In a bold assertion, veteran journalist and former presidential spokesperson Dr. Reuben Abati has accused President Bola Tinubu of committing an impeachable offense by unilaterally declaring a state of emergency in Rivers State.
Speaking on Arise Television’s Morning Show on Wednesday, Abati contended that Tinubu’s proclamation violated constitutional provisions and amounted to overreach of executive powers.
The controversy erupted after President Tinubu announced a state of emergency in Rivers State on Tuesday night, citing concerns over the political crisis in the state.
During a nationwide broadcast, the President expressed alarm over the situation, accusing Governor Siminilayi Fubara of demolishing the State House of Assembly building.
He justified his action by stating that he had assessed the situation and deemed it necessary to impose emergency rule starting March 18.
Abati strongly disagreed with Tinubu’s justification, pointing out that the President had exceeded his constitutional authority.
He referenced Section 305 of the 1999 Constitution, which outlines specific conditions under which a state of emergency can be declared, including war, insurrection, or severe instability threatening national security.
He questioned whether Nigeria was truly facing the threat of war in Rivers State. He further noted that even if the crisis warranted federal intervention, the correct legal procedure would require the President to seek National Assembly approval within 48 hours if in session, or within 10 days if in recess. If the National Assembly does not validate the proclamation, it stands nullified.
According to Abati, President Tinubu went beyond constitutional limits by assuming legislative powers for Rivers State.
He criticized the President’s statement that an appointed administrator could issue regulations and that the Federal Executive Council would legislate on behalf of the Rivers State House of Assembly.
Abati argued that the Federal Executive Council does not have such powers and pointed out that Section 11 of the Constitution clearly states that only the National Assembly can make laws for a state House of Assembly during an emergency. By usurping this authority, he insisted that Tinubu had committed an impeachable offense.
Abati further highlighted Section 188 of the Constitution, which specifies the legal process for removing a governor.
He emphasized that a governor can only be removed through a formal impeachment process initiated by the state legislature and reviewed by a judicial panel—not by presidential decree.
He stated that those who advised the President must be called to order, suggesting that Tinubu had acted unilaterally without proper legal counsel. He expressed doubt over whether the National Assembly would challenge the President’s action, either by rejecting the proclamation or initiating impeachment proceedings.
This latest development has intensified the debate over the balance of power in Nigeria’s democracy, raising concerns over executive overreach and the potential for constitutional crises.
As the political landscape reacts to Tinubu’s decision, all eyes will be on the National Assembly’s response in the coming days.