Legal Experts And Analysts Debate Possible Tenure Extension For Governor Fubara.
The declaration of a State of Emergency in Rivers State and the subsequent six-month suspension of Governor Siminalayi Fubara, his deputy Ngozi Odu, and the State Assembly have sparked intense debate over the constitutional implications of the decision.
At the heart of the discussion is whether the six-month period of suspension should be counted as part of their tenure or if the affected officials should have their terms extended upon reinstatement.
Legal and Constitutional Perspectives
President Bola Tinubu invoked Section 305 of the 1999 Constitution, as amended, to justify the emergency declaration, citing political instability in the state due to disagreements between the governor and the State Assembly. However, some legal experts argue that the constitution explicitly states in Section 180(1&2) that a governor’s tenure is four years, commencing from the date of taking the Oath of Allegiance and Oath of Office.
Femi Olajide, a legal practitioner, described the suspension as unconstitutional, supporting the stance of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA). “Removing elected officials under the pretext of emergency rule is unconstitutional and undermines democratic institutions,” he said. He urged Fubara to seek judicial interpretation of Section 180 concerning his suspension, as only the judiciary could resolve the matter.
Similarly, Abuja-based lawyer Sunday Ojumu maintained that the governor’s tenure had already been altered due to the state of emergency. “The only way to correct this is by extending his tenure to account for the lost six months. However, this can only be determined by the courts,” he stated.
Political and Historical Considerations
Some analysts believe historical precedents suggest Fubara may not recover the lost time. Former Deputy Vice-Chancellor of the Federal University Oye Ekiti (FUOYE), Prof. Sola Omotola, stressed the need to examine past cases. He referenced the Supreme Court’s 2006 decision regarding Plateau State, which dismissed a challenge against a similar state of emergency declaration under former President Olusegun Obasanjo.
Omotola argued that while the President has the power to declare a state of emergency, removing a governor without impeachment is controversial. “In past instances, governors have not had their tenure extended due to emergency rule. The case of former Ekiti State Governor Ayodele Fayose is an example,” he noted.
Dr Fyneface Dumnamene Fyneface, a policy analyst, opposed any tenure extension, asserting that Fubara and the suspended lawmakers contributed to the crisis leading to the emergency declaration. “They should not be given back the six months lost. The period is being used to fix the problems they created,” he remarked.
Similarly, former Osun State Assembly member Olatubosun Oyintiloye stated that the constitution does not provide for additional days beyond the stipulated four-year tenure. “Any attempt to extend their tenure would be a violation of the 1999 Constitution,” he said.
The Path Forward
The judiciary is expected to play a critical role in resolving the dispute, as legal interpretations of the constitution will determine whether the lost time can be reclaimed. The outcome could have broader implications for governance and emergency declarations in Nigeria, shaping future responses to political crises.
For now, the debate continues, with legal and political stakeholders closely watching how the courts will interpret the complex constitutional questions surrounding Governor Fubara’s tenure.
