“No man’s life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session.” – Gideon J. Tucker

A Governor Bola Tinubu of Lagos would not vacate his seat for anyone appointed illegally from Abuja – or from anywhere. If the heavens wanted to fall, he would ask them to fall. He would not go hide somewhere in his wife’s handbag, and from the safety of his ghetto be issuing gutless press releases. If Abuja insisted on his suspension, he would mobilise the law and lawyers for eruptions of seismic proportions. He would ask the Supreme Court to determine whether the president could sack or suspend elected governors, appoint caretaker governors and take over the role of state Houses of Assembly. He would ask the apex court to reconcile this case with its earlier verdict which outlawed caretaker governments for one of our tiers of government. He would put everything he had into the mix; he would count the teeth of the tiger in Abuja. But Rivers is not Lagos, and Siminalayi Fubara is not Bola Ahmed Tinubu. The difference between both is the difference between courage and cowardice.

Until Saturday when he spoke on the Rivers State problem, ex-President Goodluck Jonathan walked the terrace of power with utmost carefulness. He avoided speaking truth to power the way the barefooted avoids walking a floor of broken glass. But on Saturday, he came out of his zone of reticence, and dared the dark, dangerous sherds of impunity. Jonathan spoke following President Bola Tinubu’s deployment of a Supreme Court judgment to meddle with and seize control of the nuts and bolts of our federation. In a fit of daring, calculative move for political advantage, Tinubu suspended democracy on a floor of the structure. And days after the act, without a whim of resistance, he got legislative approval for the mess. He left no one in doubt that all the powers and principalities of this realm are with him and that they work for him.

The three arms of government in Nigeria have become a triangular cult of iniquity. If the executive is after you, the other two quickly join in the clobbering. Jonathan identified the spring head of the problem. He saw: “a clear abuse of office, clear abuse of power, clear abuse of privileges, cutting across the three arms of government — from the executive through the parliament and to the judiciary.” Now, when those three institutions of democracy become citadels of abuse, what remains and what is next for us?

Yesterday, 23 March, 2025, was the 92nd anniversary of the enactment of Germany’s Enabling Act which gave Adolf Hitler the power to make laws without parliamentary approval.

Nazi Germany had a parliament known as the Reichstag. The decay and destruction of that institution started in very innocuous bits, very small. It took off by saying yes to everything the leader did or took before it. The parliament members, incrementally, thought the leader deserved not their check, but their cheeks. Reichstag began its descent and quickened its suicide by enacting laws without any real debate or opposition. Then it took many other self-destruct steps; the climax came on 23 March, 1933, when Reichstag passed the historic Enabling Act transferring its powers and functions to the head of the executive.

In this Rivers matter, the Supreme Court cast the foundation, the president laid the blocks, the legislature roofed the edifice of an emerging autocracy. Jonathan spoke on the executive dictating judgments to judges. He described Nigeria as a country where “government functionaries can dictate to judges what judgment they will give.” That was a huge one. We expect a reaction or denial from the judiciary now or never. The ex-president also spoke on the operatives of the three branches of government not giving a damn as the country burned. He said they were feigning sleep while a flood of badness swept through the land. What he spoke on was the treachery of the judiciary and the perfidy of the legislature, both of which act as palace courtiers, and as whores of benefit who have surrendered their functions, power and glory to the president.

Checks and balances. How often do we ask what they are and why they are at the core of this democracy? Destruction of checks and balances creates excesses that take rest of mind away from the society. Absolute power creates all the antonyms of peace and stability. It makes the nation the ultimate sick man on a roller coaster. It was exactly so for Hitler and his Germany. The Nazi leader, on 23 March, 1933, got the powers to make laws. The ease with which he got it made him think it was time for further consolidation. Thus, on 7 April, 1933, the leader put officials of his political party in charge of all local governments. On 14 July, 1933, Reichstag became a one-party parliament. January 1934, the ruling party took over all state governments. On 19 August, 1934, the leader announced himself president, chancellor and head of the army. The Fuhrer was born!

Our National Assembly would act Reichstag if it had not done so already. It spent the whole of last weekend denying taking bribes to approve the president’s illegal suspension of democracy in Rivers State. Our multi party Senate has 109 members; the House of Representatives has 360, elected from various parties. Yet, on a very critical day last week, members of the parliament collapsed their structures into a single party; they endorsed illegality with a single voice. The president suspended democracy, appointed and swore in a viceroy to serve as governor. He declared a state of emergency without parliament’s prior approval. He usurped the powers of the legislators and the legislators endorsed the usurpation without following the law. They used voice votes to announce that he was right!

Treachery has no other definition. What does it cost a leader to be told the truth? President Bola Tinubu himself called for truth two weeks ago. He told Catholic Bishops who paid him a visit that they should tell him the truth whenever he was missing the way: “I’m here open to you, ready to listen…I won’t shut my door,” he said. But he made that request to the wrong audience. The right audience for that demand is the National Assembly, a conglomerate of dank agents. They are his enemy. He also acts his own enemy, redacting his own records of resistance and activism.

Abuse of any power will happen where there are no checks. With the help of the legislature and the judiciary, Prime Minister Balewa abused the emergency law of his time. Olusegun Obasanjo did same. And, despite all the political and legal repercussions of what Balewa and Obasanjo did, Tinubu learnt nothing and has also done it. He now sits back, watches and smiles as we fret.

The president and all who cheer him would remember that this presidential democracy is not our creation. We copied it from America. And if they agree that we copied this system from the US, have they ever found out why an American president has never tried to suspend or remove a state governor under any pretext, including under emergencies which are provided for under their own laws? It is because US governors are not boys of the president, and both sides know this to be legally and historically correct.

Where the law is allowed to work, there are always consequences for aberrant behaviour. Whatever is happening in Donald Trump’s America today, the fact is that the US Congress had historically managed to contain the excesses of presidents who thought they were king. I cite an example:

President Andrew Johnson took over as US president following the 1865 assassination of Abraham Lincoln. But Johnson does not enjoy as much favours of history as Lincoln does. Why?
President Johnson ran into problems because of his Kabiyesi stance on procedural and constitutional issues. On August 5, 1867, Johnson asked Secretary of War, Edwin Stanton to resign because the secretary disagreed with him over Reconstruction plans. The man refused to resign. The president gave him a week of grace, the man remained recalcitrant; then the president suspended him on August 12 without the approval of the Congress.

Four months after that act (December 12), the president submitted his reasons for suspending Secretary Stanton to the Senate. On January 13, 1868, Senate refused to approve Johnson’s suspension of Stanton. The following day, the man who had been acting as Interim Secretary of War, Ulysses S. Grant, informed President Johnson that in view of Senate’s decision, he was vacating his post for the rightful owner, Stanton. He left.

Stubborn President Johnson, on February 21, 1868 in gross violation of the Tenure of Office Act, formally removed Stanton and gave the control of the War Department to General Lorenzo Thomas. With the law behind him, sacked Stanton glared down President Johnson’s decision. For the next two months, he stayed put, he slept and woke up (holed up) in his cabinet office, barricading himself in there.

