News
Rivers emergency rule: N’Assembly counters PDP govs’ lawsuit, demands N1bn
The federal legislature, in its response, contended that the plaintiffs’ suit was procedurally flawed and lacked merit.
The National Assembly said this in a preliminary objection dated April 22, 2025.
It argued that the court lacks the jurisdiction to entertain the suit and should award N1bn in costs against the plaintiffs for filing what it termed a “frivolous and speculative suit.”
President Bola Tinubu had declared a state of emergency in Rivers State on March 18, 2025, suspending Governor Siminalayi Fubara, Deputy Governor Ngozi Odu, and all elected members of the State House of Assembly for an initial period of six months.
Following the suspension, Tinubu appointed Rear Admiral Ibokette Ibas (retd.) as the sole administrator to oversee the state’s affairs during the suspension period.
The National Assembly ratified the President’s declaration through a voice vote.
The PDP governors, in suit number SC/CV/329/2025, approached the Supreme Court to challenge the President’s powers to suspend a democratically elected state institution and replace it with an unelected one.
The plaintiffs in the suit are the governors of Adamawa, Enugu, Osun, Oyo, Bauchi, Akwa Ibom, Plateau, Delta, Taraba, Zamfara, and Bayelsa States.
The Attorney-General of the Federation and the National Assembly are listed as the 1st and 2nd defendants, respectively, in the suit.
All 11 states in the suit asked the apex court to determine six constitutional questions, including whether the President of Nigeria can lawfully suspend or interfere with the offices of a governor and deputy governor and replace them with an unelected appointee under the guise of a state of emergency proclamation.
They further requested the court to determine whether the Attorney-General’s threat, acting on behalf of the President, to suspend the offices of governors and deputy governors by virtue of such proclamations contravenes the provisions of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria and principles of constitutional federalism.
The plaintiffs also questioned whether the National Assembly could approve a state of emergency proclamation, including suspension of state executives and legislatures by a simple voice vote rather than the constitutionally required two-thirds majority of all members of each chamber.
In their reliefs, the plaintiffs sought the declarations that the President cannot lawfully suspend or interfere with the offices of governors and deputy governors or replace them with unelected nominees under a state of emergency.
They argued that the President cannot lawfully suspend a State House of Assembly under such circumstances.
They further contended that the Attorney-General’s threats to suspend state officials are unconstitutional and violate the principles of federalism and that the National Assembly cannot approve such proclamations through voice votes without a two-third majority.
Additionally, they prayed for a perpetual injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with state offices through state of emergency proclamations.
The plaintiffs sought an order nullifying the state of emergency proclamation in Rivers State as published in Official Gazette No. 47 of 2025.
The governors are asking for “An order of perpetual injunction restraining the defendants from suspending or approving the suspension or in any way interfering with the offices of the Governor, the Deputy Governor and /or the House of Assembly of any of the Plaintiffs States by way of a Proclamation of State of Emergency or in any manner whatsoever or by any method howsoever.
“An order setting aside and nullifying the Official Gazette No.47 of 2025, State of Emergency (Rivers State) Proclamation, 2025 made by the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria and wrongfully approved by the 2nd Defendant and upon which the ominous threat by the 1st defendant against the Plaintiffs is predicated.”
However, the National Assembly, in its preliminary objection, faulted the plaintiffs’ suit and urged the Supreme Court to dismiss it, arguing that the court lacks the jurisdiction to entertain the case, particularly against the second defendant, (NASS).
Declaring that it holds a memorandum of conditional appearance, the National Assembly argued that due process was not followed in instituting the suit, emphasising that the plaintiffs failed to issue the statutorily required three-month pre-action notice to the Clerk of the National Assembly, as mandated under Section 21 of the Legislative Houses (Powers and Privileges) Act, 2017.
It stated that “A person who has a cause of action against a Legislative House shall serve a three-month’s notice to the office of the Clerk of the Legislative House disclosing the cause of action and reliefs sought.”
Additionally, NASS argued that the plaintiffs did not secure resolutions from their respective State Houses of Assembly, a prerequisite for approaching the Supreme Court under its original jurisdiction provisions outlined in the Supreme Court (Original Jurisdiction) Act, 2002.
Citing alleged threats referenced in the plaintiffs’ suit, which borders on a statement attributed to the Attorney-General during a press briefing, NASS noted that since the threat did not emanate from them or its officers, the suit has no business with them.
The objection read, “Considering the affidavit in support and the threats alleged, which did not come from the 2nd Defendant, there is no cause of action against it.
The N’Assembly further contended, “With the objection amongst others submitted, due process of instituting the action in the suit was not followed by the plaintiffs before taking this steps against the 2nd Defendants as the plaintiffs failed to issue the requisite three months pre-action notice to the Clerk of the National Assembly and took no steps to obtain the resolutions of the Houses of Assembly of each of the States to enable the plaintiffs each join to approach this busy Court pursuant to the provision of the Supreme Court (Original Jurisdiction) Act 2002 on the matters.”
