By Femi Falana SAN
Following the cessation of the emergency rule in Rivers State on September 17, 2025, President Bola Tinubu restored the suspended Governor Siminalayi Fubara
and different elected officers. In a press release on the event of the lifting of the emergency rule, President Tinubu acknowledged that many Nigerians opposed his resolution and dragged him to courtroom. In a veiled reference to the authorized debacle, the President stated:
“I’m not unaware that there have been a couple of voices of dissent in opposition to the proclamation, which led to their instituting over 40 circumstances within the courts in Abuja, Port Harcourt, and Yenagoa, to invalidate the declaration. That’s the method it must be in a democratic setting. Some circumstances are nonetheless pending within the courts as of at this time.”
It’s pertinent to recall the case of Legal professional-Basic of Plateau State v Legal professional-Basic of the Federation (2006) 3 NWLR (Pt. 967) 346, the place the Plaintiff had challenged the constitutional validity of the 6-month emergency rule and the suspension of elected Governor, Deputy-Governor and legislators by the President. The Supreme Court docket heard the case after the expiration of the emergency rule.
In placing out the case for need of jurisdiction, the Supreme Court docket said that the claims had been in search of aid for particular person individuals who weren’t events to the motion and that the go well with raised no stay difficulty because the state of emergency had ended, rendering the claims tutorial and speculative. Within the case of Legal professional-Basic of Ekiti State v Legal professional-Basic of the Federation (unreported), the apex courtroom toed the identical line by washing off its palms like Pontius Pilate. Because the case was filed on behalf of the state authorities, the apex courtroom stated that it was not authorised by the only real administrator!
Little question, among the pending circumstances have challenged the suspension of Governor Siminalayi Fubara and different elected officers in the course of the interval of emergency rule in Rivers State. To that extent, these reliefs are prone to be struck out on the bottom that they’ve grow to be tutorial and speculative following the restoration of the suspended democratic buildings.
Nevertheless, the vast majority of the pending circumstances search a constitutional interpretation of the President’s powers to droop elected state officers and impose emergency rule and the legality of appointing a sole administrator to manipulate a state in the course of the interval of suspension. Additionally they problem the legality of suspending a state legislature and different state govt our bodies underneath emergency rule. Basically, the circumstances search the interpretation the interpretation of sections 1(2), 5(2), 11, 176, 180, 188, and 305 of the Nigerian Structure.
Different circumstances pertain to the dissolution of state govt our bodies and the removing of officers whose phrases had not expired, appointment of members of statutory boards by a sole administrator, in addition to the conduct of native authorities elections with out giving satisfactory discover to political events opposite to the judgment of the Supreme Court docket on the matter. It’s indeniable that these are stay points that must be speedily heard and decided by the courts.
From the info and circumstances of emergency rule in Rivers State, it’s indubitably clear that the circumstances arising from this specific emergency rule are distinguishable from the case of Legal professional-Basic of Plateau State v Legal professional-Basic of the Federation (supra). To that these circumstances are usually not spent.
In spite of everything, the Legal professional-Basic of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Mr. Lateef Fagbemi (SAN) had stated that the declaration of a state of emergency in Rivers State was a “clear sign” to different crisis-ridden states that the federal authorities wouldn’t tolerate breaches of the Structure. The courts can’t afford to dismiss the veiled risk of the federal authorities whereas the sword of Damocles continues to hold menacingly on the heads of elected governors.
On one other event, Mr. Fagbemi SAN had urged critics of the state of emergency in Rivers State to permit the judiciary to determine the matter. In his personal phrases, “Allow us to chorus from pointless commentary. Both you make a public remark, otherwise you enable the courtroom to do its work. For the reason that courtroom is already concerned, let’s be affected person.”
The Bola Tinubu administration has thrown a problem to the judiciary. The Courts should it up with none additional delay. In different phrases, however the restoration of democratic rule in Rivers State, the Courts are obligation certain to pronounce on the legality of the facility of the President to droop elected governors and different elected officers underneath the present democratic dispensation. In any other case, the powers of the President underneath part 305 of the Structure will proceed to be invoked to settle political scores underneath the pretext of restoring regulation and order in chosen states.
The submit Why courts are certain to determine legality of emergency rule – Falana appeared first on Vanguard Information.
