Tinubu Urges Supreme Court to Dismiss PDP Governors’ Suit Over Rivers State Emergency Rule
President Bola Tinubu has asked the Supreme Court to dismiss the suit filed by some governors of the states controlled by Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) challenging his suspension of all the elected officials of Rivers State under an emergency rule. Tinubu had on March 18, 2025, declared the state of emergency and suspended Governor Siminalayi Fubara, his deputy, Ngozi Odu, and all the state lawmakers. The president immediately appointed Vice Admiral Ibok-Ete Ibas (rtd.) as the Sole Administrator of the state. PDP governors in 11 states filed the suit to challenge the president’s action. However, one of the governors, Sheriff Oborevwori of Delta State has since defected to the All Progressives a Congress (APC). Governor Umo Eno of Akwa Ibom State has also declared support for Tinubu’s second term, and is rumoured to be planning a switch to the ruling party. The suing states, represented by their respective attorneys-general, were initially seven when they first filed the suit in March, but later grew to 11. The president was not sued directly as a defendant in the suit. The plaintiffs sued him through the Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Mr. Lateef Fagbemi (SAN), the first defendant, while the National Assembly, is the second defendant. A notice of preliminary objection filed on May 9 by the AGF to defend the president’s action challenged the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court to entertain the suit. In a notice of preliminary objection obtained by Premium Times yesterday, Tinubu asked the court to dismiss the suit on the grounds that the suit did not fit into the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court which under Section 232 (1) of the Nigerian constitution is exercisable only in a dispute between the Federation of Nigeria and a State or between states. The AGF claimed the plaintiffs (the states) have not disclosed any dispute between them and the Federation and did not also disclose any cause of action, citing previous court judgements. Fagbemi argued that the suit is abuse of court process and maintained that the plaintiffs have no locus standi to institute the suit which he described as “hypothetical, academic speculative.” “In the premises, we urge the Supreme Court to uphold this contention and dismiss the plaintiffs’ suit,” Fagbemi said in the notice. The Special Assistant to the President on Arbitration, Drafting and Regulations, Taiye Hussain Oloyede, defended Tinubu’s action in an affidavit he swore to and filed in support of the preliminary objection. He stated that the feud between the now suspended governor and the state lawmakers, and the attacks on oil facilities in the state were justifiable reasons for the declaration. He argued that the political crises and attacks on oil facilities amounted to breakdown of order and public safety, which necessitated the president’s declaration and suspension of Fubara and others. The presidential aide also defended the National Assembly’s approval of the emergency rule, stressing that they have reserved the constitutional power to only approve or reject the declaration. He rejected the governors’ argument on the lawmakers’ use of voice votes, arguing that the constitution did not stipulate that the resolution of two-thirds majority shall be by physical counting of votes by each House of the National Assembly. Oloyede claimed the governors instituted the suit because they were “driven into panic mode by their own imaginary fears” that Tinubu could declare a state of emergency in their states in the future. “It is in the interest of justice to dismiss this (plaintiffs) suit with punitive cost as the same has been brought not to redress any alleged wrong, but to harass and scandalise the president for political advantage of the plaintiffs,” he told the court. The Supreme Court has yet to fix a date for the hearing of the suit.
Admin | 2025-05-11 18:09:51