Prominent SAN Femi Falana swiftly condemned President Tinubu’s suspension of Rivers Governor Fubara, Deputy Odu, and Assembly members.
Transitioning to specifics, Falana labeled the move unconstitutional, stressing elected officials’ immunity from unilateral removal.
He further demanded accountability, urging adherence to democratic processes amid escalating political tensions in Rivers State.
He firmly described this action as unconstitutional and lacking any valid basis according to the amended 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.
In a detailed media statement, Falana strongly emphasized that the suspension lacks justification under any of the 320 provisions found in the Nigerian Constitution. While recognizing that Section 305 empowers the President to declare a state of emergency, he contended that such authority does not permit the suspension of elected officials or the dissolution of democratic institutions.
“The Constitution explicitly outlines the conditions under which an elected governor can vacate office—it includes death, ill health, resignation, or impeachment,” Falana asserted. Furthermore, he highlighted that even if both the Governor and Deputy Governor’s positions become vacant simultaneously, the Speaker of the State House of Assembly must constitutionally assume the role of Acting Governor for three months, during which fresh elections are required.
Constitutional Provisions on Emergency Powers
Falana pointed out that Section 45(3) of the Constitution defines a “period of emergency” as one declared under Section 305. He noted that while this provision allows for extraordinary measures to restore order, it does not authorize the removal or suspension of elected officials. Furthermore, Section 11(4) of the Constitution provides a mechanism for the National Assembly to legislate on behalf of a State House of Assembly if it is unable to perform its functions but explicitly prohibits the removal of a Governor or Deputy Governor under such circumstances.
“The failure of a State House of Assembly to function cannot justify the dissolution of democratic structures,” Falana argued. “The Constitution envisages such scenarios and provides legal frameworks to address them without undermining democracy.”
Historical Precedents
Falana noted emergency rule precedents in Plateau (2004) and Ekiti (2006) under Obasanjo, where democratic structures dissolved.
Although courts later declined constitutional rulings due to technicalities, outcomes sparked debate.
However, he highlighted Jonathan’s 2013 approach in Adamawa, Borno, and Yobe, where emergencies avoided dissolving institutions, adhering strictly to constitutional frameworks.
Similarly, Falana cited Buhari’s 2021 rejection of dismantling Anambra’s democracy amid unrest threats, reinforcing continuity despite proposed emergency measures.
Legal Precedents
The senior lawyer cited multiple legal rulings supporting his position. In *Attorney General of the Federation v. Attorney General of Abia State & Ors (2024)*, the Supreme Court declared the removal of elected local government officials and their replacement with caretaker committees as unconstitutional. By extension, Falana argued, this principle applies equally to state governors and legislators. Additionally, in *Speaker, Bauchi State House of Assembly v. Hon Rifkatu Danna (2017)* and other cases, Nigerian courts have consistently held that suspending elected legislators is illegal.
Call for Constitutional Adherence
Falana urged President Tinubu to rescind his decision immediately and reinstate Governor Fubara, Deputy Governor Odu, and all suspended legislators. He also called on the National Assembly to reject any endorsement of what he termed an unconstitutional act. Instead, he recommended that the National Assembly utilize its powers under Section 11(4) to assist Rivers State in restoring peace and order through lawful means.
“The path forward must be one of constitutionalism,” Falana stressed. “Extraordinary measures may be necessary in times of crisis, but they must be implemented within the framework of the law. Undermining democratic institutions sets a dangerous precedent that threatens the rule of law.”
The senior advocate concluded by reiterating his commitment to defending democratic principles and called on all stakeholders to uphold Nigeria’s constitutional order in addressing challenges in Rivers State.
