In an unprecedented move, a coalition of concerned leaders and political stakeholders from across Nigeria has strongly condemned President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s March 18, 2025, declaration of a State of Emergency in Rivers State. The group, in a joint press conference, described the decision as an unlawful and undemocratic attempt to subvert constitutional governance and impose federal control over a duly elected state government.
A Direct Assault on Democracy
The leaders emphasized that the President’s action—which included the suspension of the Governor, Deputy Governor, and the State House of Assembly—violates fundamental constitutional provisions. They warned that such a move sets a dangerous precedent that could erode Nigeria’s federal structure and weaken democratic institutions.
According to the stakeholders, the political tensions in Rivers State—particularly following the Supreme Court’s ruling—should have been resolved through due process rather than executive overreach. They noted that Governor Siminalayi Fubara had demonstrated a willingness to implement the court’s judgment despite provocations from rival factions.
Unconstitutional Overreach: Key Violations Highlighted
- Illegal Removal of a Governor and State Assembly
The Nigerian Constitution explicitly outlines the procedure for removing a Governor in Section 188, which mandates an impeachment process initiated by the State House of Assembly. Nowhere does it grant the President the power to unilaterally remove an elected state government. By suspending the Governor and State Assembly, President Tinubu has acted beyond his constitutional mandate. - Abuse of Section 305 on State of Emergency
Section 305 permits emergency declarations only under specific circumstances, such as war, national security threats, or large-scale civil unrest. However, it does not authorize the President to suspend democratic structures. Moreover, Section 305(1) makes it clear that any emergency proclamation must comply with all constitutional provisions, meaning that the tenure and removal processes for elected officials remain protected. - Lack of Justification for Emergency Rule
The conditions for invoking a state of emergency include:- War or external aggression – Nigeria is not at war.
- Breakdown of public order and safety – Rivers State, despite political disputes, has not descended into chaos or anarchy.
- Natural disaster or national crisis – No such catastrophe exists to justify the President’s actions.
Since none of these conditions apply, the emergency declaration appears to be a politically motivated intervention rather than a necessity for maintaining national stability.
- Failure to Follow Legislative Approval Process
Even if a state of emergency were justified, the Constitution demands that it receive a two-thirds majority approval from all members of the National Assembly—at least 72 Senators and 240 House members. Without this approval, the proclamation must be revoked.
A Call to Action: Defending Democracy
The coalition of leaders called on Nigerians, civil society organizations, and international bodies to resist this unconstitutional maneuver. They urged the judiciary to uphold its independence and prevent executive overreach that could undermine Nigeria’s hard-won democracy.
As political tensions rise, all eyes are now on the National Assembly and the judiciary to determine whether the rule of law will prevail or if Nigeria will slide into an era of unchecked executive power.
About The Author
