FLASHBACK: Tinubu Once Criticised Emergency Rule—Now He’s Declared One

By Arthur Maduka

As President Bola Ahmed Tinubu takes the bold step of declaring a state of emergency in Rivers State, many Nigerians are revisiting his past positions on similar moves—especially when made by his predecessors, Olusegun Obasanjo and Goodluck Jonathan.

In 2013, then-President Jonathan declared a state of emergency in Borno, Yobe, and Adamawa States in response to growing insurgency in the North-East. Tinubu, at the time the National Leader of the Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN), didn’t mince words. He slammed the move as undemocratic, warning that military occupation of civilian spaces would backfire. He accused Jonathan of targeting opposition states and failing to address the root causes of the crisis, such as poor governance, injustice, and corruption. Tinubu called it “a dangerous trend” and warned it could lead to further radicalization.

During the Obasanjo era, when states like Plateau and Ekiti came under emergency rule, Tinubu was also a vocal opponent of federal overreach. Interestingly, despite fierce political rivalry, Obasanjo never declared emergency rule in Lagos—even when Tinubu’s administration ran into repeated standoffs with the federal government. That historical restraint has now resurfaced in political circles, with critics urging Tinubu to show the same respect for democratic institutions.

Now as President, Tinubu finds himself walking the tightrope he once warned others against. The emergency declaration in Rivers State, driven by political instability and allegations of sabotage in the oil sector, has drawn sharp criticism—particularly from the Nigerian Bar Association, which called it unconstitutional and a threat to democratic order.

The irony is not lost on observers. A president who once fought hard against federal strong-arm tactics is now being accused of using the same playbook. Whether it’s a necessary step or political overreach, history, it seems, has a long memory.