Legislative Body Calls for Rejection of Lawsuit Filed by PDP Governors Regarding the State of Emergency in Rivers, as Proclaimed
Hear Ye! Hear Ye! The National Assembly is taking a bold stand in the Supreme Court, urging to toss out a legal battle initiated by 11 governors of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP). The governors are challenging the declaration of a state of emergency in Rivers State, claiming the President has overstepped his boundaries.
According to our source, the federal legislature lodged a preliminary objection, contending that the lawsuit is full of procedural flaws and embraces no substance. In a document dated April 22, 2025, the National Assembly argued that the court lacks the jurisdiction to entertain such a case and that the plaintiffs should face a ₦1 billion fine for filing a "frivolous and speculative" case.
The suit, filed by PDP governors, targets President Bola Tinubu's powers in suspending a democratically elected state institution and replacing it with an unelected one. The National Assembly counters that the suit should be dismissed for failing to meet legal standards.
On March 18, 2025, President Tinubu declared a state of emergency in Rivers State, suspending Governor Siminalayi Fubara, Deputy Governor Ngozi Odu, and all elected members of the State House of Assembly for an initial six-month period. He then appointed Rear Admiral Ibokette Ibas (retired) as the sole administrator to run the state's affairs.
The National Assembly ratified the President's declaration through a voice vote, but the PDP governors are now challenging both the President's powers and the process used to approve the state of emergency.
In suit number SC/CV/329/2025, the PDP governors from Adamawa, Enugu, Osun, Oyo, Bauchi, Akwa Ibom, Plateau, Delta, Taraba, Zamfara, and Bayelsa States approached the Supreme Court, questioning the President's authority to suspend a democratically elected state government and replace it with an unelected appointee.
The plaintiffs seek the Court's determination on several constitutional issues, including whether the President can lawfully suspend or interfere with the offices of a governor and deputy governor, and whether the National Assembly's approval of the state of emergency through a voice vote contravenes constitutional requirements for a two-thirds majority.
The plaintiffs are asking for a perpetual injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with state offices, nullifying the state of emergency proclamation in Rivers State, and setting aside the Official Gazette No. 47 of 2025, State of Emergency (Rivers State) Proclamation, 2025, made by the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.
However, in its preliminary objection, the National Assembly questioned the governors' lawsuit, asking the Supreme Court to dismiss it, arguing that the court lacks the jurisdiction to entertain the case—particularly against the second defendant (NASS).
Declaring that it holds a memorandum of conditional appearance, the National Assembly argued that due process was not followed in instituting the suit, emphasizing that the plaintiffs failed to issue the statutorily required three-month pre-action notice to the Clerk of the National Assembly and took no steps to obtain the resolutions of the Houses of Assembly of each of the States to enable the plaintiffs each join to approach the busy Court.
The National Assembly further contended that the plaintiffs were attempting to use the Supreme Court to dictate how it exercises its constitutional role, particularly regarding the use of voice votes to ratify states of emergency under section 305 of the 1999 Constitution.
The objection described the suit as speculative and an abuse of the court process, stating that the plaintiffs seek to curtail the manner in which the National Assembly votes or makes approvals, and to restrain the second defendant's Houses from carrying out their constitutional duties of approval of declarations of state of emergency.
TL;DR: The National Assembly has filed a preliminary objection in the Supreme Court against 11 PDP governors who are challenging the state of emergency in Rivers State. The National Assembly claims the suit is procedurally flawed and lacks substance, calling for a ₦1 billion fine for the plaintiffs. The governors' suit questions the President's authority to suspend a democratically elected state government and replace it with an unelected appointee, but the National Assembly argues that the court lacks jurisdiction over the matter.
- The National Assembly is involved in a legal battle against 11 governors hailing from PDP, contesting a state of emergency in Rivers State.
- The case revolves around the President's overreach in declaring a state of emergency and suspending a democratically elected state institution.
- The federal legislature lodged a preliminary objection, contending that the lawsuit is full of procedural flaws and does not offer substantial arguments.
- The National Assembly's document dated April 22, 2025, argues that the court lacks the authority to hear such cases and imposes a ₦1 billion fine for filing a "frivolous and speculative" case.
- The suit targets President Tinubu's powers, citing his suspension of Governor Fubara, Deputy Governor Odu, and all elected members of the State House of Assembly.
- The PDP governors have filed suit number SC/CV/329/2025, seeking the court's determination on constitutional issues, including the President's authority to interfere with state offices.
- The plaintiffs want a perpetual injunction, nullification of the state of emergency proclamation, and the setting aside of Official Gazette No. 47 of 2025.
- In response, the National Assembly asked the Supreme Court to dismiss the suit, arguing that the court does not have jurisdiction over the matter, particularly against the second defendant (NASS).
- The National Assembly maintains that due process was not followed, emphasizing the failure to issue a three-month pre-action notice and obtain resolutions from the Houses of Assembly.
- The National Assembly believes the plaintiffs aim to dictate how it executes its constitutional role, especially regarding voice votes to ratify states of emergency.
- The objection describes the suit as speculative and an abuse of the court process, objecting to the plaintiffs' attempts to curtail the National Assembly's manner of voting or making approvals.
- Despite ongoing politics and legal battles, emphasis should be placed on personal growth, mindfulness, and career development, such as education-and-self-development, and job-search, for a more productive future.
- One should never halt their lifelong learning, skills-training, and goal-setting to stay abreast of general-news, crime-and-justice, or policy-and-legislation updates, such as war-and-conflicts, accidents, fires, or online-education advancements.
- While focusing on personal and career growth, it is essential to recognize the importance of education-and-self-development in preventing potentially dangerous situations, like car-accidents.
- Strikes, protests, or political unrest, such as those surrounding the Rivers State issue, can negatively impact career development and job-search efforts.
- It is crucial to prioritize one's well-being and embrace practices like mindfulness and productivity to maintain mental balance amidst the chaos and uncertainty caused by politics and ongoing legal battles.
