Emergency Rule: Court dismisses suit challenging Tinubu’s suspension of Rivers governor

The Federal High Court in Abuja on Thursday dismissed a suit seeking to declare President Bola Tinubu’s suspension of Governor Siminalayi Fubara of Rivers State illegal.

Join the Premium Times WhatsApp Community For Quick Access To News and Happenings Around You.

Open in WhatsApp

Judge James Omotosho held that the court lacked jurisdiction to determine the validity of the presidential proclamation of a state of emergency. He said only the Supreme Court has exclusive and original jurisdiction over such matters.

“No other courts, except the Supreme Court, can hear a matter relating to a proclamation of emergency,” said the judge.

On March 18, President Tinubu declared a state of emergency in Rivers State, citing a political impasse and security concerns. The declaration led to the suspension of Governor Fubara, Deputy Governor Ngozi Odu, and all elected members of the State House of Assembly for an initial period of six months.

At the time, many suits erupted to challenge the president and the National Assembly. Belema Briggs and four other plaintiffs filed a suit against President Tinubu, the Federal Republic of Nigeria, Rivers State Administrator, Ibok-Ete Ibas, a retired vice admiral, and three others. The plaintiffs sought declarations that the president lacked the authority to suspend the governor and delegate executive powers to Ibas, and that the proclamation was illegal and unconstitutional.

However, on 17 September, President Tinubu lifted the state of emergency, restoring the governor, deputy governor, and lawmakers to their positions. The president acknowledged the controversy surrounding the declaration, but stated that the purpose, which was to make peace in the state, had been achieved.

The judge, while ruling on the matter, said the court cannot rule on the case without looking into the validity of the presidential declaration, but it does not have the power to do so.

Stay Ahead with Premium Times

Add as a preferred source on Google

“The originating process ought not to have been accepted for filing in this court. The subject matter of this suit is clearly outside the jurisdiction of this court,” Mr Omotosho said.

He also held that the plaintiffs lacked locus standi, noting that an individual cannot bring a suit on behalf of all residents of a state and that none of the suspended persons was a party to the case.

Validation of emergency rule

On the substantive issues, the judge said there were reasonable grounds for the president to declare a state of emergency and appoint a sole administrator for Rivers.

He ruled that the suspension of the governor and others was proper under Section 305 of the Constitution, intended to avert anarchy and maintain public order.

“The president has duly exercised his power by appointing the sole administrator for Rivers in accordance with Section 305,” he said.

Mr Omotosho also dismissed claims that the president needed the two-thirds vote of the National Assembly, noting that this could not be proven through the affidavit evidence submitted by the plaintiffs.

He said the main issues were whether the court had jurisdiction, whether the plaintiffs had the right to file the suit, whether the president had the power to suspend the governor, deputy governor, and members of the Rivers State House of Assembly, and whether he had the power to declare a state of emergency and appoint a sole administrator.

The judge ruled that, “Even if the court could exercise jurisdiction, the weight of evidence is in favour of the defendants. Consequently, this suit is dismissed in its entirety.”