The US Congress watched with consternation as the president usurped its powers. It saw what the president did as a blatant violation of the Tenure of Office Act. It proceeded to commence an impeachment process against the Commander-in-Chief. On February 24, 1868, the House of Representatives voted 126-47 to impeach Johnson.
On March 5, 1868, the Senate began its impeachment trial with Chief Justice Salmon P. Chase presiding. On May 16, 1868, the Senate voted 35-19 to convict President Johnson. The figure was, however, one vote short of the necessary two-third majority to get the man sacked. On May 26, 1868, the Senate gave the president a reprieve, it voted to acquit the president on two of the charges. It then adjourned and never voted on the remaining eight articles of impeachment.

Johnson escaped sack but the damage had been done. It was effectively the ‘end’ of Johnson as president. He never recovered.

On 11 July, 2024, Nigeria’s Supreme Court declared that state governors had no power to sack elected local government chairmen and councilors and constitute caretaker committees to run the local governments. The court further declared that a local government council was only recognisable with a democratically elected government.
“A democratically elected local government is sacrosanct and non-negotiable,’’ the apex court declared.
The Attorney-General of the Federation, Lateef Fagbemi, Senior Advocate of Nigeria, who was the plaintiff in that case saluted the Supreme Court for delivering justice. He said the judgment had effectively ended the practice of governors replacing democracy with autocracy by wantonly sacking elected council bosses and replacing them with unelected caretaker committees.
On Wednesday, 19 March, 2025, the same Fagbemi addressed a press conference in Abuja endorsing President Bola Tinubu’s appointment of a caretaker governor for Rivers State and the suspension of democratic structures there. “A lawyer’s truth is not the truth” (David Henry Thoreau).

Fagbemi is supposed to know (and he knows) that there is nothing like ‘suspension’ of governor or ‘suspension’ of the legislature in our constitution which governs all other laws and everything about our democracy. But he went further to threaten other governors with the fate of Fubara. He hinted them not to dare dare his boss: “It is Rivers State’s turn today, it can be anybody’s turn tomorrow, let the signal be clearly sent to those who want to foment trouble, who want to make the practice of democracy and the enjoyment of dividends of democracy a mirage to think twice.” In other words, when you slaughter a goat in the presence of another goat, the living will be sober; it will behave well.

But wait. If the emergency rule is declared by the president over the whole country, will he appoint himself sole administrator and suspend the National Assembly? Or who rules?

To Nigeria’s chief law officer, under an emergency rule, the president can become the electorate deciding who governs and who ceases to govern. He can also be the people of any or all the states; voters in INEC registers would become Shakespeare’s “blocks, stones …worse than senseless things.”

From the courts to the president’s office to the office of the Attorney-General, to the parliament, we could see the futility in hoping for acting right and talking straight. An incestuous triangle of the three arms or what David Wyatt called a “tyrannizing unity” of the powers, reigns.
Their ways remind us of a favourite passage in Jonathan Swift’s ‘Gulliver’s Travels’: “You have clearly proved that ignorance, idleness, and vice are the proper ingredients for qualifying a legislator. That laws are best explained, interpreted, and applied by those whose interest and abilities lie in perverting, confounding, and eluding them.”

Emergency rule started in Rome around the 3rd century BC. The Romans used the law to create what they called ‘office of the dictator’ to solve specific public (safety) problems. They had two main categories of such. The first they named the dictatura rei gerundae causa (dictatorship for getting things done). The second was dictatura seditionis sedandae causa (dictatorship for suppressing civil insurrection). The Romans did not, however, create the emergency rules and laws for free roamers to exploit. They limited the dictators’ term to six months. They also struggled to contain abuse of their powers. But, apparently because of abuses such as we saw last week in Nigeria, the Roman senate took direct control of resolving crises. It replaced the office of dictator with what was called ‘Ultimate Decree of the Senate’ (senatus consultum ultimum). The present controversy presents us an opportunity to also rethink our emergency law and everything connected with it.

Strong, uncontrollable leaders always put their nations in trouble. Keeping quiet, excusing their excesses or enabling their illegality put everyone in danger. Where big men reign above the law and below decency, people pay for what they did not buy. Italian dictator, Benito Mussolini was created and nurtured by a culture of acquisence. His appointment as Prime Minister in 1922 was approved despite his party holding only 35 seats out of 535 in the parliament. With intimidation and harassment of voters, his party pushed up its figure to 374 seats in the April 1924 election. In January 1925, Mussolini, right inside the parliament, declared himself dictator. The legislators heard him and applauded him. They proceeded to grant him more powers. They passed laws that dissolved opposition parties and shut down free press. Mussolini dismantled democratic institutions that won’t let him breathe and emit fire. He got the constitutionally recognised Chamber of Deputies, Italy’s equivalent of our House of Representatives, replaced by something called the Chamber of Fasces and Corporations, a body controlled by his Fascist Party. He made the parliament in his image transforming it for his use in outlawing the opposition and the law.

The National Assembly that sat last week in Abuja may go that way unless Kabiyesi, our president, does not want it to.

The approval grants President Tinubu the authority to enforce emergency measures while mandating a review of the situation at any time, but no later than six months.

The Assembly has also created a joint committee of both chambers, to oversee the administration of affairs in Rivers State during the emergency period.

Additionally, the Senate resolved to establish a mediation committee consisting of eminent Nigerians to help resolve the state’s political crisis.

The 2023 Presidential Candidate of the Labour Party, Peter Obi, has weighed into the raging power tussle in Rivers State and wants the warring leaders to think about the poor in the state.

In a long tweet on Tuesday on the crisis, Obi noted that the situation in Rivers is an example of how not to use democracy to serve the people

“It is unfortunate that 60 years after independence and nearly 30 years of our celebrated unbroken civil rule, our democracy is still marred by undemocratic practices and values.

“A significant percentage of our elections are deeply flawed—manipulated to serve the interests of a select few rather than reflecting the true will of the people.

“Governance at most levels does not reflect the genuine values and aspirations of the people because the welfare of the citizens is often neglected in practice.

“Looking at the ongoing crisis in Rivers State, we see yet another glaring example of how our democracy and governance are not serving its purpose, the welfare of the people of River State. The disagreement is not about improving the measurable indices of development: education, healthcare, or lifting people out of poverty but rather for reasons that do not in any way benefit the people of Rivers State and Nigeria in general.

“I fully understand the impact of what is happening in Rivers State. The real losers are the people—their welfare and the future of the society their children will live in.

“My respectful appeal to all those involved is to reconsider their positions and reflect on the grace God has bestowed upon them as leaders. They must think about the suffering people of Rivers State and work towards a better future for their children.

“My commitment remains to continuously remember them in earnest prayers and to advocate for their well-being. I also appeal to well-meaning Nigerians and the Federal Government, in the spirit of true democracy and good governance, to use their offices to restore normalcy and bring an end to this crisis.

According to the notice seen by this newspaper, the lawmakers claimed that the action, widely seen as beginning of the effort to impeach the governor, was in line with the Nigerian Constitution.

“In compliance with Section 188 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended), and other extant laws, we, the undersigned members of the Rivers State House of Assembly, hereby forward to you a Notice of Gross Misconduct by the Deputy Governor of Rivers State in the performance of the functions of her office,” the notice read.

Read the notice in full:

The Rivers Assembly’s Allegation Against Fubara and His Deputy

“That His Excellency, Sir Siminalayi Fubara GSSRS, Governor of Rivers State refused to present the Rivers State Appropriation Bill, 2024 to the Rivers State House of Assembly contrary to Section
121(1)(2) of the Constitution and disobeyed the order of the Federal High Court in Suit no. FHC/ABJ/CS/1613/2023 which declared that “thus as it stands in law, no Appropriation Bill of Rivers State has been presented neither has any of such Bill being passed into law as the purported presentation, passage and signing into law of the Appropriation Bill 2024 of Rivers State is void ab initio” and ordered him to present the Appropriation Bill 2024 to the House.

