Why Jonathan Refused to Remove Governors During Emergency Rule in Borno, Yobe, and Adamawa – Adoke

Former Attorney-General of the Federation, Mohammed Bello Adoke, has revealed why former President Goodluck Jonathan did not suspend state governors when a state of emergency was declared in Borno, Yobe, and Adamawa in 2013. According to Adoke, removing the governors would have been unconstitutional under the 1999 Constitution.

In his 2019 memoir *Burden of Service: The Reminiscences of Nigeria’s Former Attorney-General*, Adoke explained that although Nigeria had a precedent of suspending political leaders during emergency rule under the 1960 Constitution—such as the 1962 suspension of the Western Region Premier—those provisions no longer applied after the 1979 and 1999 Constitutions came into effect. He argued that the legal framework under the current constitution allows the president to declare a state of emergency but not to remove elected officials in the process.

Adoke recalled the intense political and security climate of 2013, when Boko Haram insurgents were wreaking havoc in parts of Northern Nigeria. While many political figures and commentators pressured Jonathan to remove the governors—who were all members of the opposition party—the President chose to retain them. This decision drew criticism, with some accusing him of weakness. However, Adoke said he advised Jonathan to uphold the Constitution, emphasizing that governors have no real control over security agencies and therefore cannot be blamed for breakdowns in public order.

He also criticized the misuse of emergency powers by previous administrations, particularly President Olusegun Obasanjo’s decision to remove Plateau State Governor Joshua Dariye in 2004. Adoke said that by 2004, the Emergency Powers Act of 1961, which Obasanjo relied on, had become obsolete under the new constitutional framework.

Adoke further disclosed that Obasanjo also tried to pressure Jonathan into declaring a state of emergency in Ogun State during a political crisis in 2010. The former AGF said he resisted this attempt, maintaining that the conditions for an emergency did not exist and that other constitutional mechanisms were available to manage legislative gridlock in the state.

During a Federal Executive Council meeting, Adoke faced opposition from some ministers who pushed for the removal of the governors in the three insurgency-hit states. Two ministers had even prepared a draft speech for Jonathan to announce their suspension and appoint administrators. However, Adoke stood firm in his legal opinion, warning that removing governors without constitutional backing would diminish the president’s powers and invite legal challenges.

Despite becoming a target of political backlash within Jonathan’s cabinet, including reported efforts to get him fired, Adoke said Jonathan stood by him and chose to follow the path of legality. In the end, the President neither removed the governors nor extended the state of emergency indefinitely.

Adoke described Jonathan’s restraint as a legacy of constitutional fidelity, contrasting it with past leaders who used emergency declarations as political weapons. He noted that even Jonathan’s successor, President Muhammadu Buhari, refrained from using emergency rule as a political tool in states like Rivers, Kwara, and Akwa Ibom, despite the potential advantages.