Human rights advocate, Mr Femi Falana, has lampooned the declaration of a state of emergency in Rivers State by President Bola Tinubu, saying he (Tinubu) rejected the idea of such pronouncement mooted by former President Olusegun Obasanjo at the height of Odua People’s Congress’ (OPC) crisis in Lagos State when the incumbent president served as governor.
Falana stated this at a webinar tagged, ‘Civilian Coup? Tinubu’s State of Emergency in Rivers’ co-hosted by a newspaper columnist, Prof Farooq Kperogi.
According to Falana, it is surprising that Tinubu, now in the saddle, is giving out what he refused to accept as Lagos governor
He also expressed surprise that the minister of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Mr Nyesom Wike, who also resisted plans by former President Muhammadu Buhari to do same in Rivers, at the height of the 2019 general elections crisis in the state, could be at the forefront of such declaration now.
“One then wonders what has happened between then and now that these two individuals are now promoting those things they resisted and fought against, during their time as governors.
“I remember President Tinubu as Lagos State governor, then, had threatened that Lagosians would reject any pronouncement of a state of emergency on the state by the then president, Chief Olusegun Obasanjo, at the height of the OPC crisis.
“Besides, Wike was also at the forefront complaining the use of federal might by the federal government, at the height of the tension induced by the 2019 elections Rivers. It’s quite a surprise that these two men are seen promoting what they firmly stood against, then,” he stated
Falana contended that while the president has the right under Section 305 of the nation’s constitution to declare a state of emergency, such right, he noted, does not include the removal of elected executives of such state
He wondered where the president derived his power to sack Governor Siminalayi Fubara when the Supreme Court recently pronounced as illegal the removal of some local government chairmen and their councillors, by some state governors.
“It was even the federal government that took the case to court last year, and got a judgement. And part of the Supreme Court pronouncements was the instruction to the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) and the Accountant General of The Federation not to release the statutory allocations to such states, unless their local government councils are properly constituted.
“So, if the governor does not have the power to sack local government chairmen, where is the President deriving his own power to sack the River State governor from?” he added.
Falana therefore challenged his professional colleagues, throwing their weight behind the recent action of the President in River State, to point out the section of the constitution that empowers the President to sack state executives.
While calling for a critical look at Section 305 of the Nigerian constitution, the human rights lawyer noted while the constitution has given four conditions, which the office of the governor can be declared vacant, none of such conditions empowers the President to carry out such task.
The lawyer also described as a mockery of democracy, the decision to ratify the President’s pronouncement by voice votes.
On the economy, Falana believed that despite all attempts at painting a positive picture of its performance, the figures are indicative of a failing economy.
Earlier in his introductory remarks, Kperogi explained that the webinar was designed to bring a key issue on the nation’s political space, the declaration of a state of emergency in River State, and the sack of the state’s executives to the front burner, with the aim of examining the constitutionality of such action.
