Former presidential candidate Rabiu Musa Kwankwaso has criticized President Bola Tinubu’s declaration of a state of emergency in Rivers State, calling it an unconstitutional move that threatens Nigeria’s democratic principles.

In a statement posted on his official X platform, Kwankwaso expressed deep concern over the president’s decision to suspend Governor Siminalayi Fubara, his deputy, and all elected members of the state legislature.

He warned that the action sets a dangerous precedent and brings the military uncomfortably close to political power.

“I am perturbed by the unilateral decision of President Bola Tinubu to suspend Governor Similayi Fubara of Rivers State, his Deputy and all elected state legislators from office. The legislature has the responsibility to hold the executive responsible and not always play to its tune. It is therefore appalling to see this 10th Assembly become more rubberstamp than any of its predecessors,” Kwankwaso wrote.

He also condemned the National Assembly for quickly endorsing the president’s proclamation, arguing that the legislature failed in its duty to check executive overreach. “More disturbing is the unilateral decision by both chambers of the National Assembly to ratify the president’s proclamation. I had hoped that the legislators would not add salt to injury by passing this illegality. The Constitution is clear on the method of voting on issues of such importance, and the decision to use the voice vote in deciding this is not consistent with the proper procedures and transparency.”

Kwankwaso further urged the judiciary to play its role in upholding constitutional order, calling on legal institutions to remain impartial and resist external influence. “Our judiciary also has the very important task of balancing the balance of power by being fair to all parties in any conflict. I believe that the custodians of the Law in Nigeria need to wake up to their responsibility of calming nerves by being as just as possible, with judgments devoid of any hint of external influence.”

The former Kano State governor warned against involving the military in governance, noting that Nigeria has worked hard to establish democratic stability since its return to civilian rule in 1999. “Moreover, for a politician that prides himself as a consistent advocate and defender of democracy in our country, the decision by President Tinubu to draft in the military into a position of leadership is hugely dangerous to the progress we have made in the 26 years of democratic journey. Bola Tinubu should know better than bringing the military closer to power after the good work President Olusegun Obasanjo did of confining them to their barracks while he led this country.”

President Tinubu declared a state of emergency in Rivers following reports of a major attack on the Trans-Niger Pipeline, which significantly disrupted crude oil production. In a nationwide address, he accused the state government of failing to act against growing security threats, including acts of vandalism by militants.

However, legal experts and opposition figures have questioned the legality of the move.

Kwankwaso echoed these concerns, asserting that the decision could lead to a culture of impunity.

“I am of the view that the political situation on the ground in Rivers does not justify such a flawed interpretation of section 305(1) of the 1999 constitution. The action constitutes an unconstitutional overdrive, and it could foster a culture of impunity if unchecked.”

Former Governor of Kaduna State, Mallam Nasir El-Rufai, has reaffirmed that elected officials, including governors and legislators, cannot be removed from office through a declaration of a state of emergency.

Speaking at a press conference on Thursday, El-Rufai cited a 2006 Supreme Court judgment, which ruled that Section 305 of the Nigerian Constitution does not permit the removal of elected officials during an emergency.

“It is true that in those cases, the governors were suspended. These suspensions were challenged in court, and in 2006, the Supreme Court of Nigeria gave a judgment clearly stating that under no circumstances can the emergency provision in Section 305 be used to remove any elected official. That is the law,” El-Rufai stated.

He emphasized that unless a constitutional amendment or legislation explicitly changes this ruling, no authority whether federal or state has the power to remove a sitting governor outside due legal process.

The only lawful means of removing a governor, he stressed, is through impeachment by the state legislature.

El-Rufai’s remarks came amid speculations and debates surrounding the implications of a state of emergency on elected leadership.

His statement serves as a reminder that constitutional provisions must be upheld in handling political crises.

With no amendments altering the 2006 Supreme Court judgment, the former governor’s statement reinforces the legal precedent that remains binding in Nigeria’s democratic system.

According to report President Bola Ahmed Tinubu on Tuesday declared a state of emergency in Rivers.

The President also suspended Governor Siminalayi Fubara and his deputy for 6-months.

Lawyers have faulted the six-month suspension of Rivers State Governor, Siminalayi Fubara, his deputy, Ngozi Odu, and the state lawmakers by President Bola Tinubu in a live broadcast on Tuesday.

The legal practitioners also disagreed on the state of emergency processes in the oil-rich South-South state.

Tinubu, in a nationwide broadcast, said his decision was taken to restore stability in the state that has been witnessing political turmoil as a result of the disagreement between the state governor and the state lawmakers.

“By this declaration, the Governor of Rivers State, Mr Siminalayi Fubara, his deputy, Mrs Ngozi Odu and all elected members of the House of Assembly of Rivers State are hereby suspended for an initial period of six months,” the President declared.

The president appointed retired Vice Admiral Ibok-Ette Ibas as the state’s administrator to oversee governance.

“In the meantime, I hereby nominate Vice Admiral Ibokette Ibas (retd.) as Administrator to take charge of the affairs of the state in the interest of the good people of Rivers State. For the avoidance of doubt, this declaration does not affect the judicial arm of Rivers State, which shall continue to function in accordance with their constitutional mandate,” he said.

Citing Section 305 of the 1999 Constitution, Tinubu said the emergency measure was necessary to restore peace.

He added that the proclamation had been published in the Federal Gazette and forwarded to the National Assembly.

Tinubu added, “This declaration has been published in the Federal Gazette, a copy of which has been forwarded to the National Assembly in accordance with the Constitution.

“It is my fervent hope that this inevitable intervention will help to restore peace and order in Rivers State by awakening all the contenders to the constitutional imperatives binding on all political players in Rivers State in particular and Nigeria as a whole.”

