In a society where almost everything and anything is denominated by politics and politicking, it becomes a huge dilemma to stand freely on the side of conscience, to pontificate and analyse political developments in the polity without running the risk of being accused of bias or being partisan.
The recent Presidential response to the lingering political crisis in Rivers State is one of such knotty dilemmas to unravel without being caught up in the crossfire of partisanship and accusations of lopsidedness of judgment, as it were.
A cursory look at the very speech of President Tinubu while declaring the state of emergency in Rivers State on Tuesday the 18th of March, showed a decision that was in a hurry to be taken, taking into consideration the reason adduced vis-a-vis the failure to exhaustively exploit these same reasons and processes, to the satisfaction of conscience, the two parties to the crisis and collective good of all before final action was taken.
For example, leveraging on the constitutional provisions of section 305 of the Nigerian Constitution which gives the President powers to declare a state of emergency where there’s a crisis, these same provisions include a thorough adherence to the process which includes National Assembly approval, which the President willfully ignored.
This drew the irk of the Nigerian Bar Association, NBA, who have made an open condemnation of the president’s action and likened it to “an affront to our Democracy”.
Paradoxically, it was the Lagos State government, headed by the present President, who in 2004, challenged the former President Olusegun Obasanjo in Court when he declared a State of Emergency in Ekiti and Plateau States and suspended their governors. He argued that the President has no unilateral power to remove an elected governor, even under emergency rule.
The Supreme Court ( SC 70/2004) held among other things, that the President must follow the constitutional process in section 305 which includes obtaining National Assembly approval, and that a state of emergency does not mean the automatic removal of an elected governor or dissolution of state institutions, unless expressly approved by law.
Perhaps, it is on this premise that the NBA is shouting hoarsely that allowing the suspension of elected officials under emergency rule could set a precedent for removing State governments based on political consideration.
Away from the legalese and the multiplicity of explanations flying everywhere, one wonders why the president’s speech, nay reasons for his actions, heaped blame only on Fubara, calling him a despotic leader. To me, it sounds unpresidential if, at this point, the president cannot act in the interest of all parties. It is a known fact that the crisis in Rivers is essentially that of a scramble for the control of resources between the suspended governor Fubara and his embattled Godfather, Nyesom Wike.
Any settlement, therefore, that does not apportion blame and sanctions to these two characters is pretentious, deliberate and unsatisfactory. This is why many are of the view that if an enduring peace is to be achieved, the FCT Minister must be reigned in by the President because he is the pivot on which the processes of the crisis and the possible solution rotate. Ignoring this is tantamount to playing the Ostrich.
Godfather versus Godson’s war is not new in Nigeria. In Kano, Kwankwaso brought in Ganduje. But when they fell apart, Kwankwaso moved on with his political career. The same with Akpabio and Udom. Ditto with Oshomhole and Obaseki. Why is Nyesom Wike different?
Again, the explosion on the Trans-Niger pipeline ( TNP) in Bodo, Gokana local government area of Rivers State has been assumed by many as the immediate cause of President Tinubu’s sledgehammer, following the alleged threat issued by some persons recently.
It is the responsibility of the President to ensure the safety and protection of vital national assets as the number one security officer of the Nation. This unpatriotic act of vandalism, therefore, may only be enough to declare a State of emergency on National assets in Rivers State ( and not to uproot the entire democratic structures as has been done already) only after investigation and not before.
It must be recalled that it is the haphazard declaration of a state of emergency in the Western Region by the government of the First Republic, that led to the multiplicity of factors that brought that government to an inglorious ending while leading us to an unnecessary fratricidal war. Let us learn from history.
