President Bola Tinubu has requested the Supreme Court to dismiss the lawsuit brought by several PDP-controlled states, which challenges his suspension of Rivers State’s elected officials under an emergency rule.
On March 18th, President Tinubu declared a state of emergency in Rivers State, suspending Governor Siminalayi Fubara, his deputy Ngozi Odu, and the state’s lawmakers.
He then appointed Ibok-Ete Ibas as the sole administrator.
In response, 11 states, all initially PDP-controlled, filed a lawsuit contesting the president’s action.
These states include Adamawa, Akwa Ibom, Bauchi, Bayelsa, Delta, Enugu, Osun, Oyo, Plateau, Taraba, and Zamfara.
Read Also: Why Supreme Court Should Dismiss PDP Governors Suit Challenging Declaration Of State Of Emergency In Rivers – National Assembly
It is worth noting that since the filing of the suit, Delta’s governor has defected to the APC, and Akwa Ibom’s governor has declared support for Tinubu, with rumors of a potential party switch.
The states, represented by their attorneys-general, are challenging the president’s authority to suspend an elected governor and appoint a sole administrator under the guise of a state of emergency.
They argue that the president’s declaration did not comply with constitutional requirements and that the National Assembly’s approval via a voice vote was invalid.
President Tinubu, through the Attorney-General of the Federation, Lateef Fagbemi, filed a preliminary objection on May 9th, arguing that the Supreme Court lacks jurisdiction to hear the case.
He contends that the suit does not fall under the court’s original jurisdiction, which is limited to disputes between the Federation and a state or between states.
Fagbemi maintains that the suing states have not demonstrated any dispute with the Federation and lack the legal standing to file the lawsuit, which he deems “hypothetical, academic speculative.”
Taiye Hussain Oloyede, a presidential aide, supported the preliminary objection with an affidavit, justifying the president’s actions by citing the conflict between the suspended governor and state lawmakers, as well as attacks on oil facilities.
He argues that these events constituted a breakdown of order and public safety, necessitating the declaration of a state of emergency.
Oloyede also defended the National Assembly’s approval, stating that their constitutional role is limited to approving or rejecting the declaration.
He dismissed the governors’ challenge to the voice vote, arguing that the constitution does not mandate a physical count of votes.
Oloyede alleges that the states filed the lawsuit out of “imaginary fears” that President Tinubu might declare a state of emergency in their states in the future.
He urged the court to dismiss the suit with punitive costs, claiming it was filed for political advantage.
The Supreme Court has yet to schedule a hearing for the case.
Join Informant Online WhatsApp Channel With Link Below: https://whatsapp.com/channel/0029VaihFajBadmT29ufud2
