Connect with us

News

S’Court Affirms President’s Power To Declare State Of Emergency, Suspend Elected Officials

Published

on

The Supreme Court, on Monday, affirmed the constitutional power of the President to declare a state of emergency in any state to prevent a breakdown of law and order or a descent into chaos and anarchy.

In a split decision of six to one, the apex court upheld the President’s authority under the Constitution to proclaim a state of emergency.

The court further held that, during such a period, the President may suspend elected officials, provided any such suspension is for a limited duration.

Delivering the lead majority judgment, Justice Mohammed Idris held that Section 305 of the 1999 Constitution empowers the President to adopt extraordinary measures to restore normalcy where a state of emergency has been declared.

He noted that the provision does not specify the exact nature of those extraordinary measures, thereby vesting the President with discretion on how to act in such circumstances.

The judgment followed a suit instituted by states governed by the Peoples Democratic Party, challenging the declaration of a state of emergency in Rivers State by President Bola Tinubu, during which elected state officials were suspended for six months. The Supreme Court had reserved judgment in the matter in October.

The plaintiffs were the Attorneys-General of PDP-controlled states, while the defendants were the Federal Government and the National Assembly.

The suit was filed by the Attorneys-General of Adamawa, Enugu, Osun, Oyo, Bauchi, Akwa Ibom, Plateau, Delta, Taraba, Zamfara, and Bayelsa states.

The suit, marked SC/CV/329/2025, was predicated on eight grounds. The plaintiffs asked the Supreme Court to determine whether the President has the constitutional authority to suspend a democratically elected government in a state and whether the procedure adopted in declaring a state of emergency in Rivers State contravened the 1999 Constitution.

Among other reliefs, the plaintiffs urged the court to determine “whether, upon a proper construction and interpretation of Sections 1(2), 5(2), 176, 180, 188, and 305 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999, the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria can lawfully suspend, or in any manner whatsoever interfere with, the offices of a Governor and the Deputy Governor of any of the 36 component States of the Federation and replace them with his unelected nominee as a Sole Administrator, under the guise of, or pursuant to, a Proclamation of a State of Emergency in any of the Plaintiffs’ States.”

They also asked “whether, upon a proper construction and interpretation of Sections 1(2), 4(6), 11(4) & (5), 90, 105, and 305 of the Constitution, the President can lawfully suspend the House of Assembly of any of the 36 States under the guise of, or pursuant to, a Proclamation of a State of Emergency in such States.”

In the earlier part of the judgment, Justice Idris upheld the preliminary objections raised by the defendants—the Attorney-General of the Federation and the National Assembly—against the competence of the suit.

He held that the plaintiffs failed to establish any cause of action capable of activating the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court.

In the six-to-one majority decision, the court agreed that the plaintiffs did not demonstrate the existence of an actionable dispute between them and the Federation to warrant the exercise of the court’s original jurisdiction.

Consequently, Justice Idris struck out the suit for want of jurisdiction. He nevertheless proceeded to consider the substantive issues and dismissed the case on the merits.

However, Justice Obande Ogbuinya dissented, holding that the suit succeeded in part.

He agreed that the President has the power to declare a state of emergency, but held that such power cannot be used to suspend elected state officials, including governors, deputy governors, and members of state legislatures.

More to come…

Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

News

FG to Declare Nationwide Public Holiday, Date Revealed

Published

on

Nigeria, Benin Sign Integration Pact

Nigeria’s Ministry of Interior is set to declare a nationwide public holiday across all sectors to mark Democracy Day 2026, potentially granting a one-day break for both private and public sector employees.

The federal government’s announcement regarding Democracy Day will be the only national public holiday observed in Nigeria in June 2026.

Democracy Day commemorates the 1993 presidential election and the nation’s struggle for democratic freedom. June 12, 2026, falls on a Friday.

On June 6, 2018, the late former president Muhammadu Buhari, in a public statement, changed the Democracy Day from May 29 to June 12, in honour of the June 12, 1993, presidential election and its winner, Moshood Kashimawo Olawale Abiola, who died in prison.

Abiola was born on August 14, 1937 and passed away under suspicious circumstances on July 7, 1998. A popular Ogun businessman, publisher, and politician of the Egba clan, he is often referred to as MKO Abiola.

He ran for the presidency in 1993 and was widely regarded as the presumed winner of the election, which was annulled by former military head of state, General Ibrahim Babangida.

Some southwest states had been celebrating June 12 as a public holiday and are holding ceremonies in Abiola’s honour until Buhari officially declared the day as Nigeria’s real democracy day. The former president, on Monday, June 10, 2018, signed the Public Holiday Amendment Bill into law.

