Dr. Abejide Olusegun
The political crisis unfolding in Rivers State has once again challenged Nigeria’s democratic stability. President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s decisive intervention should be viewed as a crucial step to preserve national security and avert a potential governance breakdown. While some political stakeholders, legal experts, and organizations—including the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) and the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP)—have criticized Tinubu’s actions, a closer examination reveals that his intervention was not only legally sound but also strategically essential. It prevented the chaotic impeachment of Governor Siminalayi Fubara, protected the state from further turmoil, and ensured the continuity of governance.
Legal Basis for Tinubu’s Action
The President’s intervention is strongly supported by Section 305 of Nigeria’s 1999 Constitution, which empowers him to declare a state of emergency in the face of imminent threats to public order or state stability. The crisis in Rivers State had escalated dramatically, marked by allegations of political manipulation, abuse of office, and a near-total breakdown of legislative processes. The impeachment scheme against Governor Fubara, orchestrated by a faction of the state’s House of Assembly, threatened to plunge the state into chaos. In light of rising tensions and the possibility of violence, Tinubu’s declaration of emergency rule acted as a preemptive measure to restore order before the situation deteriorated further.
Contrary to critics who argue that this move undermines democracy, history indicates that temporary emergency measures have been employed globally to prevent greater instability. In a democracy, maintaining order and governance is vital to ensure that citizens do not suffer from political power struggles. Thus, Tinubu’s intervention should be viewed as a necessary action rather than an overreach of executive authority.
Historical Precedents of Presidential Interventions in Political Crises
History offers several examples of leaders who have taken extraordinary actions to stabilize their nations before reinstating democratic governance. A notable instance is Charles de Gaulle of France. During the Algerian Crisis in 1958, he was granted emergency powers to avert a potential coup and the collapse of France’s Fourth Republic. His leadership not only led to the drafting of a new constitution but also facilitated the establishment of the Fifth Republic, thereby restoring democratic stability in the country.
Similarly, in Brazil, President Getúlio Vargas declared emergency rule in 1937, citing threats to national security. Although he ruled as an authoritarian leader for a time, his policies ultimately laid the foundation for Brazil’s modern industrial economy before democratic governance was restored. Likewise, the United States has experienced temporary suspensions of normal governance during crises, notably Abraham Lincoln’s suspension of habeas corpus during the Civil War, which was later deemed a necessary measure to preserve the Union.
Closer to home, Ghana’s former leader Jerry Rawlings intervened militarily in the country’s political system twice—first in 1979 and again in 1981—before guiding the nation to a stable democracy in 1992. Although his actions were initially controversial, they prevented Ghana from further political instability and ultimately led to the establishment of one of Africa’s most respected democratic systems today.
These examples illustrate that temporary emergency measures, when applied judiciously, can serve as mechanisms for restoring order and facilitating a more stable democratic transition. Tinubu’s actions therefore align with global practices where leaders have had to make difficult decisions to ensure national stability.
Why Fubara Should Be Grateful
Governor Siminalayi Fubara should recognize President Tinubu’s intervention as a lifeline rather than resist or denounce it. The crisis in Rivers State had reached a tipping point, with the threat of impeachment looming over his administration. Had the impeachment process succeeded, Fubara would have been rendered politically irrelevant, with his policies and vision for the state completely overturned by his political adversaries.
By intervening, Tinubu effectively halted the political maneuvers of Fubara’s opponents, particularly the loyalists of former Governor Nyesom Wike in the House of Assembly. This pause provides Fubara with a crucial opportunity to regroup, build alliances, and strategize for the future. If he plays his cards right, he can use this period to strengthen his political base and secure his position within the Rivers State political landscape.
Critics and the Politics of Hypocrisy
Predictably as expected, the usual critics of Tinubu’s administration have quickly condemned the declaration of a state of emergency. PDP stalwarts, who have failed to resolve their party crises, have turned their ire toward the President, despite their history of political interventions. This same party, unable to manage internal disputes between Fubara and Wike, now hypocritically accuses the President of undermining democracy. The inconsistency is striking.
