“A Decision That Will Go Down In Infamy” — Prof. Odinkalu Slams Supreme Court Over Rivers State Emergency Case Delay
Renowned Nigerian human rights activist and former National Human Rights Commission chairman, Chidi Odinkalu, has sharply criticized the Supreme Court for its failure to hear a high-profile constitutional challenge to the recent state of emergency in Rivers State, calling the inaction a deliberate “decision” that will “go down in infamy” in Nigeria’s judicial history.
In a series of posts on X (formerly Twitter) early Friday, Odinkalu, who holds the Commander of the Order of the Federal Republic (CGoF) honor, highlighted the apex court’s protracted silence on Suit No. SC/CV/329/2025, filed by 11 Peoples Democratic Party (PDP)-governed states in April 2025. The suit, initiated by attorneys general from Adamawa, Enugu, Osun, Oyo, Bauchi, Akwa Ibom, Plateau, Delta, Taraba, Zamfara, and Bayelsa, argues that President Bola Tinubu’s March 18, 2025, declaration of emergency rule—suspending Governor Siminalayi Fubara, Deputy Governor Ngozi Odu, and the entire Rivers State House of Assembly violates key constitutional provisions.
“The refusal of @SupremeCourtNg to even attempt to schedule a hearing of the original jurisdiction case on #EmergencyRule in Rivers State is not an omission. It’s itself a decision, which will go down in infamy in the annals of judicial politics in #Nigeria,” Odinkalu wrote in his lead post, which garnered over 60 likes and dozens of reposts within an hour. He contrasted the case’s stagnation with the court’s swift handling of prior national matters: Suit No. SC/CV/162/2023 on the naira redesign policy was resolved in just 30 days (judgment on March 3, 2023), while Suit No. SC/CV/343/2024 on local government autonomy took 45 days (decided July 11, 2024). By comparison, the Rivers emergency suit “has not been heard after 6 months+,” Odinkalu noted, underscoring what he sees as selective urgency.
The plaintiffs in SC/CV/329/2025 seek declarations that Tinubu’s actions contravene Sections 1(2), 5(2), 176, 180, 188, and 305 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), which enshrine federalism, executive powers, gubernatorial tenure, impeachment processes, and emergency proclamation limits. They argue that replacing elected officials with an unelected sole administrator—retired Vice Admiral Ibok-Ete Ekwe Ibas—amounts to an unconstitutional power grab, potentially threatening similar interventions in their own states. The Federal Government, defended by a formidable team led by former Attorney General Akin Olujinmi (SAN) and over 10 other Senior Advocates of Nigeria, filed a preliminary objection in May 2025 urging dismissal, claiming the suit was “frivolous and speculative.” The National Assembly echoed this in April, seeking ₦1 billion in costs against the governors.
Tinubu’s emergency proclamation stemmed from a months-long political feud between Fubara and his predecessor-turned-Federal Capital Territory Minister Nyesom Wike, which paralyzed governance in the oil-rich South-South state. The crisis escalated after Fubara’s May 2023 inauguration, with Wike-aligned lawmakers attempting impeachment in October 2023, a fire-damaged assembly complex demolition, and a failed December 2023 peace deal brokered by Tinubu. By early 2025, the Supreme Court itself had ruled in related cases that “there was no government in Rivers State” due to the executive-legislative deadlock, paving the way for the March intervention under Section 305.
The six-month rule, which expired September 17, saw Ekwe Ibas oversee stability measures, including controversial August 30 local government elections boycotted by Fubara’s camp. Over 40 related lawsuits flooded courts in Abuja, Port Harcourt, and Yenagoa, though lower courts deferred to the Supreme Court’s exclusive jurisdiction under the Emergency Powers Act of 1961—one Federal High Court in Port Harcourt struck out a challenge on September 15, citing this exclusivity.
In a nationwide address on September 17, Tinubu lifted the emergency effective at midnight, reinstating Fubara, Odu, and assembly members led by Speaker Martins Amaewhule from September 18. He defended the measure as a “painfully inevitable” tool to avert “anarchy,” crediting it with restoring order amid pipeline vandalism threats and economic sabotage risks.
