By Abiola Olawale
In a dramatic escalation of Rivers State’s political tensions, eleven governors from the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) have dragged President Bola Ahmed Tinubu and the National Assembly to the Supreme Court, challenging the declaration of a state of emergency in Rivers State and the subsequent suspension of Governor Siminalayi Fubara.
The legal showdown was said to be a pushback against what the governors reportedly described as an unconstitutional overreach by the presidency.
The filing of the suit was confirmed by the Director of Information and Public Relations of the Supreme Court, Dr. Festus Akande, who spoke with the PUNCH.
The governors, in the suit, marked SC/CV/329/2025, based their summons on eight legal grounds.
The eleven PDP governors—representing Bauchi, Adamawa, Bayelsa, Enugu, Osun, Plateau, Zamfara, Oyo, Akwa Ibom, Delta, and Taraba, in the lawsuit, were said to have argued that Tinubu’s actions violated the 1999 Constitution and undermine Nigeria’s democratic framework.
The governors are reportedly seeking a Supreme Court ruling to nullify the emergency declaration, the suspension of Fubara and his administration, and the appointment of a sole administrator.
They contended that the president lacks the constitutional authority to suspend democratically elected officials, even under the guise of a state of emergency.
The suit comes on the heels of Tinubu’s March 18, 2025, declaration of a six-month state of emergency in Rivers State, during which he suspended Fubara, his deputy Ngozi Odu, and all elected members of the Rivers State House of Assembly.
Tinubu also appointed retired Vice Admiral Ibok-Ete Ibas as the sole administrator to oversee the oil-rich state, citing a prolonged political crisis and incidents of pipeline vandalism as justification for his actions.
The National Assembly subsequently ebdorsed the emergency rule via a contentious voice vote, further fuelling the controversy.
Among their purported prayers to the court were the following:
“Whether upon a proper construction and interpretation of the provisions of Sections 1(2), 5(2), 176, 180, 188, and 305 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999, the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria can lawfully suspend or in any manner interfere with the offices of a Governor and Deputy Governor of any of the 36 component states of the Federation, and replace them with his unelected nominee as a Sole Administrator under the guise of, or under, a Proclamation of a State of Emergency.”
“Whether the threat by the first defendant, acting on behalf of the President, to suspend the offices of Governors and Deputy Governors in the States of the Federation—including the plaintiffs’ states—by a Proclamation of a State of Emergency, is not in contravention of Sections 1(2), 4(6), 5(2), 11(2) and (3) of the 1999 Constitution, and inconsistent with the principles of constitutional federalism.”
This comes after the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) condemned the suspension of elected officials as illegal, with its president, Afam Osigwe, arguing that a state of emergency does not justify dissolving democratic structures.
The Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) had also filed a separate suit at the Federal High Court in Abuja, challenging the suspension as an affront to democratic governance.
