PDP Governors Challenge Rivers Emergency Rule At Supreme Court

ELEVEN state governors under the platform of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) have approached the Supreme Court to determine whether President Bola Tinubu has the powers under the 1999 Constitution (as amended) to suspend democratically elected executive and legislative arms of government at the state level.
The governors are also challenging the declaration of a state of emergency rule in Rivers State in the suit filed before the apex court on Tuesday, April 8.
This development was confirmed to The Punch by the Director of Information and Public Relations of the Supreme Court, Dr. Festus Akande.
Recall that the President had on March 18 declared a state of emergency in Rivers State and suspended Governor Siminalayi Fubara, his Deputy, Mrs. Ngozi Odu, and all elected members of the state House of Assembly for an initial period of six months and appointed Vice Admiral Ibok-Ete Ibas (rtd) as Sole Administrator for the period.
The declaration was later approved by both chambers of the National Assembly- Senate and House of Representatives- through voice vote.
However, the governors, under the aegis of PDP Governors Forum, to which Fabara belongs, approached the apex court to challenge the suspension, declaration of emergency rule and appointment of the sole administrator in Rivers State, in the suit marked: SC/CV/329/2025, on eight grounds.
They want the Supreme Court to determine if the President has the powers to suspend a democratically elected structure of a state and determine if the way and manner the President pronounced the state of emergency declaration in Rivers State was not in contravention of the 1999 Constitution (as amended).
Among others, all PDP governors prayed the court to determine: “Whether upon a proper construction and interpretation of the provisions of Sections 1(2), 5(2), 176, 180, 188 and 305 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999, the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria can lawfully suspend or in any manner whatsoever interfere with the offices of a Governor and the Deputy Governor of any of the component 36 states of the Federation of Nigeria and replace same with his own unelected nominee as a Sole Administrator, under the guise of, or pursuant to, a Proclamation of a State of Emergency in any of the State of the Federation, particularly in any of the Plaintiffs States?
“Whether upon a proper construction and interpretation of the provisions of Sections 1(2), 4(6), 11(4) & (5), 90, 105 and 305 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999, the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria can lawfully suspend the House of Assembly of any of the component 36 states of the Federation of Nigeria, under the guise of, or pursuant to, a Proclamation of a State of Emergency in any of such States, particularly in any of the Plaintiffs States?
“Whether the consequent threat by the first Defendant, acting on behalf of the President, to the states of the Federation, including the Plaintiffs’ states, to the effect that the offices of the Governor and Deputy Governor of the states can be suspended by the President, by virtue of a Proclamation of a State of Emergency, is not in contravention of the provisions of Sections 1(2), 4(6), 5(2), 11(2) and (3) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999, and inconsistent with the principles of constitutional federalism.”
According to the newspaper report, the Respondents in the suit are to within 14 days after the service of the summons on them, inclusive of the day of such service, cause an appearance to be entered for them.