Before the broadcast, Tinubu met with the Senate President, Godswill Akpabio; the service chiefs and the Inspector General of Police, Kayode Egbetokun, in a closed-door meeting.

However, some lawyers have faulted Tinubu’s position on the matter.

A human rights lawyer practising in the United Kingdom, Morakinyo Olasupo, said a President does not have the power to suspend a democratically elected governor of a state, and that the suspension or impeachment of governors can only come from the state House of Assembly and the court.

He said, “The President cannot suspend a governor who is democratically elected. Governors are elected officials with a constitutional mandate, and their removal or suspension must always follow due legal processes.

“Some of the processes are impeachment by the state House of Assembly, and the procedure for impeachment is clearly stated in Section 188 of the 1999 Constitution of the country (as amended).

“Also, the Supreme Court has made it clear in the case of Inakoju vs Adeleke that impeachment of the governor by the state House of Assembly must be carried out as contained in Section 188. Another way is by court order. In the case of the election petition, if the governor’s election is contested in court, the judiciary can nullify or remove the governor.

“Another is that in the case of death or incapacitation, the governor can be removed. Incapacitation is in line with impeachment. The fourth one is that under Section 305, the President can declare a state of emergency in a state, but this does not mean that he can automatically suspend or remove the governor.

“The Pesident cannot just wake up and declare a state of emergency unless there is war or imminent danger of war that can affect Nigeria, where there is a breakdown of law and order to the extent that it requires extraordinary measures and security, breakdown of law and order in the state or public danger, disaster and pandemic threatening the existence of Nigeria.”

Faulting the state of emergency processes, Olasupo said the declaration is subject to the approval of the National Assembly, adding that the declaration cannot be done by a mere press release or broadcast done by Tinubu but by “an instrument” (a legal document).

“After the President has prepared the instrument, he will send it to the National Assembly for deliberation and approval. Once the instrument is signed by the Assembly, the President can then proceed to declare the state of emergency. The declaration cannot hold water,” he added.

In his remark, the Principal Partner, Iris Attorneys LP, Ridwan Oke, disagreed with the position of Olasupo about the processes, adding that the President has done the right thing by declaring a state of emergency because of the heightened political crisis in the state.

But Oke noted that the suspension of Fubara, his deputy, and the state lawmakers lacks merit and is unconstitutional.

He said, “The 1963 Constitution provides for the suspension of a sitting governor, not the 1999 Constitution (as amended). The President cannot suspend the governor, deputy governor, and state House of Assembly lawmakers.

“In accordance with Section 305 of the 1999 Constitution, the state of emergency can only be declared in a state when there is war, political unrest, breakdown of law and order, or there is imminent breakdown of law and order or when the governor of a state backed by two-third majority of the house requests for it. The governor has refused to request it, so the President can declare a limited time, which is not stipulated in the Constitution.

“Rivers’ political crisis and today’s explosions are tenable grounds for declaring a state of emergency. He will now send the proclamation (gazette) to the National Assembly for approval and deliberation.”

A United States federal judge has temporarily blocked President Donald Trump’s executive order that seeks to end birthright citizenship, calling it “blatantly unconstitutional.”

Judge John Coughenour, a Reagan appointee based in Seattle, issued a 14-day temporary restraining order on Thursday, halting the implementation of the controversial policy.

The decision came after Washington Attorney General Nick Brown and three other Democratic-led states challenged the order in court.

“I have been on the bench for over four decades. I can’t remember another case where the question presented was as clear,” Coughenour stated.

Expressing disbelief at the legal basis of the executive order, the judge questioned the administration’s legal counsel, asking, “Where were the lawyers?” He added that it “boggled” his mind that any attorney would argue the order was constitutional.

The lawsuit argued that Trump’s executive order directly violates the 14th Amendment of the US Constitution, which guarantees citizenship to all children born on US soil “and subject to the jurisdiction thereof.”

Washington state attorney Lane Polozola emphasised the urgency of the matter, noting that “births cannot be paused” while the courts deliberate.

“Babies are being born today here, and in the plaintiff states and around the country, with a cloud cast over their citizenship,” Polozola said, warning that children denied citizenship under Trump’s order would face “long-term substantial negative impacts.”

Polozola further argued that not only did the Trump administration ignore the potential harms of the policy, but that harm “appears to be the purpose” of the executive order.

The states opposing the policy contend that it would create financial and logistical burdens, as children denied citizenship would be ineligible for federal benefits, forcing state programs to absorb the costs.

The Trump administration argued that the clause “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” in the 14th Amendment gives the president the authority to exclude children of undocumented immigrants and even those whose parents are lawfully present but lack permanent legal status.

Justice Department attorney Brett Shumate urged the court to delay issuing an emergency order, arguing that more time was needed for a thorough review of the case.

“I understand your concerns,” Shumate said, but warned against making “a snap judgment on the merits.” He also noted that other lawsuits challenging the executive order were moving at a slower pace.

At the White House on Thursday, Trump vowed to fight the ruling, signaling that the legal battle was far from over.

Several other lawsuits have been filed against Trump’s order, including challenges from a coalition of Democratic attorneys general, immigrant rights groups, and individual plaintiffs.

In Maryland, U.S. District Judge Deborah Boardman is set to hear a separate case on February 5, brought by immigrant rights groups and pregnant women concerned about the order’s impact on their children. During a status conference, Justice Department attorney Brad Rosenberg admitted that federal agencies had not yet begun enforcing the policy.

“The executive order was issued three days ago during a time of change of administration. And so it’s very early for the agencies to develop their policies that would be necessary” to implement it, Rosenberg said.

Meanwhile, in another legal challenge in New Hampshire, a federal judge has scheduled a February 10 hearing to consider blocking the order.