The political landscape of Rivers State, Nigeria, has been characterized by instability and power struggles for nearly two years. This turmoil, stemming from a contentious relationship between former Governor Nyesom Wike and his successor, Sim Fubara, reached a critical point, prompting President Bola Tinubu to declare a state of emergency in the state on March 18th. This decisive action, which included the six-month suspension of Governor Fubara, his deputy, and all elected members of the state assembly, has been lauded by the All Progressives Congress (APC) as a necessary intervention that averted potential anarchy. The APC, through its Rivers State caretaker committee chairman, Tony Okocha, maintains that the President’s declaration effectively resolved 90% of the political crisis, comparing the situation to a painful but essential surgical procedure required to address a critical ailment.
The state of emergency declaration, according to Okocha, brought much-needed respite to a state teetering on the brink of chaos. He painted a picture of a climate of fear and uncertainty, where non-state actors openly brandished weapons and made inflammatory pronouncements, creating an atmosphere ripe for lawlessness. The President’s intervention, though drastic, was deemed a necessary evil, a painful but unavoidable measure to restore order and stability. Okocha likened the situation to a necessary surgical operation, painful in itself but crucial to alleviate a more significant and debilitating condition. This analogy underscores the severity of the political crisis and the APC’s conviction that drastic measures were warranted to prevent further deterioration.
While acknowledging the gravity of the President’s actions, Okocha absolved the current Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, Nyesom Wike, of direct involvement in the crisis. He argued that while Wike, as the leader of the political structure that produced both Fubara and the state assembly members, might be indirectly linked to the situation, he was not actively participating in the escalating tensions. Okocha emphasized that Wike, having served as the previous governor, was instrumental in establishing the existing political framework, and therefore, any attempt to implicate him in the crisis would be based solely on his association with the key players involved. The focus, according to Okocha, should be on Governor Fubara’s actions and his perceived inability to manage the political dynamics he inherited.
Okocha further characterized Fubara as a “weak political investment,” suggesting that the governor’s actions jeopardized the political structure established by his predecessor. He posited that in the realm of politics, it is rare for a leader to allow the dismantling of their established political framework. Okocha alluded to Fubara’s perceived overconfidence and reliance on his executive authority, symbolized by his frequent references to his “red pen,” which he viewed as the ultimate instrument of power. This portrayal of Fubara suggests a leader detached from the realities of the political landscape, overly reliant on his formal authority, and ultimately unable to navigate the complexities of the political environment he inherited.
The lawsuit filed by the PDP Governors’ Forum challenging the state of emergency declaration is viewed by Okocha as an opportunity to clarify the legal framework surrounding such presidential actions. He expressed optimism that the Supreme Court’s ruling on the matter would establish a legal precedent and enrich the understanding of the constitutional provisions related to presidential interventions in state affairs. Okocha contrasted the current outcry over the President’s actions with the relative silence that greeted previous incidents of political violence in the state, such as the alleged bombing of the assembly complex. This comparison highlights what Okocha perceives as a selective outrage, questioning the motives of those criticizing the President’s intervention while remaining silent during prior instances of political unrest.
In essence, the APC’s narrative, presented by Okocha, frames President Tinubu’s declaration of a state of emergency as a necessary and ultimately beneficial intervention that prevented further escalation of a volatile political crisis in Rivers State. They portray Governor Fubara as a weak and misguided leader who exacerbated existing tensions, ultimately necessitating the President’s drastic actions. While acknowledging the legal challenges to the declaration, the APC expresses confidence that the Supreme Court’s ruling will ultimately vindicate the President’s decision and establish a clear legal framework for future interventions. The legal challenge is seen as an opportunity to clarify the constitutional boundaries of presidential power and further refine the legal parameters governing the relationship between the federal government and individual states.