For instance, Reuben Abati of Arise News stated that “Tinubu has appropriated to himself the powers to make laws for the Rivers State House of Assembly, which is an impeachable offense.” He further suggested that the National Assembly could reject Tinubu’s proclamation and initiate impeachment proceedings against him, although it remains uncertain what lawmakers will ultimately decide. But does Dr. Abati genuinely believe this, or is he simply trying to stir public sentiment for applause? Is he unaware that the President consulted with legislators and secured their support before declaring the emergency in Rivers State, or is he deliberately misleading the public with his characteristic grandstanding?
Similarly, Femi Ojudu’s convoluted and irritating article on this issue exudes condescension and a desperate attempt to undermine the President’s actions. Does he think the President’s intellect and decision-making capabilities and the President’s eyes are as “Dudu” as his own accordingly? Or is he unable to conceal his resentment, still nursing political wounds from the past? If Ojudu’s criticism arises from personal disappointment that his preferred candidate, Yemi Osinbajo, did not win the presidency, he should openly acknowledge it rather than hiding behind unfounded attacks and veiled insults. I want Abati and Ojudu to cite a law that prevented the President from declaring a State of Emergency when there are flagrant attacks on the state economy. I need the law.
The reality is that many of these so-called analysts and political commentators have built their careers on opposing every action of the government, regardless of its merit. Their objections stem not from constitutional concerns but from personal grievances, political affiliations, or a desire to remain relevant in media circles. It is time for them to abandon their fixation on undermining the administration and instead focus on constructive engagement that serves the nation’s interests.
Where were these self-appointed defenders of democracy when the PDP failed to control its warring factions? Where was the National Working Committee of the PDP when the crisis in Rivers escalated? Why didn’t the PDP Board of Trustees intervene earlier to broker peace? The reality is that PDP leadership neglected its responsibilities, forcing Tinubu to step in to prevent a full-blown crisis.
Furthermore, some so-called legal experts have questioned the constitutionality of Tinubu’s actions while ignoring the fact that Section 305 of the Nigerian Constitution explicitly grants the President the powers to act when public order and governance are threatened. Rather than providing sound legal arguments, they have resorted to political grandstanding, adding confusion to an already tense situation.
The Fault Finders and Armchair Critics
Nigerian society has unfortunately become a place where self-proclaimed analysts, social media activists, and political opportunists thrive on controversy. Ironically, many of those criticizing Tinubu’s decision do so without offering any viable solutions. They refuse to acknowledge the real dangers of a political meltdown in Rivers State, choosing instead to fuel division and misinformation.
It is time for these individuals to engage in more productive conversations. Nigeria does not need more armchair critics who contribute nothing but noise to the national discourse. Instead, we need solution-oriented discussions focused on long-term stability and governance. Those who genuinely care about democracy should aim for constructive criticism and engage in meaningful political discourse, rather than constantly seeking to undermine efforts to maintain order.
Lessons for the Future
The crisis in Rivers State should serve as a wake-up call for Nigerian politicians. Political stability is not guaranteed, and leadership requires careful management of power struggles and institutional conflicts. Fubara’s near-impeachment and Tinubu’s subsequent intervention highlight the fragile nature of Nigerian politics and the need for better conflict resolution mechanisms within parties and state governments.
For Governor Fubara, this period should be a lesson in political survival. He now has the opportunity to rebuild his political alliances and work toward consolidating his administration. For other governors and political leaders, it is a reminder that governance is not just about holding office—it is about managing political relationships, maintaining order, and ensuring that leadership serves the people rather than individual interests.
Final Thoughts
President Tinubu’s intervention in Rivers State was not only necessary; it was a masterstroke that prevented a political catastrophe. History has demonstrated that prudent temporary emergency measures can rescue nations from chaos and pave the way for stability. Governor Fubara should recognize the favor extended to him and use this time wisely.
For the fault finders and habitual critics, it is time to step aside and allow governance to unfold. Nigeria needs leaders who can make tough decisions for the greater good, rather than professional complainers who contribute only to disruption. Tinubu acted within the constitutional framework, and his decision has provided a vital reset for Rivers State. Now, it is up to the political actors involved to seize this opportunity and ensure a peaceful and democratic resolution to their differences.
Dear readers, we really need your support to keep on serving you with authoritative, truthful, and juicy stories everyday. For your support, please reach out to the editor @gavelinternational66@gmail.com