The Federal Government has defended its decision to impose a state of emergency on Rivers State, telling the Supreme Court it acted to prevent further breakdown of law and order and economic sabotage.
In its response on Saturday, May 10, to a suit filed by 11 opposition-controlled states, the government said it had no other choice after political chaos in Rivers escalated and crippled governance.
The 11 states, Adamawa, Akwa Ibom, Bauchi, Bayelsa, Delta, Enugu, Osun, Oyo, Plateau, Taraba, and Zamfara, are challenging the legality of the emergency declaration.
In a counter-affidavit sworn by Taiye Hussain Oloyede, Special Assistant to the President and the Ministry of Justice, the FG described Rivers’ situation as a “very serious political crisis” that left the state without a functioning government.
He said, “By reason of my job as Special Assistant to President Ahmed Bola Tinubu, GCFR, I know the facts and circumstances that happened in Rivers State, which culminated in the declaration of a state of emergency in Rivers State by President Bola Ahmed Tinubu on 18th March, 2025.”
The government cited the demolition of the State House of Assembly complex, attacks on vital oil infrastructure, threats by militants, and a complete legislative breakdown as justification.
“The governor demolished the House of Assembly of the State thus depriving the 27 members opposed to him from having official accommodation where they could meet to carry out their duties as a House of Assembly,” Oloyede stated.
He added, “Militants were openly threatening fire and brimstone against those they perceived as enemies of the governor with the governor not doing anything even as little as denouncing and disowning them.”
According to the FG, Rivers was in such disarray that “governance had run to a standstill” and “there is no government in Rivers State.”
READ ALSO: Rivers Emergency Rule: NASS Opposes PDP Suit, Seeks ₦1bn Damages
Oloyede continued: “It is a matter of common knowledge that there was a very serious political crisis in Rivers State which had led to the Governor of Rivers State and the House of Assembly not being able to work together.”
He also said President Tinubu had engaged all parties involved to find a resolution, but the efforts were rebuffed.
“President Bola Ahmed Tinubu intervened… but the parties stuck to their individual positions to the detriment of peace and development in the state,” he said.
The federal government insisted the President acted strictly within constitutional powers to restore peace and was not targeting opposition states.
“Contrary to the depositions… the President has neither said nor threatened that he would declare a state of emergency in any of the plaintiffs’ states but the plaintiffs have only been driven into panic mode by their own imaginary fears,” the affidavit said.
It also stressed the President acted based on verified security reports and was committed to the rule of law.
“That President Bola Ahmed Tinubu is a strong adherent of the rule of law who has committed himself to exercising his powers… only in accordance with the law and the constitution and based on verifiable facts,” Oloyede declared.
Meanwhile, the National Assembly, also named in the suit, is asking the apex court to throw it out for lacking merit.
In a preliminary objection filed on April 22, the legislature said the suit was “frivolous and speculative,” urging the court to award ₦1 billion in costs against the plaintiffs.
The PDP governors are asking the court to determine whether the President can lawfully suspend elected state officials or state legislatures under the guise of emergency rule.
They are also challenging any move by the President to impose unelected administrators on any of the 36 states of the federation.