PDP Fights Back: 11 Governors Challenge Tinubu’s Grip on Rivers

A fierce legal and political battle is unfolding in Nigeria as 11 governors from the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) have taken President Bola Tinubu to the Supreme Court over his controversial declaration of a state of emergency in Rivers State.

The crisis erupted on March 18, 2025, when Tinubu, in a nationwide broadcast, announced the emergency rule, citing “disturbing security reports” of pipeline vandalism by militants and accusing Governor Siminalayi Fubara of inaction. Invoking Section 305(5) of the 1999 Constitution.

Tinubu suspended Fubara, his deputy Ngozi Odu, and all members of the Rivers State House of Assembly for six months, appointing retired Vice-Admiral Ibok-Ete Ibas as sole administrator.

The National Assembly backed the move via a contentious voice vote, sparking outrage over its legality and intent.

PDP Governors Strike Back

In response, the PDP governors—Ahmadu Fintiri (Adamawa), Ifeanyi Ugwuanyi (Enugu), Ademola Adeleke (Osun), Seyi Makinde (Oyo), Bala Mohammed (Bauchi), Udom Emmanuel (Akwa Ibom), Simon Lalong (Plateau), Ifeanyi Okowa (Delta), Darius Ishaku (Taraba), Dauda Lawal (Zamfara), and Douye Diri (Bayelsa)—filed a suit at the Supreme Court on April 8, 2025 (SC/CV/329/2025).

They argue that Tinubu’s actions violate Sections 1(2), 5(2), 176, 180, 188, and 305 of the Constitution, asserting that the president lacks the power to suspend elected officials and replace them with an unelected administrator.

The governors contend the proclamation fails to meet constitutional thresholds—no war, no breakdown of public order—while also challenging the National Assembly’s approval process for lacking a two-thirds majority.

They seek a ruling to nullify the suspensions and restore Rivers’ democratic structure.

Opposition vs Ruling government

This case tests presidential authority in Nigeria’s Fourth Republic, where opposition challenges to ruling governments have a dismal track record.

Since the return to democracy in 1999, no challenge to a presidential election outcome has succeeded, and emergency rule precedents have similarly favored incumbents.

The pattern began with the 1999 election, when Oluyemi Falae (All People’s Party, APP) filed a suit on March 15, 1999, at the Federal Court of Appeal in Abuja, contesting Olusegun Obasanjo’s victory. Falae sued the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), its chief Ephraim Akpata, and 57 others, alleging irregularities. On April 16, 1999, Justice Dahiru Musdapher’s tribunal dismissed the petition, upholding Obasanjo’s win.

In 2003, Obasanjo’s re-election was challenged by Muhammadu Buhari (All Nigeria Peoples Party, ANPP). Buhari approached the presidential election tribunal, but on July 23, 2003, four of five judges dismissed his petition. Unconvinced, he appealed to the Supreme Court on June 6, 2003; on July 1, 2005, Justice SMA Belgore’s panel validated the tribunal’s ruling, affirming Obasanjo’s victory after a prolonged 829-day process.

Obasanjo’s tenure also saw emergency rule test opposition resolve. On Tuesday, May 18, 2004—one year into his second term—he declared a state of emergency in Plateau State amid sectarian bloodshed.

On May 2, Christian Tarok militants killed over 600 Muslims in Yelwa, per the Nigerian Red Cross, sparking retaliatory killings by Muslims in Kano. With over 2,000 dead in Plateau since 2001, Obasanjo sacked Governor Joshua Dariye, accusing him of “lackadaisical” leadership and instigating unrest via a radio broadcast.

The state legislature was suspended, and retired General Chris Ali, a Plateau indigene, was appointed administrator for six months.

Then-Lagos Governor Bola Tinubu called the move illegal, but Dariye accepted it, skipping his office. Critics questioned why Kano’s Governor Ibrahim Shekarau faced no similar fate.
Dariye returned after six months following a UK arrest and bail in September 200 4, facing no successful legal challenge—though a 2006 illegal impeachment attempt by six lawmakers followed.