That His Excellency, Sir Siminalayi Fubara GSSRS, Governor of Rivers State authorized or approved withdrawals from the Consolidated Revenue Fund of Rivers State in the 2024 financial year of Rivers State without an appropriation law duly passed by the Rivers State House of Assembly contrary to Section 120 of the Constitution.

”That His Excellency, Sir Siminalayi Fubara GSSRS, Governor of Rivers State violated Section 122 of the Constitution by authorizing expenditures from the Consolidated Revenue Fund of Rivers State even after the Rivers State House of Assembly declared a shutdown on Rivers State Government expenditure in a resolution passed at the 4′ Legislative day of the Second Session of the 10th Rivers State House of Assembly which held on Monday the 15* day of July 2024, thereby relegating the constitutional resolution passed by the House to the background.

”That on Friday the 28th of February 2025, the Supreme Court of Nigeria before their Lordships Uwani Musa Abba Aji JSC, Ibrahim Mohanned Musa Saulawa JSC, Emmanuel Akomaye Agim JSC, Chioma Egondu Nwosu-Iheme JSC and Jamilu Yammama Tukur JSC in Suit no. SC/CV/1174/2024 restored the Judgement of the Federal High Court in Suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/984/2024 which confirmed that Sir Siminalayi Fubara GSSRS, Governor of Rivers State never presented an Appropriation Bill for 2024, still does not have an Appropriation Law for 2025 so, ordered that “the Central Bank of Nigeria and the Accountant General of the Federation should forthwith stop releasing and paying to the Government of Rivers State, its organs, departments and officials any money belonging to Rivers State until an Appropriation law is made by Rivers State House of Assembly constituted as prescribed by the 1999 Constitution”.

“Hindering or obstructing the Rivers State House of Assembly which is another arm of government protected by the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended) from performing her constitutional duties.

“That His Excellency, Sir Siminalayi Fubara GSSRS ordered and personally supervised the demolition of the Rivers State House of Assembly Hallowed Chamber and Auditorium at the Rivers State House of Assembly Complex, Moscow Road, Port Harcourt on the 13th day of December 2023. This action was in contravention of the ex parte order of the Federal High Court in Suit No.: FHC/ABJ/CS/1613/2013 issued on the 30* of November, 2023 which declared “that the Rivers State House of Assembly is a constitutional institution that needs to be preserved pending the determination of the Motion on Notice dated and filled 29th November, 2023.”

“That the Judgement delivered on the 220d of January 2024 in favour of the Rivers State House of Assembly where the presiding judge-Justice J.K Omotosho in Suit No.: FHC/ABJ/CS/1613/2013 condemned the act of demolition and stated that “this Court finds it strange that the 11th defendant as Chief Executive of the State would go to the extent of stopping the authentic House of Assembly from sitting through devious means such as destroying the House of Assembly Complex” is noteworthy.

“That the Supreme Court in Suit No.: SC/CV/1174/2024 delivered on the 28 of February 2025 took judicial notice of the illegal demolition and condemned the action of the Governor of Rivers State wherein it was stated that “surprisingly on 13-12-23, in gross violation of the subsisting Order of the trial Court, the appellant demolished Rivers State House of Assembly complex at Moscow Road and secretly arranged four members of the 15 Respondent led by Rt. Hon, Ehie Ogerenye Edison to a place outside the premises of the said House of Assembly and held a sham sitting of the 1s Respondent”.

“Appointment of persons to occupy offices/positions in the Rivers
State Government without allowing for the requirement of screening and confirmation as prescribed by the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended), other extant laws but making the request for screening to persons other than the legitimate Rivers State House of Assembly.

“That His Excellency, Sir Siminalayi Fubara GSSRS, Governor of Rivers State made several appointments which are in contempt of the Order of the Federal High Court in a Judgement delivered in Suit No.: FHC/ABJ/CS/1613/2023 that prohibited him from dealing with any other persons or House other than the Rivers State House of Assembly under the leadership of Rt. Hon. Martin Chike Amaewhule as Speaker.
This judgement which was upheld by the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court stated among other things that “AN ORDER is hereby made restraining the 11th Defendant from howsoever or in whatsoever manner making any request, presentation or nomination to the Rivers State House of Assembly except to the Rivers State House of Assembly under the leadership of the 2d Plaintiff as Speaker”.

“That His Excellency, Sir Siminalayi Fubara GSSRS, Governor of Rivers State failed to forward the name of a nominee for appointment as Attorney-General and Commissioner for Justice in line with Section 192(2) & (6) as well as Section 195(1) of the 1999 Constitution as amended to the legitimate Rivers State House of Assembly as declared by the Judgement of the Federal High Court in FHC/ABJ/CS/1613/2023 but chose to announce one Mr. Dagogo Iboroma to assume the said position.

“That His Excellency, Sir Siminalayi Fubara GSSRS illegally swore-in several other persons who were purportedly confirmed by certain individuals for appointment into the Rivers State Executive Council on Tuesday 21st May, 2024 namely- Prince Charles O. Beke; Collins Onunwo; Solomon Eke; Peter Medee; Elloka Tasie-Amadi; Basoene Joshua Benibo; Tambari Sydney Gbara and Ovy Orluideye Chinendum Chukwuma without screening and confirmation by the Rivers State House of Assembly in full compliance with Section 192(2) & (6) of the 1999 Constitution as amended. Others who were sworn in on Tuesday 13th of August 2024 are Illamu Arugu; Rowland Obed Whyte; Samuel Anya; Samuel Eyiba and Austin Emeka Nnadozie while Israel Ngbuelu; Evans Bipi;
Otamiri Ngubo and Benibo Alabraba were sworn in on Monday 7th October 2024. Emmanuel Frank-Fubara was sworn-in on the 8th of July 2024 amounting to a total number of 19 persons parading themselves and misleading Rivers people that they are Commissioners with your tacit approval.

“That His Excellency, Sir Siminalayi Fubara GSSRS, Governor of Rivers State illegally swore-in Mr. Lawrence Oko-Jaja as Chairman; Earnest Ibekwe Ekwe; Mina Ogbanga; Iseleye Amachree and Adokiye Oyagiri as members of the Rivers State Bureau on Public Procurement on Friday 30th of August 2024 without screening and confirmation by the legitimate Rivers State House of Assembly as stipulated in Section 4(a) of the Rivers State Public Procurement Law No. 4 of 2008. Others are Gift Alex-Hart; Grace Osaronu and Selinah Amonieah as members.

“That His Excellency, Sir Siminalayi Fubara GSSRS, Governor of Rivers State engaged Mr. Goodlife Ben as Chairman;
Emmanuel Jaja; Betty Warmate; Jerome Chimenem; Prince Ohochukwu; Philip Okparaji and Christian Amadi as members of the Rivers State Local Government Service Commission without screening and confirmation by the legitimate Rivers State House of Assembly contrary to Section 44(3) of the Rivers State Local Government Law No. 5 of 2018.

“That His Excellency, Sir Siminalayi Fubara GSSRS, Governor of Rivers State made the illegal appointments and refused to rescind his actions even after several letters were sent to him and published in the electronic and print media following resolutions of the house.

