The recent declaration of a state of emergency in Rivers State has raised fundamental questions about the future of democracy in Nigeria. Constitutional lawyer Mike Ozekhome has not minced words, calling President Bola Tinubu’s move a “civilian coup d'état.” His concern reflects a growing fear that this action could set a dangerous precedent for political control disguised as crisis management.
Nigeria prides itself on being a democracy, yet the suspension of Governor Siminalayi Fubara, his deputy, and the entire Rivers State House of Assembly is nothing short of a political earthquake. A state of emergency, in theory, should be used to restore order in times of grave crisis, such as war or large-scale insurrection—not as a tool to remove elected officials. This raises the question: Is democracy in Rivers State being undermined under the guise of maintaining order?
Ozekhome’s argument is clear—this move violates the very Constitution that binds the nation. Section 305 of the Nigerian Constitution allows for emergency rule under extreme circumstances, not as a means to eliminate political opposition. By taking such drastic steps, the President may have overstepped his legal authority, potentially eroding the democratic principles that Nigeria has fought so hard to uphold.
Beyond the legal and political ramifications, the crisis has inflicted a significant human cost. The decision to suspend key government figures has not only created a leadership vacuum but has also cast a shadow of uncertainty over ordinary citizens.
- Families in Turmoil: The sudden upheaval in leadership has left many questioning the stability of governance. Families dependent on government programs or employment are now uncertain about their futures.
- Communities Living in Fear: The deployment of armed forces to Rivers State has turned neighborhoods into tense zones. For many residents, this feels like martial law, not democracy.
- Economic Ripples: Businesses and investors are left in limbo, unsure whether the instability will lead to further economic downturns. Many companies are already reconsidering their operations in the state.
If this move is allowed to stand, what stops future leaders from using emergency powers to silence opposition? Today, it is Rivers State—tomorrow, it could be any other region that falls out of favor with those in power.
The danger here is not just the removal of a governor but the setting of a precedent where elected officials can be dismissed under loosely defined “emergency” conditions. The implications for Nigeria’s federal structure are staggering. States must have the autonomy to govern themselves without fear of arbitrary federal intervention.
Ozekhome has hinted that the real motivation behind this move may not be about security or governance but about political dominance. With Rivers State being a politically strategic region, one cannot ignore the possibility that this is a calculated attempt to weaken opposition forces ahead of future elections.
If the government truly believes Rivers State is in crisis, why not seek diplomatic or legal means to resolve it? Why resort to emergency rule, which essentially strips an entire state of its democratic leadership? These are questions that demand answers.
Nigerians must not stand by as democracy is slowly chipped away. Civil society organizations, the judiciary, and the international community must scrutinize this decision and demand accountability. The people of Rivers State deserve governance, not governance by force.
If the President’s actions go unchallenged, Nigeria risks descending into a state where democratic processes can be overridden at will. This is not just about Rivers State—it is about the future of democracy in Nigeria.
Now is the time for vigilance, advocacy, and action. Democracy is not a privilege handed down by the powerful; it is a right that must be protected at all costs.