Tinubu Asks Supreme Court to Dismiss PDP Governors’ Suit Challenging Rivers Emergency Rule

President Bola Tinubu has urged the Supreme Court to dismiss a lawsuit filed by 11 governors from the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), who are challenging his declaration of a state of emergency in Rivers State and the suspension of its elected officials. The president, through a preliminary objection filed by the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF), Lateef Fagbemi, on 9 May, argued that the Supreme Court lacks the jurisdiction to entertain the case.

The controversial move by President Tinubu on 18 March led to the suspension of Governor Siminalayi Fubara, Deputy Governor Ngozi Odu, and all state lawmakers. In their place, the president appointed retired naval officer Ibok-Ete Ibas as sole administrator of the state. The declaration, which marked one of the most politically consequential decisions of Tinubu’s administration so far, sparked immediate legal resistance from several PDP-controlled states.

Initially seven in number, the group of suing states later expanded to 11 and includes Adamawa, Akwa Ibom, Bauchi, Bayelsa, Delta, Enugu, Osun, Oyo, Plateau, Taraba, and Zamfara. At the time of filing, all governors of the affected states were PDP members, although Delta’s Sheriff Oborevwori has since defected to the All Progressives Congress (APC), and Akwa Ibom’s Umo Eno has openly endorsed Tinubu’s re-election bid amid rumours of a pending defection. It remains uncertain whether the political shifts in these two states will lead to a withdrawal from the suit.

The plaintiffs brought the case against the federal government through the AGF, naming him as the first defendant, while the National Assembly, which swiftly approved the emergency rule, was listed as the second defendant. In his objection, Mr Fagbemi argued that the case fails to meet the constitutional conditions for invoking the Supreme Court’s original jurisdiction, as stipulated in Section 232(1), which limits such jurisdiction to disputes between the federation and a state or between states. He contended that the suit reveals no actual dispute or actionable claim, calling it speculative and an abuse of judicial process.

Supporting the objection, Presidential Special Assistant on Arbitration, Drafting, and Regulations, Taiye Hussain Oloyede, submitted an affidavit defending Tinubu’s actions. He cited political unrest and attacks on oil infrastructure in Rivers State as justifiable grounds for declaring the state of emergency. Oloyede insisted the National Assembly acted within its powers and rejected the plaintiffs’ criticism of its use of voice votes, asserting that the constitution does not mandate a roll-call vote for such resolutions.

He further accused the governors of filing the suit out of fear that their own states could be targeted next, describing the action as politically motivated and designed to embarrass the president. He called on the court to dismiss the case with punitive costs.

The Supreme Court has yet to set a hearing date for the suit. In their filings, the governors posed eight key legal questions challenging the president’s authority to suspend elected officials and install a sole administrator during an emergency. They asked the court to declare the suspension of Governor Fubara and others unconstitutional and to invalidate the appointment of Mr Ibas. The suit also contests the legality of the National Assembly’s approval process, insisting that it failed to meet the two-thirds majority requirement mandated by Section 305 of the Constitution.