“His Excellency, Sir Siminalayi Fubara GSSRS, Governor of Rivers State seized salaries of some members of the Rivers State House of Assembly which were hitherto paid monthly from the Ministry of Finance of Rivers State. The month of April, 2024 was the last time monthly salaries were paid to Rt. Hon.
Martin Chike Amaewhule; Rt. Hon. Dumle Maol; Hon. Major Jack; Hon. Franklin Uchenna Nwabochi; Hon. Christopher Ofiks Kagbang; Hon. Azeru Opara and Hon. Enemi Alabo George. Others in the same fate are Hon. Granville Tekenari Wellington; Hon. Solomon Wami; Hon. Bernard Mgbar; Hon. John Dominic Iderima; Hon. Queen Uwuma Tony Williams and Hon. Lolo Isaiah Opuende. Hon. Peter Abbey; Hon. Igwe-Obey Aforji; Hon. Justina Emeji; Hon. Ignatius Onwuka; Hon. Chimezie Nwankwo; Hon. Lemchi Prince Nyeche as well as Hon. Barile Nwakoh; Hon. Emilia Lucky Amadi;Hon. Nkemjika Ezekwe; Hon. Davids Arnold Okobiriari; Hon. Sylvanus Nwankwo and Hon. Gerald Oforji are also affected.

“His Excellency, Sir Siminalayi Fubara GSSRS, Governor of Rivers State seized funds standing to the credit of the Rivers State House of Asembly since the month of April 2024 in a bid to frustrate the House and cripple her activities as well as relegate the Judgement of the Federal High Court in Suit No.: FHC/ABJ/CS/1613/2023 to the background. The Judgement stated that ” AN ORDER OF INJUNCTION is hereby granted restraining the Governor of Rivers State (the 11th Defendant) whether by himself or his servants or agents and/or the executive arm of the Government of Rivers state, including the 12th, 13th and 14th Defendants (by themselves individually or collectively), or by their servants or subordinates from withholding any amount standing to the credit of Rivers State House of Assembly in Consolidated Revenue Fund of Rivers State including salaries and emoluments due and payable to the Speaker, Deputy Speaker, and other members of staff of the House or in any manner whatsoever denying the Rivers State House of Assembly of the due fund for running its affairs including the payment of salaries, allowances, emoluments and meeting its financial obligations no matter how described.”

“His Excellency, Sir Siminalayi Fubara GSSRS, Governor of Rivers State illegally withheld the salary of the Clerk of the Rivers State House of Assembly contrary to the Judgement of the Federal High Court in Suit No.: FHC/ABJ/CS/1613/2023 which stated that ” AN ORDER OF INJUNCTION is hereby granted restraining the Governor of Rivers State (the 11h Defendant) whether by himself or his servants or agents and/or the executive arm of the Government of rivers state, including the 12th, 13th and 14th Defendants (by themselves individually or collectively), or by their servants or subordinates from withholding any amount standing to the credit of Rivers State House of Assembly in Consolidated Revenue Fund of Rivers State including salaries and emoluments due and payable to the Speaker, Deputy Speaker, and other members of staff of the House or in any manner whatsoever denying the Rivers State House of Assembly of the due fund for running its affairs including the payment of salaries, allowances, emoluments and meeting its financial obligations no matter how described.”

“Mr. Speaker, we conclude by stating that the Governor has shown that he is not prepared to govern Rivers State in line with the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended) and his oath of office. The Supreme Court in Suit No.: SC/CV/1174/2024 condemned his actions when it stated that “the 8th respondents fear of impeachment by the House of Assembly is no justification for his attacks on the House of Assembly, the Constitution, the Government of Rivers State and the rule of law. Political disagreements cannot justify these attacks and contempt for the rule of law by the Governor of a State or any person. What the 8th respondent has done is to destroy the government because of fear of being impeached”

As the three-man Election Petitions Tribunal (EPT) reserved judgment in the petitions against the declaration of Senator Monday Okpebholo of the All Progressives Congress (APC) as winner of the September 21, 2024, governorship election in Edo State, we’re reminded, as per Muhammad JSC, in Olonade vs Sowemimo (2014) LPELR-22914(SC), 27 – in explaining the meaning of the standard of proof in civil cases, (and) the balance of probabilities – that:
  “The court decides which side’s evidence is heavier, not by the number of witnesses called by either party or on the basis of the one being oral and the other being documentary, but by the quality or probative value of the evidence be it oral and/or documentary.”
  Were the parties to the electoral dispute, especially the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), whose candidate, Dr Asue Ighodalo, came second at the poll, able to meet the Supreme Court benchmark referenced by Justice Muhammad? The people of Edo State and Nigerians in general wait anxiously and expectantly for the tribunal to answer that poser in its crucial judicial pronouncement.
  While Dr Ighodalo and the PDP are the 1st and 2nd Petitioners, accordingly; the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Governor Okpebholo and the APC are the 1st, 2nd and 3rd Respondents, respectively, with the disputants representated by many election petition-tested Senior Advocates of Nigeria (SANs) and junior legal practitioners.
  On Monday, March 3, 2025, Justices Wilfred Kpochi (Chairman), A.B. Yusuf and A.A. Adewole, presided over the tribunal’s concluding proceeding for adoption of the final written addresses by parties to the dispute, which centres on the petition marked, EPT/ED/GOV/02/2024, filed by Ighodalo and the PDP.
  The tribunal, which sits at the National Judicial Institute (NJI), Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Abuja, granted the Respondents 15 minutes each to defend their final written addresses, while the Petitioners were given 30 minutes to argue their case “in what became a heated legal battle.” Thereafter, the tribunal reserved judgment to a future date to be communicated to the Petitioners and Respondents.
  The following quotes summarise the presentations of counsel for the Respondents and Petitioners, and how the tribunal arrived at the adoption of the final written addresses:

• Chief Kanu Agabi (SAN), INEC’s Counsel:
  “The petitioners are asking to be declared winners despite simultaneously arguing that the election was invalid — two conflicting positions… Your Lordships cannot declare the petitioners as winners of the election on the grounds of their arguments that it is invalid… “Your Lordships cannot annul the election because that is not a relief that they (petitioners) sought.
  “The case of the petitioners was founded on analyses undertaken by consultants… The petitioners have not pleaded alternative results on the basis of which they can be declared the winners… The petitioners have not tendered the results they challenged… The ground of non-compliance raised by petitioners is not accompanied by consequential reliefs.
  “The number of polling unit agents (five) the petitioners called as witnesses represented a negligible number of the polling units (765) the petitioners challenged from the entire polling units (4,519) in Edo State… The polling unit agents all signed the result sheets, a clear sign that the election was organised in accordance with the law… The witnesses did not distinguish between what they heard and what they saw… They failed to prove over-voting.
  “The petition is incompetent, as it does not seek the annulment of the entire election. The grounds (for the petition) are inconsistent with one another and inconsistent with themselves. It renders them defective. On the basis of these, I urge My Lordships to dismiss the petition.”

