The Supreme Court of Nigeria is set to schedule a hearing for a suit filed by 11 governors of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), challenging the declaration of a state of emergency in Rivers State.
According to The Punch, the matter will be taken up after the court’s Easter vacation.
The Director of Information and Public Relations at the Supreme Court, Festus Akande, who spoke with the platform, said the court will fix a date for the hearing once it resumes operations.
He stated, “You know the court is on vacation now, but when the Justices return at the end of the month, a hearing date will be fixed for the matter.”
The legal dispute centres on the constitutional authority of President Bola Tinubu to suspend a democratically elected state government, as well as his decision to appoint a Sole Administrator for Rivers State.
The suit, filed under case number SC/CV/329/2025, questions President Tinubu’s power to suspend the elected governor, deputy governor, and members of the Rivers State House of Assembly.
The 11 PDP-controlled states that have initiated the suit are Adamawa, Enugu, Osun, Oyo, Bauchi, Akwa Ibom, Plateau, Delta, Taraba, Zamfara, and Bayelsa. The plaintiffs are seeking the Supreme Court’s intervention on the legality of the President’s actions.
On March 18, 2025, Naija News reported that 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’s House of Assembly for a six-month period.
Tinubu appointed retired Vice Admiral Ibok-Ete Ibas as Sole Administrator to oversee the state’s affairs during this suspension.
In the suit, the PDP governors are asking the court to determine whether the President has the constitutional authority, under Sections 1(2), 5(2), 176, 180, 188, and 305 of the 1999 Constitution, to suspend or interfere with the offices of a governor and deputy governor, and replace them with an unelected nominee under the pretext of a state of emergency. The governors are also questioning whether the President can lawfully suspend a state House of Assembly under similar circumstances.
In addition to challenging the legality of the state of emergency, the governors’ suit raises concerns about the President’s alleged threats, communicated via the Attorney General of the Federation, to suspend elected governors and their deputies. The plaintiffs argue that such actions could violate constitutional provisions and undermine the principles of federalism.