The law, according to the former president’s ex-senior special assistant on National Assembly Matters (Senate), Ita Enang, allows a public holiday to be declared on June 12 every year, while May 29 is to be a handing-over date.

Continue Reading

News

BREAKING: Top Nigerian Emir is Dead, Details Emerge

Published

on

A top Nigerian monarch, the Emir of Gazargamu in Yobe State, His Royal Highness Alhaji Ahmad Tijjani Ibn Saleh, has died after a prolonged illness.

The monarch passed away on Tuesday in Cairo, Egypt, where he had been receiving medical treatment.

His son, Engr. Tijjani Hamisu Bala, who is the General Manager of the Yobe State Road Maintenance Agency (YORMA), confirmed the development to Daily Trust in Damaturu.

In a statement announcing the death, Bala described the late emir as a father, mentor and traditional ruler whose life was devoted to the service of his people and humanity.

“With profound sorrow and total submission to the will of Almighty Allah, I announce the passing of my beloved father, namesake and traditional ruler, His Royal Highness Alhaji Ahmad Tijjani Ibn Saleh, the Emir of Gazargamu, who returned to his Creator today, June 9, 2026, in Cairo, Egypt, after a protracted illness,” he said.

He said the late emir’s life was marked by wisdom, humility, courage and unwavering dedication to the service of his people.

“His fatherly guidance, leadership and legacy will remain a source of inspiration to us all,” he added.

Bala prayed to Allah to forgive the late monarch’s shortcomings and grant him Al-Jannatul Firdaus; and give the family and the entire emirate strength and patience to bear the painful loss.

As of the time of filing this report, details of the burial arrangements were yet to be announced, while it remained unclear whether the late emir would be buried in Nigeria or in Egypt.

Continue Reading

News

JUST IN: INEC Appeals Court Rulings Challenging 2027 Election Timetable

Published

on

The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has confirmed that it has appealed two Federal High Court judgments challenging aspects of its Timetable and Schedule of Activities for the 2027 General Election, maintaining that the processes outlined in the timetable are interconnected and cannot be separated without disrupting the entire electoral programme.

INEC Chairman, Prof. Joash Amupitan (SAN), disclosed this on Tuesday during the Commission’s Second Quarterly Consultative Meeting with leaders of political parties in Abuja.

According to him, the Commission carefully reviewed the two court rulings and subsequently approached the appellate courts to seek definitive legal interpretations on the issues raised.

The first judgment, delivered on May 20, 2026, in the case of Youth Party vs INEC (Suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/517/2026), questioned certain timelines contained in the electoral timetable. The second judgment, delivered on May 26, 2026, in Social Democratic Party (SDP) vs INEC (Suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/720/2026), upheld INEC’s authority to issue an election timetable but nullified specific timelines relating to the nomination and substitution of candidates.

Prof. Amupitan noted that the court, in the SDP judgment, acknowledged the importance of a comprehensive timetable, stating that “an election timetable, without date for submission of parties’ membership register, timeframe for primaries, etc. is inchoate. Without this timetable, there would be chaos in our electoral system.”

“While the Commission remains fully respectful of the decisions of the Courts and of the judicial process generally, these judgments raise important legal questions concerning the extent of the Commission’s constitutional and statutory powers in coordinating and regulating electoral activities,” he said.

The INEC chairman stressed that the election timetable is built around a series of interdependent processes designed to ensure the orderly, transparent and successful conduct of elections.

He explained that although the Electoral Act prescribes timelines for some activities, several critical electoral processes are not assigned specific statutory deadlines and must therefore be accommodated within the Commission’s broader election calendar.

Among the activities listed by the Commission are the submission and verification of party membership registers, monitoring of party primaries nationwide, uploading of primary election results to INEC’s portal, candidate nomination processes, printing of ballot papers and result sheets, quality assurance procedures, deployment of election materials, training of electoral personnel, voter education campaigns, procurement of sensitive materials, configuration of BVAS machines, and compliance with statutory requirements such as allowing political parties to inspect electoral materials under Section 42 of the Electoral Act, 2026.

“The Commission therefore considers it imperative that all electoral activities be harmonised within a coherent and workable framework that promotes certainty, transparency, administrative efficiency and equal treatment of all political parties,” Amupitan stated.

He assured political parties and the Nigerian public that despite the pending appeals, INEC remains committed to conducting the 2027 General Election in strict compliance with the Constitution, the Electoral Act and all valid court rulings.

The chairman also announced that on June 26, 2026, the Commission would provide all political parties with official access codes to its Candidate Nomination Portal, enabling authorised national officers to upload the names, personal details and other required information of nominated candidates.

He warned that the nomination portal is fully automated and will automatically shut down once the stipulated deadline expires.

Continue Reading

Trending