• Dr Onyechi Ikpeazu (SAN), Governor Okpebholo’s Counsel:
  “The Supreme Court has ruled that proving over-voting requires the Bimodal Verification Authentication System (BVAS) machines. Since the petitioners failed to present BVAS data, their claim of over-voting was unsubstantiated… The petitioners had not provided crucial evidence such as Form EC25D, which records ballot paper serial numbers… Instead, they relied on Form EC25B, which merely documents the quantity of election materials received and returned.
  “The petitioners tendered sensitive material exhibits with missing parts, contrary to the serial numbers they carry for identification, and tendering BVAS machines without opening any of them to prove their allegation of over-voting… Even with the polling unit records presented by the petitioners, Okpebholo still has a clear lead… This petition is a mere academic exercise. It is frivolous, baseless, unwarranted, irritating, and lacking in merit. I urge My Lords to dismiss it.”

• Chief Emmanuel Ukala (SAN), APC’s Counsel:
  “As per Supreme Court rulings, proving non-compliance requires detailed evidence from polling unit to polling unit, ward to ward, and local government to local government… The petitioners simply dumped documents on the tribunal, instead of proving them, after calling only five polling unit agents out of over 4,000 polling units in Edo State, and calling no single presiding officer for their hearsay evidence… (Citing Ucha vs Elechi and Baba vs INEC, as the position of the law in spite of Section 137 of the Electoral Act, Ukala said)… It is clear that the case of the petitioners was not proven. I urge My Lordships to dismiss the petition.”

• Mr Ken Mozia (SAN), PDP/Ighodalo’s Counsel:
  “Of the 4,519 polling units in Edo State, irregularities were identified in 765 — enough to invalidate the election results… The PDP, in its petition, only challenged 765 polling units with complaints of multiple incidents of over-voting, non-serialisation of ballots, and incorrect computation of results, which altered the victory of Dr. Asue Ighodalo.
  “The 2nd respondent (INEC) failed to tender any alternative result sheet nor plead any alternative forms EC25B to challenge or contradict PDP’s CTC documentary evidence of rigging across the disputed 765 polling units in the State… All the documents we tendered were duly certified by INEC, and they were admitted without objection by the maker (INEC).
  “The Supreme Court decisions in Uzodinma vs Ihedioha; Kennedy vs INEC; Johnson vs INEC; and Lawal vs Matawalle, etc., established that there must be prior recording of sensitive election materials in forms EC25B, which INEC failed to comply with in some polling units.
  “The law does not require petitioners to challenge results in every polling unit or submit alternative results… All tendered documents were certified by INEC and admitted without objection… Polling unit agents need not testify, as the disputed collation occurred at ward and local government collation centres, where polling unit agents were not present.
  “The petitioners disagreed with collation at ward and local government levels… I plead with the tribunal to holistically consider the petition on several grounds for cumulative effects… Isolating grounds and submitting that such grounds, when taken alone, will not have the cumulative effects that were prayed, and adopting that it is academic, is not true.
  “The iRev results that the petitioners have tendered, no party had impugned the results… The Supreme Court in Austin vs INEC, Kennedy vs INEC and Isah & Another vs INEC & Others, has affirmed that results uploaded to INEC’s IReV portal are credible… We urge My Lordships to grant this petition.”
  PDP/Ighodalo and five other political parties (six initially but one withdrew midway) have queried the declaration by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) that Okpebholo (APC, Edo Central) won the election, with 291,667 votes (about 51.1%) to defeat Ighodalo, a Lagos-based Lawyer and business tycoon, who polled 247,274 votes (about 43.3%).
  Specifically, PDP/Ighodalo filed petitions at the tribunal, alleging, among others, multiple incidents of over-voting, non-serialisation of electoral materials and INEC’s suppression, falsification and alteration of results across 765 polling units in Edo State, which reportedly deprived Ighodalo victory and the governorship.
  The tribunal, which began its pre-hearing on January 13, and the hearing proper on January 24, 2025, in Benin City, Edo State capital city, relocated sitting to the FCT, Abuja, on January 28 over alleged security threats posed by armed political thugs.
  During the proceedings, PDP/Ighodalo presented 19 of 99 witnesses to testify for them, and they spoke to their statements on oath, and the evidence presented as a true reflection of the poll in favour of the Petitioners, and called for justice to be done. The Petitioners closed their case on February 3.
  While the 1st Respondent (INEC) didn’t present any of the five witnesses it’d pledged, and closed its case on February 6; and the 2nd Respondent (Okpebholo) called one of his six witnesses and closed his case on February 10; the 3rd Respondent (APC) called four of 28 witnesses to testify for it before closing its defence on February 13.
  Prior to ending the hearing, a mild drama ensued, as a counsel for the Respondents (INEC, Okpebholo and APC), Chief Ferdinard Orbih (SAN), explained APC’s closure of its defence without calling the pledged 24 additional witnesses, even as he expressed confidence in the strong legal defence mounted for the poll victory of Governor Okpebholo.
  Orbih said: “Yesterday (Wednesday, February 13), we promised that we will exchange our schedule of documents today in order to make for a seamless presentation of our witness testimony. My Lord, I am sorry to say the documents we were expecting did not arrive.
  “However, we have done a further comprehensive review of the evidence led by the petitioners, the evidence received from the petitioners under cross-examination, the evidence led so far by the respondents in this tribunal, the documentary evidence before this tribunal…
  “My Lord, we have also considered that time is of (the) essence. The judicial time of this honourable tribunal is precious. My Lord, taking all the enumerated factors into serious consideration, we are happy at this stage to close the 3rd respondent’s case as it pleases Your Lordship.”
  Responding to Respondents’ application to close their case, Adetunji Oyeyipo (SAN) for the Petitioners, noted, with a jab, the surprising “abandonment” of the 3rd Respondent’s scheduled 28 witnesses after calling just four of them.
  “My learned counsel has just addressed the court. I’m actually not quite sure about the state of those documents. I can only say ‘he who fights and runs away, lives to fight another day.’ So, we have no objection,” Oyeyipo said.
  But Orbih replied Oyeyipo’s poking: “My Lord, I’m still on the point of fact. When they (Petitioners) scheduled 99 witnesses and presented only 19, we didn’t accuse them of running away. They have no business with how we conduct our case. We remain here. We are not running away.”
  With no objections from the other Respondents (INEC and Okpebholo), Justice Kpochi – despite pleadings by the Respondents and Plaintiffs for more days to prepare their written addresses – stood his ground and closed the defence of the 3rd Respondent (APC).
  The judge, however, acceded to seven days for the Respondents, five days for the Petitioners and extra three days each to file their written addresses, which began counting on Friday, February 14, and adjourned the tribunal to Monday, March 3, for the adoption of the final written addresses. That ritual was concluded, as scheduled, and the tribunal adjourned for judgment on a date to be communicated to the Respondents and Petitioners.
  To witness the final legal fireworks were chieftains of the Edo State chapters of the PDP and APC. Among the PDP topshots were the party candidate, Dr Ighodalo, the Edo Chairman, Dr Anthony Aziegbemin, former Senator Clifford Odia (Edo Central), and Rt Hon. Friday Itulah, former Speaker of the Edo Assembly and ex-Member of the House of Representatives.
  On the APC side were former Edo State Governor and Senator for Edo North, Comrade Adams Oshiomhole, former Deputy Governor Philip Shaibu, and twice Governorship Candidate, Pastor Osagie Ize-Iyamu.
  Adetunji Oyeyipo (SAN); Ken Mozia (SAN); Abiodun Owonikoko (SAN); Rotimi Oguneso (SAN); Larry Selekowei (SAN); A. T. Kehinde (SAN); A. K. Ajibade (SAN); Oluwole Iyamu (SAN); Oluseyi Jolaawo (SAN) and others pleaded the Petitioners’ case.
  Kanu Agabi (SAN); A. M. Aliu (SAN); E. M. Inuwa (SAN); Alhassan Umar (SAN); M. T. Abubakar (SAN); and others appeared for the 1st Respondent, INEC. 
  Dr. Onyechi Ikpeazu (SAN); Chief Offiong E. Offiong (SAN); Festus Kayode (SAN); Tobechukwu Nweke; Dr. Ike Chude; Edward Ireluwe; Lydia Oluwakemi; Linda Chuba-Ikpeazu and others appeared for the 2nd Respondent, Okpebholo.
  Emmanuel Ukala (SAN); E. C. Denwigwe (SAN); Chief Ferdinand Orbih (SAN); J. O. Asoluka (SAN); Echezona Etiaba (SAN); Henry Bello (SAN) and others represented the 3rd Respondent, the APC.
  As the political fate of Governor Monday Okpebholo and Dr Asue Ighodalo rests in the hands of the tribunal, may the judges dispense justice with the wisdom of Solomon and the firmness of Daniel, according to the dictates of the electoral laws and the probative value of the evidence adduced by the parties to the dispute!
  (Credit: Sebastine Ebhuomhan, award-winning journalist from Edo State, reporting for Popular News (March 3); Theconclaveng (March 3, 2025); The National Update (March 3, 2025); and The Standard Gazette (March 4, 2025).

