Federal High Court to Rule March 9 on Suit Challenging Tinubu’s Emergency Powers in Rivers
The Federal High Court sitting in Abuja has slated March 9 for judgment in a new constitutional suit questioning the legality of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s decision to remove elected state officials following the declaration of a state of emergency in Rivers State.
Justice James Omotosho fixed the judgment date after legal teams representing both parties formally adopted their court filings and advanced arguments for and against the suit, PulseNets learned.
The action was instituted by the Civil Society Observatory for Constitutional and Legal Compliance (CSOCLC) through its counsel, Nnamdi Nwokocha-Ahaaiwe, challenging the president’s authority in the aftermath of the emergency proclamation in Rivers State.
According to court documents obtained by PulseNets, the plaintiff contends that although Section 305 of the 1999 Constitution empowers the president to declare a state of emergency, it does not confer authority to suspend or remove elected executive and legislative officeholders, nor to appoint an interim administrator.
While adopting the originating summons and reply briefs, Ahaaiwe argued that the Constitution has comprehensively regulated emergency powers, insisting that it “covers the field” and leaves no room for discretionary expansion by the executive arm.
He further submitted that earlier legislations, particularly the Emergency Powers (Jurisdiction) Act of 1962, relied upon in past judicial decisions to limit jurisdiction to the Supreme Court, had become obsolete long before the advent of the 1999 Constitution.
Speaking before the court, Ahaaiwe maintained that the 1962 law had expired, was intentionally excluded from the Laws of the Federation as a spent enactment, and could not lawfully be revived or altered through any executive modification order in 2025.
He told the court that no existing statute extends presidential authority beyond what is expressly provided by the Constitution, stressing that the power to suspend elected officials was deliberately omitted by the framers of the law.
Counsel representing the president and other co-defendants, however, adopted their defence processes, including a preliminary objection challenging the court’s jurisdiction, relying on previous judicial pronouncements and the 2025 modification order.
Justice Omotosho observed during proceedings that the matter bore strong resemblance to earlier suits he had dismissed on jurisdictional grounds, which were premised on the Emergency Powers (Jurisdiction) Act of 1962.
The judge also referenced a Supreme Court decision delivered on December 15, 2025, which reportedly struck out a similar case on procedural grounds.
In response, Ahaaiwe acknowledged the existence of the prior rulings but insisted they were fundamentally flawed.
He argued that the 1962 Act was a “spent law” deliberately removed from Nigeria’s statute books before the 1999 Constitution came into force, PulseNets reported.
According to him, any presidential order purporting to amend or rely on a non-existent statute is unconstitutional and legally void.
“The Constitution has fully occupied the space on emergency powers,” Ahaaiwe submitted, adding that “no executive proclamation can amend, supplement, or override the clear provisions of Section 305.”
Counsel for the first to fifth defendants, including the President of the Federation and the Attorney-General, maintained that the disputed 1962 Act and its modification vest exclusive original jurisdiction in the Supreme Court, urging the Federal High Court to strike out the suit.
The plaintiffs are seeking 26 reliefs, among them a declaration that the appointment of a sole administrator — retired Vice Admiral Ibok-Ete Ekwe Ibas — cannot lawfully override constitutional governance structures in Rivers State.
The hearing has reopened a sensitive constitutional debate many believed had been settled by earlier judicial pronouncements.
PulseNets learnt that the state of emergency, declared on March 18, 2025, and ratified by the National Assembly, led to the suspension of Governor Siminalayi Fubara, his deputy, and members of the Rivers State House of Assembly for six months.
Also Read: Federal High Court rejects Nnamdi Kanu’s bail request, denies transfer to Kuje prison
The emergency rule ended on September 17, 2025, with the suspended officials reinstated the following day.
Legal observers say the suit raises unresolved constitutional questions concerning the limits of federal intervention in state governance.
A related case filed by governors elected on the platform of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) was previously struck out by the Supreme Court on procedural grounds, including improper invocation of its original jurisdiction, PulseNets learnt.
