The Supreme Court on Monday struck out a suit filed by 11 states of the federation challenging President Bola Tinubu’s declaration of emergency rule in Rivers State and the subsequent suspension of Governor Siminalayi Fubara, his deputy and members of the Rivers State House of Assembly. The states, all controlled by the opposition Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), approached the apex court through their respective attorneys general, alleging that the president acted beyond his constitutional powers.
In the suit marked SC/CV/329/2025, the plaintiffs questioned Tinubu’s authority to suspend a democratically elected governor and other state officials following the proclamation of a state of emergency. They asked the court to interpret Sections 1(2), 5(2) and 305 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), arguing that the president has no power under any guise to remove elected officials or dissolve a state legislature.
The PDP-led states further urged the court to declare the suspension of Governor Fubara, his deputy and members of the Rivers State Assembly unconstitutional, illegal and a gross violation of the Constitution. They also contended that the president lacked the authority to suspend a state House of Assembly under Sections 192 and 305 of the Constitution.
The Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) and the National Assembly were listed as defendants in the suit. The plaintiffs argued that the actions of the president, backed by the National Assembly, undermined democratic governance and set a dangerous precedent for federal interference in state affairs.
However, in its judgment delivered on Monday, a seven-member panel of the Supreme Court, in a split decision of six to one, struck out the case for want of competence. Justice Mohammed Idris, who delivered the lead judgment, held that the plaintiffs failed to establish any cause of action capable of invoking the Supreme Court’s original jurisdiction.
Justice Idris explained that the apex court can only exercise original jurisdiction where there is a clear dispute between the federation and a state, or between states. According to him, the subject matter of the suit did not qualify as such a dispute, as the plaintiffs were unable to show any direct legal injury or actionable disagreement between themselves and the federal government.
The court noted that the issues raised by the PDP governors, while constitutional in nature, did not meet the strict requirements for the Supreme Court to sit as a court of first instance. Consequently, the panel declined jurisdiction and struck out the suit.
It will be recalled that the Supreme Court, led by Justice Inyang Okoro, had reserved judgment in the matter on October 21 after all parties adopted their written addresses. However, before the judgment was delivered, Delta State, initially listed as the fifth plaintiff, withdrew from the suit following the defection of its governor, Sheriff Oborevwori, from the PDP to the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC).
The ruling effectively ends the legal challenge by PDP governors against President Tinubu over the Rivers State emergency rule, which had sparked nationwide debate over constitutional limits, federal authority, and the protection of democratic institutions.