* Mr Ezomon, Journalist and Media Consultant, writes from Lagos and can be reached on X, Threads, Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp @EhichioyaEzomon. Tel: 08033078357

This was contained in a statement dated Wednesday 12th March 2025, signed by the National Publicity Secretary Labour Party, Obiora Ifoh, and made available to newsmen in Kaduna on Thursday.

The party said it watched in surprise as the former minister of finance and former member of the People’s Democratic Party (PDP), Usman failed in her bid to transact with the Labour Party in alliance with former Governor of Kaduna State, el-Rufai.

“Before wednesday’s shameful but audacious display by Nenadi Usman, many attempts have been made by some desperate politicians to transact with the Labour Party, with all ending in the same disastrous fate.

“We are also aware of one other group which has continued to claim proprietary right over the Labour Party, which in a recent statement indicated interest to join in this transactional frenzy to obliterate this party seen as the third force. We really do not know why all these interests in the Labour Party. Are there no other political parties in Nigeria?

“We have repeatedly said that the Labour Party is filled with several transactional politicians whose only purpose of joining the party was to scramble for the soul of the party.

“This explains the genesis of the crises we have witnessed in the party in the last two years. We have continued to warn that the Labour Party is not a merchandise that can be bought over the counter.

“It baffles us how some persons will continue to engage in a futile enterprise which end is already foretold”, the statement stressed.

Usman joined the Labour Party in 2022 in support of the presidential ambition of Peter Obi, but as an unregistered member of the party.

“She is not known in her Ward, Local Government and the State chapters of the party. It is only in Nigeria that some desperate politicians can wake up one morning and begin to claim one position, even if such position is not supported by any law.

“Today, it is becoming manifest why she forced her way to assume an illegal and ill-conceived transitional chairman of the Labour Party and perhaps the unseen hands that have urged and funded her covert agenda.

“The leadership of the Labour Party has repeatedly said that it is not in any discussion with any individual or group on matters of alliance or merger for now”, it noted.

The party therefore preposterous for Nenadi Usman, who is not known to be either an executive nor member of the Labour Party to have the “audacity to want to auction our party to her former mentor. For how much, we may ask?

“Nigerians must know that Nenadi Usman dragged the party to the court seeking that the entire executives of the party, from the Ward, Local Government, State and the National level be sacked and she lost in both the lower and Appeal courts.

“She was barely two year old as a non card carrying member of the party as at that time. Today, even the six months illegal mandate given to her in Umuahia has since elapsed but she is still sitting on a non-existing office.

“In her media release, She claimed that She was invited by her colleague in the SDP to witness el-Rufai’s defection. Imagine a supposed party leader saying “they” received el-Rufai into opposition fold.

“Was it a CNPP event? It’s so funny that a supposed party leader who was “appointed” to drive reforms in the Labour Party went to SDP with her sitting on the side of el-Rufai to do anti party and claim she was invited by the leadership of another political party.

“Why didn’t they invite chairmen of the other opposition political parties? This is a shallow defense and most unfortunate from Senator Nenadi Usman.

“Finally, we want to state emphatically that we are not against any individual leaving or joining any political party of choice, provided such prerson, if elected into office on the ticket of a political party relinquishes the mandate.

“If therefore, Nenadi Usman wants to join any other political party, she is free to do so, but transacting with Labour Party is clearly criminal and it must be resisted”, the statement said.

