In a move that underscores the escalating constitutional face-off between the Federal Government and 11 Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) governors, the Federal Government has assembled a high-powered legal team led by former Attorney General of the Federation, Chief Akin Olujinmi (SAN), to defend the controversial emergency rule declared in Rivers State.
This legal action follows President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s March 18, 2025, declaration of a state of emergency in Rivers State, suspending Governor Siminalayi Fubara, his deputy, Ngozi Odu, and the entire State House of Assembly for six months. Retired Navy Admiral Ibok-Ete Ibas was appointed as the sole administrator of the state during the interim period.
The National Assembly swiftly ratified the emergency rule through a voice vote, a move that has been challenged as unconstitutional by the 11 PDP governors who have dragged the Federal Government and the legislature to the Supreme Court.
The plaintiffs—governors of Adamawa, Enugu, Osun, Oyo, Bauchi, Akwa Ibom, Plateau, Delta, Taraba, Zamfara, and Bayelsa—are seeking judicial intervention to halt what they describe as an unconstitutional seizure of power at the state level. They argue that the President lacks the legal authority to suspend a democratically elected government or replace it with unelected officials under any guise, including a state of emergency.
Their suit, marked SC/CV/329/2025, raises six constitutional issues. Key among them is whether the President can legally suspend the offices of a governor and deputy governor or dissolve a State House of Assembly under emergency conditions. The governors are also questioning the legality of the National Assembly’s voice vote, contending that a two-thirds majority of both chambers is constitutionally required.
In addition to seeking the nullification of the Rivers State emergency proclamation, the governors are also demanding a perpetual injunction to restrain the Federal Government from interfering with the political offices of any state government in future emergencies.
Responding to the suit, the Federal Government, through its legal team including Olujinmi, Prof. Kanyinsola Ajayi (SAN), Jelili Owonikoko (SAN), and others, filed a preliminary objection on May 9, 2025. The objection argues that the Supreme Court lacks the original jurisdiction to hear the case under Section 232(1) of the 1999 Constitution, stating that the matter does not involve a dispute between the Federation and a state concerning legal rights.
The Attorney General of the Federation (AGF) further asserted that the plaintiffs lack the locus standi to file the suit, describing it as hypothetical, academic, and an abuse of court process.
In a counter-affidavit, Taiye Oloyede, a Special Assistant to the President, detailed the alleged breakdown of governance in Rivers State. He cited infighting between Governor Fubara and the State Assembly, a divided legislature, the absence of a passed appropriation bill, and escalating violence involving militants. According to Oloyede, these conditions created a governance vacuum that justified the emergency declaration.
He also defended the President’s decision to suspend the governor and other elected officials as a necessary measure to restore peace and order, arguing that Tinubu acted within constitutional bounds and in the interest of national security.
Meanwhile, the National Assembly has also filed its objection, dismissing the suit as speculative and frivolous. It contended that the plaintiffs failed to serve the required three-month pre-action notice and did not secure approval from their respective state Houses of Assembly before initiating the suit, thus violating the Supreme Court (Original Jurisdiction) Act of 2002.
The National Assembly is demanding a N1 billion cost award against the governors for what it describes as a gross abuse of judicial process.
As the legal showdown looms, the apex court is expected to announce a date for the hearing. Legal experts say the outcome could have far-reaching implications for Nigeria’s federal structure, emergency powers, and the limits of presidential authority.
The Rivers emergency rule marks one of the most consequential constitutional battles in recent years, with the potential to reshape the interpretation of federalism and governance in Nigeria.