In a new survey conducted by the Centre for Journalism Innovation and Development (CJID), across the three senatorial districts of Rivers State, an overwhelming majority of respondents have voiced strong opposition to the federal government’s declaration of a state of emergency in the oil-rich state.
The survey, which targeted 400 diverse cross-section of the population, including youth, women, civil servants, businesspersons, and rural and urban dwellers, found that 68.2 per cent of Rivers residents disapprove of the emergency rule imposed on March 18, 2025, by President Bola Ahmed Tinubu.
|
|
The declaration, which included suspending the elected governor and the State House of Assembly and appointing a sole administrator to oversee the state’s affairs, has sparked widespread concern over its legality, constitutionality, and long-term implications for democratic governance.
Strong Awareness, Stronger Disapproval
A striking 92.7 per cent of the 400 surveyed respondents said they were aware of the state of emergency and the suspension of democratic institutions in Rivers. However, the majority, over two-thirds, believe the move was politically motivated and unconstitutional. When probed further, 65 per cent of respondents believed that the president’s suspension of the governor and the House of Assembly was illegal. Despite the political crisis, 72.8 per cent of citizens stated that the suspended governor and the assembly had performed their roles effectively. A majority believed that the institutions should not have been removed, even if performance was questionable, because they were democratically elected. This sentiment portrays a deep-rooted respect for electoral mandates and constitutional order among the Rivers populace.
|
|
|
|---|
Security Concerns Do Not Justify Emergency Rule
One official justification for the emergency declaration was the alleged security breakdown in Rivers. However, 86.7 per cent of those surveyed disagreed that the state had experienced insecurity severe enough to warrant emergency rule. Respondents largely reported being able to go about their daily lives without significant disruptions due to violence or instability.
Sole Administrator: Unknown and Unseen
The survey also revealed a glaring lack of public awareness about the actions or policy direction of the sole administrator. Over 75 per cent of respondents stated that they had no idea what the appointee had done or planned to do two months into his tenure. This lack of visibility further fuels perceptions of democratic exclusion and governance by fiat.
Constitutional Crisis and Dangerous Precedents
There are fears that it may set a dangerous precedent for federal overreach. Unlike in previous emergency declarations in Plateau and Ekiti states under President Olusegun Obasanjo, or the North East under President Jonathan, where democratic institutions were either preserved or the situation involved extreme violence, Rivers’ crisis is largely political and institutional.
READ ALSO: Rivers’ N1.48 trillion 2025 budget passes second reading at Senate
By suspending an elected governor and assembly and replacing them with an unelected administrator, the federal government may be undermining the very democratic institutions it claims to protect. The Supreme Court has yet to offer a definitive ruling on the legality of such actions, leaving a troubling constitutional ambiguity.
Implications for 2027 Elections
With the next general elections scheduled for 2027, and preparations expected to begin in early 2026, the ongoing emergency rule in Rivers poses significant risks. Concerns include voter suppression, weakened civil liberties, and manipulated electoral processes, especially in a state historically fraught with election-related violence. Rivers citizens demand respect for the rule of law, the restoration of elected institutions, and a peaceful, democratic resolution to political disputes.
The full report will be launched on the 12th of June, 2025, during a webinar. Click here to register.
