The applicants brought up the case in a suit dated March 20, 2025, and marked ECW/CCJ/APP/18/25.
The controversy surrounding the declaration of a state of emergency in Rivers State has taken a new turn.
This time, the Nigerian government led by President Bola Tinubu has been dragged before the Community Court of Justice of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS Court) in Abuja.
The applicants brought up the case in a suit dated March 20, 2025, and marked ECW/CCJ/APP/18/25.
According to the applicants, there is a dire need for the court’s order to set aside and/or quash the suspension of elected officials and removal of democratic structures and institutions in Rivers State as an imperative for the enthronement of a full-fledged democratic order.
It was noted that by declaring a state of emergency in Rivers State, the Nigerian government has unlawfully taken away, the democratic rights of the applicants and the population of Rivers State, both individually and collectively.
The Plaintiffs in the suit, include Harry Ibiso and 11 others.
They filed the suit of behalf of themselves and the Eastern Zone of the Ijaw Youth Council.
They are also seeking an order of court setting aside all decisions, actions, policies, and directives given or issued by the Sole Administrator appointed by the respondent’s president on March 18.
“The implication, therefore, is that the applicants and the people of Rivers State have lost their existence and dignity as human beings, having been politically emasculated by the loss of the values that accompany democratic governance and deprived of leaders duly elected by them in the democratic space," the applicants said.
"A state of emergency cannot be a guise or subterfuge for the usurpation of the executive functions of the governor or the exercise of the lawmaking powers of the legislature,” the applicants further held.
It would be recalled that President Bola Tinubu declared a state of emergency in Rivers State under the pretext of instability in the state.
He thereafter sacked the state governor, deputy governor, and all elected lawmakers.
According to him, the decision was necessary to ensure the continuation of governance in the state.
His position has, however, been faulted as biased and undemocratic by many.
He has also been criticised for failing to caution his ally, Nyesom Wike, for his role in the escalation of the crisis.
Despite the barrage of criticisms that have trailed this decision, Tinubu continues to hold strong, with his aides defending the move as a show of “leadership,” although many describe it as a show of “dictatorship.”
In the application brought pursuant to Articles III and IV of the supplementary protocol amending ECOWAS Court’s protocol, Article II of the Protocol of the court, and Article 33 of the Rules of the court, the applicants averred that the respondent’s president (President Bola Tinubu), elected into political office, lacked the powers to remove or suspend the governor of a state, who was also elected into the office.