President Bola Tinubu was ill-advised, saying that he should have acted as a father for the parties involved in the Rivers State quagmire instead of being seen as one-sided and vindictive.
“Yes, this rational deduction could be gleaned even from the sequence of his speech which gives away emergency rule proclamation as a political orchestration towards a political end.
“This sort of action was what the NNPP had warned Nigerians and the people of Kano against, which it saw being orchestrated by some evil forces during the Emirate crisis.
“But for the maturity of the Governor and the good people of Kano State, who avoided being “tricked” into taking their resistance onto the streets, the same scenario might have played out with an unjustifiable declaration of a State of Emergency in Kano State,” the NNPP spokesman stated.
He, however, reckoned with the implication of the declaration of the State of Emergency for the economy, warning that it was a decision capable of triggering restlessness in the Niger Delta with disastrous effects on the national economy.
“Now, the challenge is how to deal with a possible implosion in the Niger Delta over this matter. Are we seeing signs of this as per the incidents in the State in the last few days and how this could affect oil production as the nation’s economic mainstay?” Johnson queried.
Calling on the Presidency to immediately reverse its decision, he also called on members of the National Assembly to reject what is tantamount to a “presidential coup against a constitutionally elected government of the people in Rivers State.”
President Tinubu took proactive action in overall interest- Hon Uwak
According to Hon. Uwak, the threats made by some elements in the State could not be taken lightly by any serious government, noting that the initial explosion on a gas pipeline was not tackled adequately by the Governor.
“No responsible president will fold his hands and allow things to deteriorate resulting in the loss of lives and properties,” he said.
“The president acted proactively to arrest the situation because in contemporary governance, the government ought to be proactive rather than reactive. What the president did was to prevent the loss of lives and properties.”
