Legal practitioner and African Democratic Congress chieftain, Kenneth Okonkwo, has criticised the Supreme Court’s judgment validating President Bola Tinubu’s declaration of a state of emergency in Rivers State.
In a six-to-one split decision delivered on Monday, the apex court upheld the President’s constitutional power to declare emergency rule where there is a threat to public order or national stability.
The court also held that elected officials could be suspended during such periods, provided the suspension is for a limited duration.
Speaking on Channels Television’s Sunrise Daily on Tuesday, Okonkwo rejected the court’s reasoning, arguing that the Constitution does not empower the President to suspend elected officials under emergency rule.
Concerns Over Democratic Implications
Okonkwo warned that the ruling carries serious implications for Nigeria’s democratic framework and the separation of powers.
“They said they don’t have jurisdiction, so they just stated an opinion,” he said.
“If they lacked jurisdiction, the proper thing was to stop there, not to make pronouncements capable of confusing the nation.”
He argued that once the court declined jurisdiction, any additional commentary risked creating uncertainty in constitutional interpretation.
According to him, the judgment blurs the limits of executive authority during emergencies and weakens constitutional safeguards.
Fear of Dangerous Precedent
The former actor-turned-politician cautioned that the ruling could open the door to widespread abuse of power by future administrations.
“What this means is that the President can suspend all 36 governors at once,” Okonkwo said.
“He could declare a nationwide state of emergency and rule with the military, even if only temporarily.”
He stressed that such an interpretation undermines federalism and concentrates excessive power in the executive arm of government.
Loss of Confidence in the Judiciary
Okonkwo also expressed disappointment in the judiciary, saying recent judgments have weakened public trust in the rule of law.
“As a lawyer, I am not confident in the judicial system because its judgments are no longer reflecting the rule of law,” he stated.
However, he praised the lone dissenting justice in the case, describing the dissent as a principled defence of constitutional democracy.
“Thank God there was one dissenting voice among the justices, and I align myself completely with that position,” he added.
The judgment arose from a suit filed by states governed by the Peoples Democratic Party, challenging President Tinubu’s decision to impose emergency rule in Rivers State.
The Supreme Court’s ruling effectively upheld the suspension of Governor Siminalayi Fubara, his deputy Ngozi Odu, and members of the Rivers State House of Assembly for six months.
