The announcement of a new date for local government elections in Rivers State has ignited a mixed response from political parties and civil society organizations. The Rivers State Independent Electoral Commission (RSIEC), under its new chairman, Dr. Michael Odey, rescheduled the elections from August 9th to August 30th, 2025. This shift has been met with approval from some political parties, including the All Progressives Congress (APC) and the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), who have expressed their readiness to participate. They cite proper procedures and stakeholder engagement as reasons for their support, contrasting it with the previous RSIEC leadership. The Labour Party also welcomed the new date, viewing it as a continuation of the existing electoral timetable. Similarly, the Youth Party affirmed its intention to participate but emphasized the need for a level playing field for all contestants.
However, the new date has also drawn criticism, particularly from civil society groups. The South-South Youths Initiative and the Civil Liberties Organisation (CLO) have both called for the suspension of the elections, citing various concerns. The South-South Youths Initiative argues that the elections should only be held after the reinstatement of the suspended Governor, Siminalayi Fubara. They contend that Fubara, as the duly elected governor, is the rightful authority to oversee the elections, not the State Administrator. The group also raised concerns about potential post-election litigation and the short notice given for the polls, arguing that it does not allow for adequate campaign time.
The CLO, on the other hand, challenges the constitutionality of the newly constituted RSIEC board itself, questioning its legitimacy to conduct or reschedule elections. They point to the statutory provisions of the Electoral Act, which mandates a minimum 90-day notice period for elections. The CLO insists that the previous RSIEC, under its former chairman, was lawfully constituted before Governor Fubara’s suspension and that the new timetable announced by Dr. Odey is unconstitutional. They also contend that the process represents a misuse of public funds.
This divergence of opinion highlights the complex political landscape in Rivers State. Political parties, eager to engage in the electoral process, see the new date as an opportunity to contest and potentially gain control of local government councils. Conversely, civil society organizations raise concerns about due process, the legitimacy of the electoral body, and the potential for instability and legal challenges in the aftermath of the elections.
The arguments presented by both sides revolve around key themes of legitimacy, due process, and political stability. The supporting political parties emphasize the inclusion of stakeholders in the decision-making process and their readiness to participate in the elections. They view the change in date as a necessary adjustment and not a fundamental flaw in the electoral process. Civil society organizations, however, focus on the legality of the process, arguing that the current RSIEC lacks the constitutional authority to conduct elections and that the short notice given undermines the democratic principles of fairness and participation. They also raise the issue of the suspended governor, suggesting that holding elections under the current administration would further exacerbate existing political tensions.
The situation in Rivers State underscores the importance of adhering to established legal frameworks and ensuring inclusivity in electoral processes. The conflicting perspectives demonstrate a need for dialogue and consensus-building among stakeholders to ensure that the elections are conducted in a manner that is both legal and perceived as legitimate. The potential for post-election litigation and continued political instability remains a significant concern, highlighting the need for a resolution that addresses the concerns raised by civil society groups while also allowing for the democratic process to unfold. A balanced approach that respects both the letter of the law and the spirit of democratic participation is crucial for a peaceful and credible outcome.
