By Ikechukwu Nnochiri
ABUJA– Seven states controlled by the Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, have approached the Supreme Court to challenge what they termed as President Bola Tinubu’s unconstitutional actions in Rivers State.
Governors of the PDP states, through their respective Attorneys-General, urged the apex court to declare that based on the provisions of sections 1(2), 5(2), and 305 of the 1999 Constitution, as amended, President Tinubu, “has no powers whatsoever or vires to suspend a democratically elected governor and deputy governor of a state in the federation of Nigeria under the guise of or pursuant to the proclamation of a state of emergency in the state of the federation by the president, including the states of the federation represented by the plaintiffs.”
They equally prayed the Supreme Court to declare that President Tinubu has no power to suspend a democratically elected House of Assembly of a state pursuant to Sections 192 (4) (6) and 305 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended).
As well as to declare that the suspension of Governor Siminalaye Fubara, his deputy and members of the Rivers State Assembly was unconstitutional, unlawful, illegal and utterly in gross violation of provisions of the 1999 Constitution, as amended.
The states behind the suit are; Bauchi; Adamawa; Bayelsa; Enugu; Osun; Plateau; and Zamfara.
Aside from President Tinubu, the National Assembly was also cited as a defendant in the matter.
It will be recalled that President Tinubu had on March 18, declared a state of emergency in Rivers State after he slammed governor Fubara with a six-month suspension.
Equally placed on suspension were the deputy governor, Mrs. Ngozi Odu, as well as members of the Rivers State House of Assembly.
President Tinubu appointed Vice Admiral Ibok-Ete Ibas to pilot affairs of the state within the period, as a Sole Administrator.
The action of the president received legislative backing from both the Senate and the House of Representatives.
However, in their suit, the PDP states maintained that President Tinubu was bereft of the statutory powers to suspend a serving governor and appoint a Sole Administrator in his stead.
While urging Supreme Court to nullify the appointment of a Sole Administrator to superintend over Rivers State, the litigants also challenged the constitutionality of voice votes the National Assembly used to ratify President Tinubu’s action.
They argued that the defendant’s declaration of a state of emergency in Rivers State did not comply with the constitutional requirements set by Section 305 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended).
More so, the PDP states contended that President Tinubu’s proclamation failed to meet stipulated conditions and procedures for such a declaration, adding that it was made for reasons beyond those specified in the Constitution.
It was equally their argument that the National Assembly’s approval of the state of emergency via a voice vote, was invalid, stressing that the constitution made it mandatory that two-third majority vote of members of eachbof legislative chambers must be secured.
Consequently, they, among other things, prayed the Supreme Court for: “An order of this honourable court nullifying the proclamation of a state of emergency in Rivers state made by the 1st defendant and wrongfully approved by the 2nd defendant,” the plaintiffs are further seeking.
“An order of this honourable court restraining the defendant, by himself, servants, agents and privies from implementing the unlawful suspension of the governor and deputy governor of Rivers state.
“An order of this honourable court restraining the defendant, by himself, servants, agents and privies from interfering in any manner whatsoever with the execution by the governor and deputy governor of Rivers state of their constitutional and statutory duties, as well as their electoral mandate.”
Likewise, “an order of this honourable court restraining the Defendant from attempting the suspension of any other governor of any state in Nigeria, particularly the plaintiffs and any governor not belonging to the ruling political party, or in any manner whatsoever attempting to interfere with or undermine their constitutional and statutory duties.
The post Rivers: Why Tinubu’s action is illegal, PDP Govs tell Supreme Court appeared first on Vanguard News.
