The declaration of a state of emergency and subsequent suspension of elected officials in Rivers State by President Bola Tinubu has ignited a firestorm of criticism and condemnation from prominent figures and civil society organizations across Nigeria. Former President Goodluck Jonathan, echoing the sentiments of many, expressed deep disappointment at the removal of duly elected officials, arguing that such actions tarnish Nigeria’s image on the global stage and undermine investor confidence. He pointedly accused all three branches of government – the executive, legislature, and judiciary – of abusing their power and failing to uphold the principles of democratic governance. While acknowledging the need for intervention in times of crisis, Jonathan emphasized that his own declaration of a state of emergency in the North-East during his tenure did not involve the suspension of democratic institutions, highlighting the stark contrast with the current situation. He stressed the importance of upholding the sanctity of the constitution and the rule of law, warning that the current trajectory sets a dangerous precedent for the future of democracy in Nigeria.
Nobel Laureate Wole Soyinka added his voice to the chorus of dissent, characterizing the President’s actions as a betrayal of the spirit of federalism. He argued that the 1999 Constitution grants excessive power to the presidency, creating an imbalance that undermines the principles of true federalism. Soyinka emphasized the importance of respecting the autonomy of states within a federal system and stressed the need for a national dialogue to address the fundamental flaws in the current constitutional framework. He reiterated his longstanding call for a national conference to forge a truly representative constitution that reflects the will of the people and safeguards the principles of federalism. He warned that the current centralized structure of power is ill-suited for a pluralistic society like Nigeria and poses a serious threat to the long-term stability and unity of the nation.
Civil society organizations, human rights activists, and pro-democracy groups have vehemently denounced the emergency rule, describing it as an assault on democratic principles and a dangerous precedent. Aisha Yesufu, co-convener of the #BringBackOurGirls movement, along with other prominent activists, demanded the immediate reversal of the emergency rule and the reinstatement of the suspended officials. They accused President Tinubu and the National Assembly of undermining the constitution and betraying the trust of the Nigerian people. They warned that failure to challenge this act of “constitutional rascality” will embolden future abuses of power and erode the foundations of democracy. They called upon all Nigerians to stand up for the rule of law and defend the hard-won gains of democracy.
The Citizens and Civil Society Organisations, representing a coalition of over 300 groups, condemned the state of emergency and vowed to pursue legal action to challenge the President’s actions. Anthony Ubani, Executive Director of FixPolitics, argued that the President’s actions are dictatorial and illegal, exceeding his constitutional authority. He called on the National Assembly to uphold its responsibility as the supreme law-making body and resist the erosion of constitutional principles. He warned that if this unconstitutional act goes unchallenged, it will set a dangerous precedent for future abuses of power, jeopardizing the democratic rights of citizens across the country.
Various youth groups and pro-democracy movements have mobilized to protest against the emergency rule, accusing President Tinubu of steering Nigeria toward authoritarianism. The Take-It-Back Movement announced plans for a nationwide protest to denounce the President’s actions and demand a return to democratic governance. Sanyaolu Juwon, the group’s national coordinator, accused the Tinubu administration of silencing dissent and suppressing the voice of the opposition. He argued that the events in Rivers State are part of a broader pattern of authoritarianism and warned that the President’s actions are laying the groundwork for a return to military dictatorship.
The Youth Rights Campaign, the #EndBadGovernance movement, and the Civil Society Legislative Advocacy Centre (CISLAC) have all expressed grave concerns about the implications of the emergency rule for democracy and fundamental human rights. They called for the protection of the constitutional right to peaceful protest and vowed to resist any attempts to suppress dissent. The Democratic Socialist Movement (DSM) called for mass action, urging the Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC) and the Trade Union Congress (TUC) to lead the charge in defending the democratic rights of the people of Rivers State. They warned that the suspension of elected officials amounts to a coup against the people and must be resisted with all available means. They emphasized the importance of unity and collective action in safeguarding the hard-won gains of democracy.
In response to the widespread criticism, the Presidency defended the President’s actions, arguing that he acted within his constitutional powers to preserve the corporate existence of Nigeria. Presidential spokesperson, Temitope Ajayi, acknowledged the opinions of Jonathan and Soyinka as respected statesmen but maintained that President Tinubu has a duty to prevent any part of the country from descending into chaos. He cited a Supreme Court ruling that declared the Rivers State government non-functional, justifying the President’s intervention. However, critics argue that this justification is flawed and that the President’s actions have set a dangerous precedent for executive overreach. The unfolding events in Rivers State represent a critical test for Nigerian democracy and raise fundamental questions about the balance of power between the federal government and the states, the sanctity of the electoral process, and the future of democratic governance in the country.