Former British statesman, Labour Party politician and twice Prime Minister of the United Kingdom (1964 to 1970 and 1974 to 1976) James Harold Wilson (1916-1995), stated that: “A week is a long time in politics,” which, in today’s world of social media, is being updated to, “A day in politics is a lifetime.”
Thus, ahead of the February 2027 General Election in Nigeria, “a day in politics is like a lifetime” in which anything – the anticipated and the unexpected – could happen in the political arena, with one politician already predicting the poll outcome, and embarking on a warpath to hinder those on his radar even up to 2031.
But how many political combats can former Kaduna State Governor and ex-Minister of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Abuja, Mallam Nasir el-Rufai win till Election Day in 2027 and beyond? How many of the politicians posturing for elective offices will grace his “enemy list”? Will he ultimately compromise and reconcile with his “enemies”?
Controversial and outspoken el-Rufai has a grievance, which’s that President Bola Tinubu, who promised him a ministerial portfolio didn’t deliver, but was actually the one who didn’t want him in his government.
To el-Rufai, it’s Tinubu – and not the Senate over alleged security concerns – who gave the order for his ministerial rejection in 2023. He recalled that proposing to name him for the power ministry, the president had told him, “Let’s join hands to defeat the electricity mafia,” adding that he accepted to serve because of that challenge.
In his extensive and no-holds-barred interview on Arise TV on February 24, 2025, el-Rufai said: “The president begged me publicly to come and serve in his government.
“After two months of negotiations, we finally agreed that he would nominate me as minister. I think along the line, the president changed his mind. Please, don’t believe the story that the NASS (National Assembly) rejected me; it has nothing to do with this. The president didn’t want me in his cabinet.”
Rhetorically, el-Rufai queried: “What was the security issue? I had been the Governor for eight years in one of the most difficult States in the country. Where is the (security) report? What about other ministers who are far less qualified and have huge controversies around them that scaled through because the president made a call?”
If the President, as el-Rufai claimed, “made a call” to the Senate on behalf of some nominees, why didn’t Tinubu do likewise for el-Rufai, who most Nigerians were sure would be the first to be cleared by the Senate, owing to how Tinubu publicly cajoled him to be part of his cabinet.
Nigerians were elated over speculations that el-Rufai would be named the Minister of Power due to his antecedents as Minister of the FCT, which he sanitised in line with the territory’s Master Plan.
And they can’t forget that iconic video of Tinubu and el-Rufai walking almost hand-in-hand when then-President-elect visited Kaduna State, and pleaded with el-Rufai to be part of his government, even as el-Rufai stated he wanted to take leave from public service.
But alas, el-Rufai’s screening by the Senate ended in controversy, with claims that the Department of State Services (DSS) had issues with his clearance, and that the Kaduna Senators didn’t suppot his nomination – a main criterion for a nominee’s approval by the Senate.
Barring any undercurrents, Tinubu owes el-Rufai a reciprocal gesture for a yeoman’s job of fighting for the Presidency to rotate to Southern Nigeria in 2023. El-Rufai thrust his chest out in support of the zoning, at least under the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC), which benefited Tinubu!
If, indeed, Tinubu hadn’t a hand in el-Rufai’s rejection by the Senate, why didn’t he carve out another appointment for him in government, which doesn’t require Senate clearance? That he didn’t do so is food for thought, as el-Rufai’s only scratched the surface, and Tinubu remains taciturn about what went wrong along the way!
El-Rufai also spoke about how he and the Kaduna chapter of the APC endorsed Tinubu among the aspirants for President in 2023, saying: “I don’t know if I will support Tinubu in 2027. I will evaluate the situation at the time and I will consult widely. When I supported President Tinubu before the primaries, it was a decision that the leaders of APC took in Kaduna. Who do we support?
“We succeeded in ensuring that power goes to the South, and we know that all the Northern candidates (then-Kogi State Governor) Yahaya Bello, and (then-Senate President) Ahmad Lawan will go nowhere.
“Among the southerners, who do we support? They know those that are my friends. Tinubu was not my friend. I was never close to him. (In spite their political association of over a decade, from 2012 to 2023 – pre-formation of the APC, and through the campaigns and conduct of the 2015, 2019 and 2023 General Elections).
“But the consensus of the APC in Kaduna was that we should support Bola Tinubu because he is the one that is more likely to win. Politicians make these calculations. In 2027, I am going to consult the same people. We are going to take the same decision, which candidate to support and in which party!”
El-Rufai admitted he might not possess the same clout in 2027 as in 2023, to determine who and from which region the APC candidate will emerge. “Now, I am a private citizen. I am not sure I would be in the APC 2027, so I cannot answer that question (about his support for a Southern candidate). Now in 2027, I will not be a governor, so I will not have the sort of clout that I had in 2023,” he said.
Going haywire, el-Rufai boasts of rallying like-minded Nigerians, to upstage Tinubu in 2027. He’s created an “enemy list” that so far contains Tinubu; the National Security Adviser (NSA), Mallam Nuhu Ribadu; and Kaduna State Governor Uba Sani, who el-Rufai “anointed” to succeed him in 2023.
El-Rufai’s tackling Tinubu from the angle of performance of his administration barely two years in the saddle. And he’s given the President and his team the thumbs down, as one of the reasons he may not endorse him for re-election in 2027.
In his Arise TV interview, el-Rufai asked if Tinubu has performed averagely to contemplate running for a second term, saying, “As a private citizen, I can afford to be reckless and say, ‘You know what? We gave the southerners their chance. They gave us Tinubu; has he done well? If he hasn’t done well by 2027, let’s vote him out'” (and vote in a northerner).
El-Rufai talked about a “Project to destroy el-Rufai,” allegedly motivated by Mallam Ribadu’s purported ambition to succeed Tinubu in 2031, even as he accused Governor Sani of working with Ribadu, and levelling corruption allegations against him, to destroy his image.
“This project… is Nuhu Ribadu’s conception. He is the architect and builder of that project. He is the one working with Uba Sani to implement it. So far, it has been frustrating for them,” el-Rufai said.
Denying el-Rufai’s claim, Ribadu, in a post on X platform on February 24, stated: “If my silence wouldn’t be misconstrued as consent, I would have ignored him. I am too preoccupied with my current assignment to engage in a media fight with Nasir el-Rufai or anyone else.
“Despite the incessant baiting and attacks, I have never spoken ill of Nasir on record anywhere. This is out of respect for our past association and our respective families. I will not start today. I, however, urge the public to disregard El-Rufai’s statements against me.”
On the claim by el-Rufai that he’s planning a 2031 presidential bid, Ribadu stated: “For the avoidance of doubt, I want to put it on record that I have never discussed running for president in 2031 with anybody.
“All my focus and energy are geared completely towards the advancement of Nigeria and the success of President Tinubu’s administration. I therefore ask Nasir el-Rufai to allow me to face my onerous national assignment, just as I do not bother myself with his own affairs.”
El-Rufai, like some topshots, boycotted the APC first caucus meeting under Tinubu’s headship on February 25, stating: “Unfortunately, I won’t attend the APC national caucus meeting, because I will be on my way to Cairo where I spend most of my time. I didn’t get adequate notice.
“The constitution of our party requests 21 days or I think 14 days’ notice for this kind of national organ meeting. I don’t think that notice was given. If it was given, I don’t think I’d received such an invitation. I’ve my plans, and I am leaving tomorrow (February 25). Many of my friends will attend and they will give me updates. I don’t think I will miss anything. Ramadan is starting. I’ve made my own plans, too.”
Anyway, el-Rufai said he’s been vocal about his grievances with the APC and its leadership, especially his earlier declaration that, “he’d not left the APC, but it’s the APC that’d left him.”
“When the party meets, I think I’ve shouted loud and clear. So, we’ll wait and see what the party will do about it. I don’t have to be there. I’m not the only member of the party that’s unhappy” (about APC’s alleged deviation from its core progressive principles and values).
It wasn’t all gloom and doom about President Tinubu and his economic policies, and reported lopsided appointments that favour the Yoruba. “I support some of his (Tinubu’s) policies; most of the economic policies are the right orthodox policies, but the sequencing is wrong and the quality of the people implementing the reforms leaves much to be desired” el-Rufai said.
“President Tinubu is appointing his own boys, not because they’re Yoruba, and most of his appointments do not reasonably cover the Southwest. People should stop confusing the two; the appointments are not balanced, but it’s not a Yoruba thing. Please, don’t punish the Yoruba.”
Despite hobnobbing with and chaperoning former Vice President and ex-presidential candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Alhaji Atiku Abubakar, across the power bases in the country, el-Rufai ruled out joining the PDP, but may find another platform “to pursue the progressive values he believes in if he can’t find them in the APC.”
“(But) one thing I can say for sure is that PDP is not a party I will go to, ever. I thought about it and decided long ago, and nothing has changed; in fact, if anything, the PDP has gotten worse,” he said.
With friends like Mallam el-Rufai, President Tinubu, Mallam Ribadu and Governor Sani don’t need enemies! Who’ll be next to appear on el-Rufai’s “enemy list” as he proceeds apace towards his 2027 goal of removing Tinubu and the APC from power? The political arena is pregnant with anxiety and anticipation! (END)

• Mr Ezomon, Journalist and Media Consultant, writes from Lagos and can be reached on X, Threads, Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp @EhichioyaEzomon.

During a meeting with representatives and leaders of the Niger Delta under the Pan-Niger Delta Forum (PANDEF), President Tinubu reiterated that respect for the judiciary is crucial in upholding democracy and fostering harmony.

The President advised the leaders to be more broadminded, selfless and focused on the larger vision of salvaging the region, politically and economically, by insisting that the judiciary’s interpretations of the Constitution be respected.

“I am here by the grace of God, appreciating your support, prayers and concern. I cannot complain. I campaigned for this position and begged for the job. I must do it with all my heart, whatever it takes.

