No one pays attention to the headlines of Nigeria’s federal system, whether it is tax reform or local government autonomy. That is, so far.
Last night, President Bola Tinubu left Bombshell. He invoked emergency powers and suspended the democratic election of Governor Siminalayi Fubara, a member of the opposition PDP. This is a Long-term political struggle Between Fubara and his former boss, now the Federal Capital Territory Minister Nyesom Wike. Without falling into the details of impact, I would like to explain why this development is terrible for the emergence of secondary autonomy and why threatening the future of Nigeria’s federalism.
Legal and historical background
The President has the right to declare a state of emergency from Article 305 of the Constitution of 1999.
- Article 1: If the President is satisfied that any part of Nigeria or any part of Nigeria is in a state of emergency, they are allowed to issue a declaration.
- Subsection 3: It is clear that this is not a carte blanche; it lists specific conditions that justify the declaration.
- Subsection 4: The President is required to seek approval from the National Assembly within two days or ten days.
Three Nigerian presidents have used this power since 1999. Plateau (2004) and Ekiti (2006) and Jonathan, in Borno, Yobe, Adamawa and part of the plateau (2011). Obasanjo, like Tinubu, suspended the elected governor of the affected countries. Legal scholars have long debated whether Article 305 grants a president to remove him or suspend the governor. The Supreme Court upheld this view, confirming that even under emergency rules, elected officials cannot unilaterally dismiss.
Former President Obasanjo’s newspaper headlines for exercising emergency powers suspends governor
The damage to the law is enough to be bothering, but Tinobu’s reason marks New low. It provides the most vulnerable reason we have seen so far, representing one of the most important presidential overthrows in recent history.
Why is it different this time
Nigeria deliberately adopted the federal system. The deep ethnic, regional and religious diversity of the country makes centralized governance untenable. After the colonial merger in 1914, tensions between major ethnic groups and numerous ethnic minorities intensified. The federal policy emphasizes subnational autonomy and is seen as a way for these various groups to retain self-determination while bringing the entire country together.
The states and their governors will be instruments of self-determination. States have constitutionally protected powers and sources of income. Even if the federal government disagrees, they can draw their own courses, provided they comply with the law.
Tinubu’s use of emergency power marks a shift. When is the president considering reasonable dismissal a dangerous low. Nigeria’s federal system has been tilted towards the federal government; power imbalance is not news. Governors who oppose the president know that their chances of re-election will suffer. But this is different. This shows that the governor’s tenure is not only their election prospects, but also the federal interest. It tilts and balances even Further support center.
A broader meaning
Tinubu appointed Chief Executive, Deputy Admiral Ibok-Ete Ikwe, a former military official, took a photo with Minister Vick (when he was governor).
Federalism is not a certain degree. Nigerian commentators like to debate “Real federalism.” There is no such thing. Over the past three years, my research has exposed me to almost all the federal system that exists. Some are concentrated, some are scattered. Some promote subnational autonomy; others prefer cooperation. Whether Nigeria tends to one or the other will depend entirely on political actors and how they choose to cooperate or consolidate power. Even electors are not given. Russia is a federal state where the governor was appointed.
But what is the basis of the federal system Public buy. The legitimacy of any political structure depends on whether the public believes in its principles. The federal system is intended to demonstrate fairness and independence. Tinubu’s actions collapsed, especially in the Niger Delta, which has been historically unfairly treated despite its significant contribution to the national economy.
The perception of injustice cuts down on two ways. For the Niger Delta people, they watched the emergency powers deployed by the northern states under Jonathan and maintained by Buhari, but the Governor was never removed. Meanwhile, the people in the north are at the forefront, losing their family members, livelihoods, places of worship, and questioning why despite this violence, their leaders remain intact. Their suffering is not very important because their state does not produce oil?
Most importantly, Rivers has now installed the governor under a complete political excuse without the consent of the people’s election. In many cases, Nigeria’s election consent has been doubted. But at least the view of it exists. There hasn’t even been a try here. It deepens the legitimacy crisis and drives home with little consideration of democratic principles at the national level.
These perceptions only deepen with every excessive federal intervention, eroding the federal ability to manage racial diversity and alleviate tensions. What’s even more disturbing is that it sets a precedent. Each use of emergency rules lowers the bar. Future presidents may not use it for real security crises, but for political control, especially in opposition-led countries. It shows that even manageable internal disputes may invite federal takeover.
share
in conclusion
The 2025 Rivers State Emergency Statement is more than just another title. This is a turning point. It exacerbates the already stark imbalance between the federal center and the states. It undermines constitutional safeguards that should protect national autonomy. It distrusts the public about the fairness and impartiality of the Nigerian federal system. The most dangerous thing is that it sets a precedent for later abuse.
There are many people who would think that Tinubu is not the first and should not be criticized. I tend to agree, but be aware that the future president may quote his actions as he quoted his ex. Must be highlighted and swiped.
The question now is not whether the Nigerian federal system is threatened. How long can it withstand these attacks?
