State Of Emergency In Rivers: Tinubu’s Gamble With History, By Yahaya Kana Ismaila
On Tuesday, May 18, 2004, President Olusegun Obasanjo declared a state of emergency in Plateau State, appointing retired Army General Chris Ali to take charge. His justification? Escalating communal violence that had claimed hundreds of lives, including the gruesome Yelwa massacre.
The crisis began on Sunday, May 2, 2004, when a Christian militia attacked and killed hundreds of Muslims in Yelwa. In retaliation, Muslim militias launched reprisal attacks, leaving hundreds more dead. Obasanjo, alarmed by what he described as “near mutual genocide,” blamed Governor Joshua Dariye for incompetence, arguing that his leadership failures had worsened the violence.
Fast forward to Thursday, October 19, 2006, Obasanjo again invoked emergency powers—this time in Ekiti State. In a televised address, he warned that the state’s political crisis had become a national security threat. His decision was triggered by the controversial impeachment of Governor Ayo Fayose and his deputy, Abiodun Olujimi, on Monday, October 16, 2006, by the state assembly. Obasanjo suspended the acting governor and the legislature, replacing them with retired Brigadier General Adetunji Olurin for an initial six-month period which could have been extended had the national assembly not asserted itself when Obasanjo requested extension.
While the move was not entirely unexpected, observers speculated that the crisis had been engineered to justify the emergency rule, particularly with crucial elections looming in 2007.
On Tuesday, May 14, 2013, President Goodluck Jonathan declared a state of emergency in three northeastern states—Borno, Adamawa, and Yobe—in response to the Boko Haram insurgency. However, unlike his predecessor, Jonathan took a different approach. Acting on the advice of then-Attorney General Mohammed Adoke, he allowed the governors to remain in office rather than removing them. For many Nigerians, this shift signalled the end of a political era where emergency declarations meant the suspension of elected governors.
But that perception was shattered when President Bola Ahmed Tinubu revived the Obasanjo-style approach in Rivers State yesterday. Tinubu not only declared a state of emergency in Rivers, but also suspended Governor Siminalayi Fubara and the state legislature led by Martins Amaewhule, leaving only the judiciary intact.
Also keeping with the Obasanjo precedent, Tinubu appointed retired Air Marshal Ibokette Ibas as administrator to govern Rivers for an initial six-month period. The president justified his decision for the declaring the state of emergency by citing the prolonged political crisis between Governor Fubara and the legislature, which, he claimed, had paralysed governance. He stopped short of directly blaming Fubara but leaned on a recent Supreme Court ruling that had described the governor’s actions—demolishing the state House of Assembly complex and governing with only four lawmakers—as a threat to democracy.
The crisis in Rivers reached a boiling point on Monday, March 18, 2024, when the Martin Amaewhule-led state assembly served Governor Fubara with a notice of gross misconduct—an impeachment precursor. The situation soon spiralled out of control, culminating in the bombing of an international oil export pipeline in the Gokana community of the state. That explosion, many believe, was the final straw that led to Tinubu’s drastic decision.
Since the declaration, Nigerians have been sharply divided. The debate is not only about the president’s constitutional powers to suspend an elected government but also about whether the move was necessary. While section 305 subsection 1 of the 1999 constitution as amended puts the question of legality to rest, the question of necessity continues to linger.
Many critics argue that Tinubu’s decision was heavy-handed, pointing out that he placed all the blame on Governor Fubara without mentioning Nyesom Wike—his ally and FCT Minister, as well as the instigator-in-chief of the Rivers crisis. The opposition People’s Democratic Party (PDP) has accused Tinubu of orchestrating the state of emergency to pave the way for the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) to take control of Rivers. Ironically, both Wike and Fubara belong to the PDP.
Beyond the political maneuvering, Rivers State is Nigeria’s oil exploration hub and has a history of violent militancy. Many fear that rather than restoring calm, the declaration could worsen tensions. If that happens, Tinubu may have miscalculated, and this could further dent his democratic credentials. On this note, I strongly believed Tinubu was overenthusiastic.
To stave off the above possible ugly outcome, one would have hoped the national assembly will quash Tinubu’s decision because, technically, the emergency rule must be ratified by two-thirds of the federal legislature to stand. However, given the legislature’s reputation and seeing that president Tinubu held a close door meeting with members of both chambers of the national assembly before the declaration, many Nigerians believe Tinubu will get his way. The bigger question remains: Will Siminalayi Fubara return as governor, like Joshua Dariye did after Plateau’s emergency rule? Or will Rivers follow the Ekiti pattern, where an entirely new political arrangement emerged?
This is where it gets interesting. Looking at the situation, I think Tinubu’s swift action may have saved Fubara’s mandate. Had he wanted Fubara out completely as insinuated by the PDP, I believe he would have allowed the impeachment process kick-started by the Martins Amaewhule-led legislature to run its course, knowing fully well it would lead the Rivers situation to degenerate into chaos, before declaring the state of emergency. With Fubara removed and maybe Amaewhule as governor, like in Ekiti, Tinubu would have foreclosed the possible return of both Fubara and Amaewhule as governor or speaker, paving way for a whole new leadership arrangement. However, as it stands, the jobs of Fubara and the Martins Amaewhule-led Rivers legislature and their mandates may have been saved.
Above notwithstanding, I believe the coming days will be critical. How Rivers reacts to this political reset—and whether it leads to peace or an escalation—will ultimately determine whether Tinubu’s gamble with history pays off or backfires.
Yahaya writes from Kana of Nassarawa LGA in Nasarawa state and can be reached on: kanaismail@yahoo.com