Obasanjo struck again on October 19, 2006, declaring emergency rule in Ekiti State after the assembly impeached Governor Ayo Fayose over corruption—diversion of funds and kickbacks—installing Speaker Friday Aderemi. Labeling it a “usurpation of power,” Obasanjo suspended Fayose, his deputy Abiodun Olujimi, and the assembly, appointing a retired general as administrator for six months.

Amid EFCC probes of 31 governors, no effective opposition challenge emerged. Fayose’s ouster held, underscoring judicial deference to executive action.

The 2007 election saw Umaru Yar’Adua (PDP) face Buhari (ANPP) and Atiku Abubakar (Action Congress, AC).
Both runners-up challenged the April 27 vote at the tribunal, which upheld Yar’Adua’s win on February 26, 2008. Their Supreme Court appeal concluded on December 12, 2008, with Justice James Ogebe’s seven-man panel ruling 4-3 that evidence of graft wasn’t sufficient for annulment, though it acknowledged electoral flaws—taking 492 days from election to final verdict.

Goodluck Jonathan’s 2011 win, following two years as president after Yar’Adua’s death, was contested by Buhari, now under the Congress for Progressive Change (CPC).
On May 8, 2011, Buhari petitioned the Court of Appeal in Abuja to nullify the April 16 election and order a fresh vote. The tribunal dismissed it, and on November 12, 2011, Chief Justice Dahiru Musdapher’s seven justices unanimously upheld Jonathan’s victory—188 days from petition to resolution.
The 2015 election broke the mold: Jonathan (PDP) conceded to Buhari (APC), avoiding litigation—the only uncontested presidential race since 1999.

But in 2019, Buhari’s re-election on February 23 faced Atiku Abubakar (PDP), who alleged INEC withheld server results.
The tribunal dismissed Atiku’s petition on September 11, 2019; the Supreme Court, led by Justice John Okoro, upheld it on October 30, 2019, denying server use and affirming Buhari’s eligibility—177 days total.

Tinubu ’s 2023 win (February 25) was challenged by Atiku (PDP) and Peter Obi (Labour Party), but the tribunal ruled against them on September 6, 2023, and the Supreme Court confirmed it on October 26, 2023—219 days.

Emergency rule cases—Plateau (2004) and Ekiti (2006)—under Obasanjo also stood firm. The PDP governors’ current suit, a constitutional rather than electoral dispute, faces a judiciary with a 0-for-7 record of siding with opposition presidential challengers and a 0-for-2 record on emergency rule challenges since 1999.

The PDP governors’ current suit, however, isn’t an election dispute but a constitutional clash, potentially giving it different odds—though the judiciary’s track record favors incumbents.

2027 stakes: Rivers and Tinubu’s re-election

The Rivers ruling could significantly shape Tinubu’s re-election bid in 2027.

Rivers, an oil-rich powerhouse with the South-South’s largest voting population, is a political prize. Critics, including activist Deji Adeyanju, frame the emergency as a strategic move by Tinubu’s All Progressives Congress (APC) to cripple PDP control, mirroring his 25-year dominance of Lagos.

Political watchers suggest it’s a bid to offset APC’s waning northern influence and secure resources and votes for 2027, especially as opposition coalitions—like Nasir El-Rufai’s shift to the SDP—gain traction.

A Supreme Court loss could dent Tinubu’s authority, embolden the opposition, and signal federal overreach, alienating voters amid economic hardship (fuel subsidy cuts, inflation).

A win, however, would cement APC’s grip on Rivers, boosting Tinubu’s re-election prospects by showcasing decisive leadership—albeit at the cost of deepening partisan divides.

Tinubu’s Defense and the Road Ahead

Tinubu’s camp, via Special Adviser Sunday Dare, insists the president is focused on economic gains—rising reserves, falling inflation—not elections.

Yet, with a Supreme Court decision possibly due between October 2025 and May 2026 (based on historical averages of 191–286 days), the outcome will loom large over Nigeria’s political landscape as 2027 nears.

For now, the nation watches as Rivers becomes a battleground for power, precedent, and the future of Tinubu’s presidency.