Oghenejabor Ikimi is the National Chairman of the Centre for the Vulnerable and the Underprivileged (CENTREP). The Warri-based human rights activist and lawyer speaks to EBENEZER ADUROKIYA on the development in Rivers State.
What is your take on the National Assembly endorsing President Bola Tinubu’s imposition of a state of emergency in Rivers State?
I’m not surprised because the National Assembly is not independent. It is not an independent Assembly. They are just an appendage of the executive, so I’m not surprised. Despite the hullabaloo that followed the state of emergency in Rivers State, I was not surprised. All that was just a smokescreen; at the end of the day, they bowed to the directives of Mr President. So, it’s not surprising. The House is not independent.
What does that portend for Nigeria’s democracy and the rule of law?
What happened in Rivers State is a civilian coup, and the new recruits into the coup are the National Assembly, which perfected the unconstitutionality or illegality of Mr President’s actions. What Mr President did is illegal. An elected president cannot remove or suspend an elected governor or deputy governor, let alone suspend the state Assembly. That is a coup. There is nowhere in the constitution that states that Mr President has the power to remove an elected governor, an elected deputy governor, or the state Assembly. Nowhere. I have searched. Section 305, which discusses the state of emergency, does not state that. What the National Assembly did was merely to authenticate and approve illegality, making it complicit in the unconstitutional act.
This poses a danger to our democracy because Mr President can now wake up one day and declare a state of emergency at will. You saw the way he was speaking to the governor that day—he spoke as if the governor was his appointee, as if he was a dictator. The National Assembly had the opportunity to curtail his excesses, but they refused. Instead, they decided to join the bandwagon of illegality. So, this is a dangerous precedent for our democracy.
Would you say that Tinubu respects the constitution he swore to uphold, compared to the cases of former Presidents Goodluck Jonathan and Olusegun Obasanjo who also toed the line of emergency rule declaration?
From what he did concerning this state of emergency, I don’t know where he got the power to suspend the governor, the state Assembly, or the deputy governor. Now, if the constitution defines the powers of the president and the president acts beyond those powers, it means he is undermining the constitution. Only a dictator would do that. So, I don’t know where he derived such power from.
Again, if you look at what Tinubu did, it is reminiscent of what Obasanjo did. We all know that President Tinubu was never happy about Obasanjo’s actions as regards Ekiti State’s emergency rule then. He repeatedly called Obasanjo a dictator and strongly opposed him at the time. Jonathan, on the other hand, declared a state of emergency in parts of the North because of insurgency, but the governors remained in charge of their states. They were not suspended.
I was in Rivers State shortly before the president’s declaration of a state of emergency, looking for signs of insurgency or war. There was none. The state was peaceful. There was no breakdown of law and order anywhere in Rivers State. I travelled there to visit my in-law, and the entire state was calm. So, you will realise that the president was never neutral in the dispute between Wike and Fubara. If he had been neutral, he would have curtailed Wike’s excesses. For crying out loud, we are talking about a governor—an elected governor, chosen by the people of Rivers State. What Tinubu did is an impeachable offence. He had no power to do what he did. The right course of action is to challenge him in court.
No governor can remove an elected chairman or councillors in a local government. Likewise, the president cannot remove an elected governor. Because if he starts removing governors at will simply because he dislikes them, he will continue doing so, using state of emergency as justification. Which section of the constitution gives the president the power to appoint an administrator? Everything they are doing is illegal and driven by thirst for power. The only way to resolve this is to go to court and ask whether the president has the authority to remove a governor. As we speak, is there war in Rivers State? Is there an insurgency? The entire state is peaceful. There is no breakdown of law and order. For instance, has the governor investigated what caused the blast?
It’s just like telling me there was a blast in Abuja. There were three blasts in Abuja. Was that enough to declare a state of emergency there? Forget the analysis that Ijaw boys were making threats—that was not enough justification. I have always maintained that the government is merely enriching people under the guise of guarding pipelines. In other countries, individuals do not guard pipelines; it is managed through technology. Surveillance technology should be in place to detect any interference with the pipelines. Yet, while other nations go digital, we remain stuck in the analogue era. We cannot even safeguard our primary source of revenue with modern technology; instead, we send people with boats and guns to patrol in the name of protecting pipelines. Now, regarding the pipelines that exploded, how do we know it was the Ijaw boys? Is there any evidence? Even if it was the Ijaw boys, who sent them? Let’s call a spade a spade, there has been no credible report stating that Ijaw boys were caught bombing anywhere. There were three bomb explosions in Abuja, was that enough to declare a state of emergency there?
This is a dangerous precedent, and it should be challenged in court. I am not from Rivers State, but I would be happy if Rivers people took legal action to put an end to this abnormality.
The Supreme Court stopped disbursement of funds to Fubara. But the same funds, which were withheld from an elected governor and local government chairmen, will now be disbursed to an unelected sole administrator. Isn’t that ironic?
There is no logic in that. It only proves that they were acting a script. They were never neutral. Mr President was never neutral. And when Mr President is not neutral, the chief legal officer will not be neutral either. That is why we advocate for the separation of the Attorney General’s role from that of the Minister of Justice. These positions should not be merged because they are all politicians who will simply follow their superior’s agenda.
Look at what Fagbemi is saying, a learned man making such statements. This clearly shows that they have been acting a script all along, because in the end, they are now releasing all the funds to an administrator. I won’t go into the integrity of that administrator because there are many question marks there. But you can see that all of this is just illegality.
What pained me the most was how Mr President addressed Governor Fubara as though he was his subordinate. I have never seen a president speak to his ministers the way he spoke to an elected governor. This is nothing but power grab, a craze for money, and an obsession with control. It is unfortunate.
This dictatorial approach of Mr President as well as the complicity of the National Assembly must be curtailed. The people of Rivers State must go to court and challenge this state of emergency.
Are you saying there is a better way to handle the case?
Yes, no matter how long it takes. Even if it extends beyond this regime, it will resolve the issue, because what happened in Port Harcourt will happen again. If this trend continues, it will be repeated elsewhere. So, it is better to go to court and put a stop to this nonsense. Look at Jonathan, he declared a state of emergency, but did he remove the governors, their deputies, and the Houses of Assembly? He did not. That is what a true democrat does.
Are Jonathan’s and Tinubu’s states of emergency different?
Jonathan’s case involved actual insurgency. Rivers State’s case is purely political. It has lingered since 2023 because Mr President is not neutral. He has consistently supported Wike. As the president of the country, he receives daily security reports. Yet, he has taken sides. If he had been neutral, he would have called Wike to order. This whole issue is about money, about who controls the state’s funds. It is also about 2027. It is purely politically motivated, and Mr President is involved.
What, in your view, is the way forward for the people of Rivers State?
They must go to court. If they don’t, it will happen in another state. They should assert their rights, just as Natasha should have challenged her treatment in the Senate. Democracy is fragile. There is a thin line between democracy and autocracy. If we remain silent, democracy will turn into autocracy.
READ ALSO: Emergency rule: Rivers electorate drag Tinubu, NASS, AGF to Court
and then