President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s declaration of a state of emergency in Rivers State has sparked intense debate over the limits of presidential power. His decision to suspend Governor Siminalayi Fubara, his deputy, and the Rivers State House of Assembly has raised a fundamental legal question: Can Tinubu suspend the Rivers governor under emergency rule?
While the federal government defends the move as necessary to address political instability and economic sabotage, legal experts and opposition figures argue that the Nigerian Constitution does not grant the president the power to remove a sitting governor, even during a state of emergency. This analysis explores the legal framework, historical precedents, the controversy surrounding Tinubu’s decision, and the available options for Fubara and the people of Rivers State.
Political and Economic Turmoil: Why Did Tinubu Suspend Rivers Governor?
The crisis in Rivers State has been brewing for months. Governor Siminalayi Fubara has been at odds with the Rivers State House of Assembly, which is largely controlled by loyalists of his predecessor, Nyesom Wike. The political conflict intensified when lawmakers initiated impeachment proceedings against Fubara, accusing him of misconduct. The battle for control escalated in October 2023 when the Rivers State House of Assembly complex in Port Harcourt was set ablaze under mysterious circumstances.
Beyond politics, the situation took a more serious turn when the Trans Niger Pipeline, one of Nigeria’s key oil export routes, was sabotaged in early 2025. The attack, which caused a massive fire in the Bodo community of Gokana Local Government Area, disrupted crude oil transportation and led to fears of economic losses. Given Rivers State’s role as a major oil-producing region, the federal government justified the emergency declaration as a response to both political instability and threats to national revenue.
However, Tinubu’s decision to suspend the Rivers governor and dissolve the state legislature has drawn widespread criticism, with legal experts questioning its constitutionality.
Does Emergency Rule Give Tinubu the Power to Suspend Rivers Governor?
Nigeria’s 1999 Constitution outlines the conditions under which a state of emergency can be declared. Section 305 allows the president to impose emergency rule if there is war, an imminent danger of invasion or insurrection, a breakdown of public order and safety, or any other urgent threat requiring federal intervention.
While the president has the authority to assume direct control of a state’s administration in an emergency, the Constitution does not explicitly grant the power to suspend an elected governor. Instead, Section 188 of the Constitution provides a clear process for removing a governor—through impeachment by the state House of Assembly, with a two-thirds majority vote and judicial oversight.
This legal distinction is central to the ongoing controversy. Can Tinubu suspend the Rivers governor without following constitutional impeachment procedures? The Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), under the leadership of Afam Osigwe, has strongly condemned the suspension, arguing that it violates democratic principles. In a statement, Osigwe asserted that a declaration of emergency does not override the constitutional process for removing a governor, emphasizing that Siminalayi Fubara remains the legitimate leader of Rivers State until he is lawfully impeached.
Former Attorney General Kanu Agabi also warned that allowing Tinubu’s action to stand could set a dangerous precedent, where future presidents might use emergency powers to remove political opponents from office.
Historical Precedents: Has Any Nigerian President Suspended a Governor Before?
Nigeria has experienced multiple declarations of emergency rule in the past, but the approach to handling governors has been inconsistent.
During the First Republic, Prime Minister Tafawa Balewa imposed emergency rule in the Western Region in 1962 due to political violence. The regional government was suspended, and an administrator, Dr. Moses Majekodunmi, was appointed. This marked the first instance of federal intervention in a state government.
In 2004, President Olusegun Obasanjo declared a state of emergency in Plateau State following religious violence. Governor Joshua Dariye was suspended, and retired General Chris Alli was appointed to govern the state. This is one of the few cases where a governor was removed under emergency rule.
A similar scenario occurred in Ekiti State in 2006 when Obasanjo imposed emergency rule due to political instability. Governor Ayodele Fayose was suspended, and retired General Tunji Olurin took over as administrator.
However, in 2013, when President Goodluck Jonathan declared a state of emergency in Borno, Yobe, and Adamawa States due to Boko Haram insurgency, he did not suspend the governors. Instead, the federal government focused on security operations while allowing state administrations to remain functional. This suggests that emergency rule does not necessarily require suspending a governor, making Tinubu’s decision even more controversial.
Political and Legal Reactions to Tinubu’s Suspension of Rivers Governor
The suspension of Governor Fubara has triggered strong political and public reactions. Opposition parties, including the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), have described the move as an “attack on democracy”, with PDP Chairman Umar Damagum vowing to challenge it in court.
In Rivers State, civil society organizations and youth groups have staged protests, demanding the reinstatement of Fubara. Meanwhile, some pro-government figures argue that Tinubu’s intervention is necessary to stabilize the state and protect Nigeria’s economic interests.
However, a key factor in determining the legitimacy of Tinubu’s decision lies with the National Assembly, which must approve the emergency declaration within ten days. If lawmakers reject it, the suspension will be reversed.
What Are Governor Fubara’s Options After Suspension?
Despite being suspended, Governor Siminalayi Fubara still has several options to challenge Tinubu’s decision. One key option is filing a legal challenge at the Supreme Court, arguing that his suspension violates the Constitution. If the Supreme Court rules in his favor, it could prevent future presidents from removing governors through emergency rule.
Another avenue is seeking intervention from the National Assembly. If enough lawmakers oppose the suspension, they could refuse to approve the emergency declaration, effectively restoring Fubara’s position. There is also the possibility of political negotiation with Tinubu’s administration, which could lead to a compromise that allows Fubara to return to office under specific conditions. Additionally, public and civil protests in Rivers State could put pressure on the federal government to reconsider its decision.
Conclusion: Can Tinubu Suspend Rivers Governor Without Impeachment?
The declaration of emergency rule in Rivers State and the suspension of Governor Siminalayi Fubara have raised fundamental questions about the limits of presidential power in Nigeria. While the federal government argues that the decision was necessary for stability, legal experts warn that it undermines democratic processes and state autonomy.
The coming days will be crucial as the National Assembly debates the emergency rule and legal challenges unfold. If Tinubu’s action is upheld, it could redefine executive authority in Nigeria. If overturned, it would reinforce the constitutional safeguards protecting elected officials from arbitrary removal. Either way, this crisis will have long-term implications for governance, federalism, and democracy in Nigeria
