….Presidency defends suspension of Governor Fubara, lawmakers, and declaration of emergency in Rivers

President Bola Tinubu has asked the Supreme Court to dismissed the lawsuit filed by governors elected on the platform of the People’s Democratic Party (PDP)-controlled states following his declaration of Statev of Emergency in Rivers State and the suspension of its elected officials.

Sunday Telegraph recalls that President Tinubu had in March suspended Governor Siminalayi Fubara, Deputy Governor Ngozi Odu, and the entire Rivers State House of Assembly, citing a breakdown of public order amid the unending political tussle in the state.

Following their suspension, the President appointed Vice Admiral Ibok-Ete Ibas (rtd.) as the Sole Administrator of the state for six months.

In reaction to the development, PDP governors from 11 states challenged the move at the Supreme Court, accusing the president of constitutional overreach.

READ ALSO:

However, the Attorney General Lateef Fagbemi (SAN), representing the president, filed a preliminary objection describing the suit as an abuse of court process.

He argued that the governors lack locus standi, and that the case is “hypothetical, academic, and speculative.”

“We urge the Supreme Court to uphold our objection and dismiss the plaintiffs’ suit,” Fagbemi stated.

The presidency’s legal team insists that the suit is politically motivated, noting that one of the plaintiffs, Delta State Governor Sheriff Oborevwori, has since defected to the APC.

Additionally, Akwa Ibom Governor Umo Eno, another plaintiff, recently endorsed Tinubu’s second-term bid and is reportedly considering joining the ruling party.

In an affidavit filed alongside the objection, Taiye Hussain Oloyede, Special Assistant to the President on Arbitration, defended Tinubu’s decision.

He cited escalating political tensions between Governor Fubara and state lawmakers, along with attacks on oil facilities, as valid grounds for invoking Section 305 of the Constitution, which permits emergency declarations in cases of public disorder.

“The political unrest and sabotage of vital infrastructure posed a threat to national stability and justified decisive action,” Oloyede argued.

Oloyede also defended the National Assembly’s approval of the emergency rule. He rejected claims that lawmakers’ use of voice votes was unconstitutional, insisting that the 1999 Constitution (as amended) does not mandate individual vote counting for such resolutions.

Furthermore, he claimed the PDP governors filed the suit out of fear that Tinubu might extend similar declarations to their states.

“This suit was filed in panic, not to correct any actual wrong, but to score political points and harass the president,” Oloyede told the court.

He called for the Supreme Court to dismiss the case with punitive costs, citing its alleged abuse of the judicial process.

As of Saturday, the Supreme Court has not fixed a hearing date for the high-stakes constitutional case, which could have far-reaching implications for executive powers and inter-party politics.