BREAKING: Supreme Court To Fix Date To Hear Rivers Emergency Rule Lawsuit As FG Hires Ex-AGF, SANs For Court Battle
The Supreme Court may announce today (Monday) a hearing date for the high-profile constitutional suit filed by 11 Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) governors challenging the Federal Government’s declaration of emergency rule in Rivers State.
President Bola Ahmed Tinubu had, on March 18, 2025, declared a state of emergency in the oil-rich state, suspending Governor Siminalayi Fubara, Deputy Governor Ngozi Odu, and all members of the State House of Assembly for six months.
He appointed retired naval officer Ibokette Ibas as the sole administrator to oversee the state’s affairs. The National Assembly subsequently ratified the proclamation through a voice vote.
FG Lines Up 10 SANs to Defend Emergency Rule
To defend the decision, The PUNCH, reports that the Federal Government has assembled a 16-member legal team, including 10 Senior Advocates of Nigeria (SANs) led by former Attorney General of the Federation, Chief Akin Olujinmi (SAN). Others in the team include Prof. Kanyinsola Ajayi, Jelili Owonikoko, Kehinde Ogunwumiju, Tijani Gazali, Babatunde Obama, Olawale Fapohunda, Olumide Olujinmi, Akinyemi Olujinmi, and Ademola Abimbola.
Additional lawyers on the team include Akinsola Olujinmi, Oluwole Ilori, Abdulwahab Abayomi, Mojeed Balogun, Jideuche Ezi, and Ramat Tijani.
The Federal Government, through this team, has filed a preliminary objection and a counter-affidavit dated May 9, urging the apex court to dismiss the PDP governors’ suit on several grounds.
PDP Governors Challenge Legality of Emergency Rule
The plaintiffs—Adamawa, Enugu, Osun, Oyo, Bauchi, Akwa Ibom, Plateau, Delta, Taraba, Zamfara, and Bayelsa—filed suit SC/CV/329/2025, seeking the Supreme Court’s interpretation of the President’s powers under the Constitution.
They asked the court to determine whether a president has the constitutional authority to suspend duly elected governors, deputy governors, and lawmakers and replace them with unelected appointees under a state of emergency.
The governors also questioned whether the National Assembly acted lawfully by approving the emergency declaration through a voice vote rather than a two-thirds majority of members in each chamber as required by the Constitution.
In their reliefs, the governors prayed for a declaration nullifying the emergency proclamation in Official Gazette No. 47 of 2025, and sought a perpetual injunction restraining the Federal Government from suspending state officials or legislatures under emergency proclamations.
FG: Suit is Academic, Plaintiffs Lack Locus Standi
In its objection, the Office of the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF) argued that the suit does not fall under the Supreme Court’s original jurisdiction as outlined in Section 232(1) of the 1999 Constitution.
The AGF contended that no genuine dispute exists between the Federation and the plaintiff states that involves any legal rights, and that the governors lack locus standi to file the action. The suit, according to the AGF, is “hypothetical, academic, speculative and an abuse of court process.”
In a counter-affidavit deposed to by Taiye Oloyede, Special Assistant to the President on Arbitration, Drafting and Regulations, the presidency outlined the justifications for the emergency rule.
Oloyede said Rivers State had experienced a “very serious political crisis,” with the House of Assembly split between 27 members opposed to the governor and four aligned with him. The inability to pass an Appropriation Bill, he argued, had stalled governance.
He alleged that Governor Fubara further worsened the crisis by demolishing the Assembly building, preventing opposition lawmakers from meeting. “There was violence in the state with attacks on critical economic assets… militants were openly threatening perceived enemies of the governor,” Oloyede said, adding that the President had tried but failed to mediate peace between the factions.
He defended the President’s intervention as a constitutional and necessary step to restore order:
“The suspension of the governor, deputy governor and members of the State Assembly… is one of the extraordinary measures required for the restoration of peace and security in Rivers State.”
National Assembly Also Seeks Dismissal
The National Assembly, listed as the second defendant, also filed a preliminary objection dated April 22, 2025, accompanied by a counter-affidavit.
It argued that the governors failed to follow due process, citing their alleged failure to issue the required three-month pre-action notice to the Clerk of the National Assembly under Section 21 of the Legislative Houses (Powers and Privileges) Act, 2017.
The legislature also claimed the plaintiffs lacked authorisation from their respective State Houses of Assembly to initiate the suit, as required under the Supreme Court (Original Jurisdiction) Act, 2002.
The NASS asked the court to award ₦1 billion in costs against the PDP governors for what it termed a “frivolous and speculative suit,” insisting they had shown no personal injury or legal basis for the reliefs sought.