“I will make sure we achieve our promises and goals.

“Nigeria is a great country. To some cabinet members here, from outside looking in and inside looking out, we have been doing our best to give Nigeria a re-bounce, a reset and a recalibration of the economic fortune.

“Yes, Niger Delta is the goose that lays the golden egg. We must care for the goose; otherwise, we lose the golden egg. I got your signal and your concern, particularly on Rivers State. I have been on the issue for quite some time. I foresaw the crisis festering for too long before I intervened.

“We reached an agreement, written agreement, and both parties signed.”

The President said stakeholders must make sacrifices for the state to move forward by recognising the Constitution.

“This is a nation governed by the rule of law. I should not be here as President without a rule of law. I have total confidence in our judiciary. We have expectations. Human beings can make errors. But once the court has spoken, that is it.

“Please go back home and help implement the court rulings within the shortest possible time. I am putting the ball in your court. Help! Privately and openly intervene and counsel the governor. Pursue the path of peace and stability,” he added.

President Tinubu told the delegation that his priority remains community development, particularly projects and programmes that positively impact citizens.

“Go back home and take charge of peace. If you need me, let me know. I have given the situation enough time and enough consideration. We cannot fall back, and we will not. The people of Rivers State will not suffer because of democracy. We worked together on it. They will not suffer. They must be protected,” President Tinubu said.

The President commended the leadership of the Niger Delta.

“I have seen what you have tolerated in the region. Community development is very close to my heart. The leader of the Niger Delta Development Commission (NDDC), Dr Samuel Ogbuku, is doing a great job and should be encouraged to do more.

“He is your son. We are all proud of him. Yes, there are lots of misadventurers around Nigeria on democracy. We will continue to work on preserving the integrity and character of our legislators.

“I sincerely thank you for bringing up those issues. And for doing what you are doing for the country. Nigeria is too big for anyone. And greater than anyone. It is so great. That greatness must come from us through our determination, perseverance and endurance to do all we can to improve it.”

President Tinubu thanked the delegation for acknowledging the efforts to stimulate the economy for more sustainable and predictable growth.

“We cannot achieve Eldorado in one day. But we are on the path to it. We will succeed by the grace of God Almighty. We are resetting the economy, and it looks far better. We have funds for our children in college. Our medical colleges are also getting equipped,” he said.

The President noted that the ongoing coastal road project will create new economic benefits for the Niger Delta and the country.

“We are already working with international companies to build ports in the Niger Delta States,” he stated.

King Alfred Papapreye Diete-Spiff, Amanyanabo of Twon-Brass Kingdom and Co-Chairman of the PANDEF Board of Trustees, thanked the President for his commitment to South-South well-being and appointments given to Niger Delta indigenes.

“Your government has taken the bull by the horns, and we are sure you will succeed. We are here to give you our assurance and support. I can say now that God bless Nigeria and your government,” he said.

Obong Victor Attah, former governor of Akwa Ibom State and co-chair of the PANDEF Board of Trustees, called for further intervention in the Rivers State crises.

Attah, who also chairs the reconciliation committee set up by PANDEF in Rivers State, said the political crises in Rivers State threaten national stability and deserve more attention.

“Instability there has far-reaching consequences on the peace and stability of the nation,” he added.

He praised the President’s reforms, including power devolution and regional development recognition, and urged focus on infrastructure, seaports, environmental sustainability, and fiscal federalism in the South-South.

The PANDEF delegation included former governors, legislators, ministers, traditional leaders, religious figures, and youth and women groups.

The politician, who had left the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) for the APC, said in a statement that his decision follows a disenchantment with the APC.

The sstatement reads:

NIGERIA UPDATE: Onwards to the future

As a founding member of the All Progressives Congress (APC), I have fond memories of working with other compatriots to negotiate the merger of political parties that created the APC. It had been my hope since 2013 that my personal values and that of the APC will continue to align up to the time I choose to retire from politics.

Developments in the last two years confirm that there is no desire on the part of those who currently control and run the APC to acknowledge, much less address, the unhealthy situation of the party.

On my part, I have raised concerns in private and, more recently, in public regarding the capricious trajectory of the party. Therefore, at this point in my political journey, I have come to the conclusion that I must seek another political platform for the pursuit of the progressive values I cherish.

Founders rightly feel attached towards institutions they helped create, but one must be pragmatic enough to admit when a divergence appears unbridgeable. I have diligently served the APC and made my contributions to its viability as a political platform, but I recognize that the party has since strayed and left me stuck in the vision of its well-meaning founding fathers and mothers.

As a loyal party man, I worked to help secure the APC’s election victories in 2015, 2019 and 2023. I was one of the many governors elected on the party’s platform in 2015 and 2019, that stood for certain democratic and progressive principles to advance nation-building. My eight-year tenure in Kaduna State was devoted to implementing progressive policies to advance human development in education and healthcare, as well as expand infrastructure, promote equality of opportunity, create jobs and attract investments. These records count for little in the current APC that has castrated its organs and treated its membership with contempt in the last two years. I find this no longer acceptable.

Today, 10th March 2025, I have submitted a letter resigning my membership of the APC to my ward in Kaduna, effective immediately. Prior to this step, I had concluded consultations with my mentors, colleagues and loyalists across the country about the future. I have now decided to join the Social Democratic Party (SDP), and adopt it as the platform for our future political engagements and activities.

Without prejudice to this decision, as a member of the SDP, I will focus on engaging with and persuading other opposition leaders and parties to join us and congregate under a unified democratic platform to challenge the APC in all elections and bye-elections between now and 2027 by the Grace of God. I therefore call on all our supporters and other persons concerned about our country’s future to join us in the SDP in the journey towards making Nigeria flourish as a beacon of pride for Africans and the Black Race.

Thank you and God Bless the Social Democratic Party.
God Bless the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

Nasir Ahmad El-Rufai, CON
Abuja, Nigeria
10th March 2025

The Secretary to the Rivers State Government, Dr Tammy Danagogo, made this known in a letter addressed to the Speaker, Amaewhule, and shared with the media on Sunday.

In the letter, entitled, ‘Meeting Between the Governor of Rivers State and the Honourable Members of the Rivers State House of Assembly,’ Danagogo stressed that the meeting, scheduled for Monday, March 10, 2025, became necessary following the governor’s receipt of the Certified True Copy of the Supreme Court judgement

The letter stated that discussions would focus on providing a space for the lawmakers loyal to the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Nyesom Wike, to hold their sittings, as well as the presentation of the 2025 budget, among other matters.

“I hereby write, in furtherance of His Excellency’s promise stated in my letter dated March 5, 2025, to notify you that His Excellency has received the Supreme Court judgement and has therefore directed me to invite you and your colleagues — the Honourable members of the Rivers State House of Assembly — to a meeting to discuss:

“Provision of a befitting space for the Assembly’s sittings, payment of all outstanding remuneration or allowances of the Honourable members;.

“Presentation of Budget and sundry matters. Any other matter(s), as may be necessary, to chart the way forward in the best interest of the state.

“Sequel to the above, I hereby humbly invite the Rt. Hon. Speaker and all members of the Rivers State House of Assembly to a meeting with the governor as follows:”

According to the statement, the meeting will take place at 10 am on Monday at the Government House, Port Harcourt.

“Many thanks, Sir, as we look forward to your kind attendance with a view to charting the way forward in the interest of the good people of Rivers State,” the letter concluded.