The Office of the Attorney General of the Federation (OAGF) and the Federal Government have not yet been served with court summons in the suit filed by 11 governors from the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), challenging President Bola Tinubu’s suspension of Rivers State Governor Siminalayi Fubara and the declaration of a state of emergency in the state.
Although both the AGF and the Federal Government are named as defendants in the case, sources within the OAGF said that they had not received the necessary legal documents.
A senior official in the AGF’s office commented, “We have read about the suit in the media. You in the media are the ones telling us that a suit has been filed by some PDP-controlled states against the emergency rule declared in Rivers State.
“For now, I can confirm to you that the office of the AGF has not been served. I believe it is this office that will also be served with processes intended for the Federal Government or the President. We are waiting. This is our office. If indeed any suit has been filed, we will respond accordingly once we are served as required,” The Nation reports.
Meanwhile, Vice-Admiral Ibok Ibas (rtd), the Sole Administrator appointed by President Tinubu to oversee Rivers State, explained that his decision to appoint administrators for the state’s 23 local governments followed observations made during his visits to the councils.
Also on Thursday, hundreds of women staged a protest in Port Harcourt, demanding an end to the emergency rule. They marched from Isaac Boro Park to Garrison Junction along Aba Road, carrying placards and singing solidarity songs.
The suit, marked SC/CV/329/2025, was filed by the Attorneys-General of 11 PDP-controlled states: Adamawa, Enugu, Osun, Oyo, Bauchi, Akwa Ibom, Plateau, Delta, Taraba, Zamfara, and Bayelsa. The plaintiffs are asking the Supreme Court to determine whether the President has the constitutional authority to suspend a democratically elected state government.
They also question whether the process used to declare a state of emergency in Rivers aligns with the 1999 Constitution.
The suit specifically seeks judicial interpretation of several constitutional provisions. Among the key issues raised:
“Whether upon a proper construction and interpretation of the provisions of Sections 1(2), 5(2), 176, 180, 188 and 305 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999, the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria can lawfully suspend or in any manner whatsoever interfere with the offices of a Governor and the Deputy Governor of any of the component 36 States of the Federation of Nigeria and replace same with his own unelected nominee as a Sole Administrator, under the guise of, or pursuant to, a Proclamation of a State of Emergency in any of the State of the Federation, particularly in any of the Plaintiffs States?”
“Whether upon a proper construction and interpretation of the provisions of Sections 1(2), 4(6), 11(4) & (5), 90, 105 and 305 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999, the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria can lawfully suspend the House of Assembly of any of the component 36 States of the Federation of Nigeria, under the guise of, or pursuant to, a Proclamation of a State of Emergency in any of such States, particularly in any of the Plaintiffs States?”