NASS asserted that the plaintiffs were attempting to use the Supreme Court to dictate how it exercises its constitutional role, particularly regarding the use of voice votes to ratify states of emergency under section 305 of the 1999 Constitution.
The objection described the suit as speculative and an abuse of the court process.
“In the suit, the Plaintiffs seek to use the court to curtail the manner in which the 2nd defendant votes or make approval to ratify proclamations of State of Emergency declared pursuant to section 305 of the CFRN 1999, to get the 2/3 majority of their votes.
“It also seeks that the Court dictates how much roles are to be performed by the 2nd Defendant. The suit seeks to restrain the 2nd defendant from using voice votes to get majority approval for future or anticipated Proclamations of States of Emergency in the States of the Plaintiff.
“The suit also seeks by perpetual injunction, to restrain the second defendant’s Houses (Senate /House of Assembly) from carrying out their constitutional duties of approval of Proclamations of State of Emergency and seeks that the approval given by the 2nd Defendant on the 20th day of March, 2025, ratifying the proclamation of State of Emergency in Rivers State be set aside for being wrongfully approved.”
NASS further added, “The 2nd Defendant/Applicant having observed the several deficiencies in the suit of the Plaintiffs which go contrary to the provisions of the laws and the jurisdiction of the Court raises objection and submits that the 11 States (Plaintiffs) approached the Court wrongly and in abuse of court process.”
It predicated its objection on six grounds, stating that the plaintiffs’ suit lacks a cause of action.
The National Assembly further stated that the plaintiffs lack locus standi to proceed against the second defendant on the issues raised in the suit.
It also argued that the plaintiffs failed to comply with due process as stipulated under section 2, Schedule 2 of the Supreme Court (Additional Original Jurisdiction) Act, 2002.
The 2nd defendant noted that the “court lacks jurisdiction.”
In an affidavit supporting the notice of preliminary objection deposed by Godswill Onyegbu, a legal officer in the Directorate of Legal Services, National Assembly, he argued that due process was not followed in instituting the suit.
Onyegbu maintained that no dispute exists between the plaintiffs and either the Government of Nigeria or the second defendant, (NASS).
He further deposed that, “The plaintiffs did not obtain the required resolutions from the Houses of Assembly in their respective states to authorise the suit under the Supreme Court’s original jurisdiction.
“There is no cause of action against the second defendant, as no threat emanated from the second defendant’s office.
“That the plaintiffs lack the locus standi to institute this suit as none of the plaintiffs has shown that it has suffered anything far and above any other persons or people of Rivers State.
“There are no disputes involving questions of law or fact upon which the existence or extent of a legal right depends between the parties.
“The plaintiffs have not established any legal rights against the second defendant to warrant equitable relief such as a perpetual injunction.”
He noted that the Supreme Court lacks jurisdiction to hear the matter against the second defendant as constituted.
In addition to requesting the dismissal of the suit, Onyegbu called for a cost of N1b to be awarded jointly and severally against the plaintiffs in the interest of justice.
“That the Plaintiffs’ States’ Houses of Assembly did not pass any resolution by a simple majority of the members present and sitting at the time of the resolution authorising the plaintiffs to institute this action.
“That the plaintiffs have not established any legal rights against the 2nd defendant to enjoy the equitable remedy of perpetual injunction.
“That the suit of the plaintiffs is speculative, unfounded, frivolous and a vexatious waste of resources, time and energy of the 2nd defendant.
“That the present court lacks the jurisdiction to entertain this matter as presently constituted against the 2nd defendants.
“That it is in the best interest of justice for the Court to dismiss or strike out this suit against the 2nd defendant with a cost of N1b only, jointly and severally against the plaintiffs,” the affidavit read.
The African Airlines Association (AFRAA) has admitted Enugu Air as Member, extending the Association’s membership base in Nigeria’s fast-growing domestic aviation market and reaffirming AFRAA’s commitment to supporting the continued development of African carriers across the continent.
This was announced by AFRAA in Nairobi on Wednesday, making Enugu Air the 50th Member of the association, joining the AFRAA airline fraternity, collectively representing more than 85 per cent of total international traffic carried by African airlines.
Speaking on the development on Thursday, AFRAA Secretary General, Mr Abdérahmane Berthé, said, “We are delighted to welcome Enugu Air into the AFRAA fraternity.
“As a state-backed carrier serving Nigeria’s rapidly expanding domestic market, Enugu Air represents the kind of homegrown investment that is vital to building resilient air connectivity across our continent.
“We look forward to supporting the airline through the IOSA certification process and to its continued growth within the AFRAA membership, as we work together to advance the cause of unified African skies.”
Reacting to the development on Thursday, the CEO of Enugu Air, Capt Tolu Ita, described the admission into AFRAA as a major milestone in the airline’s short history.
“We are honoured to join the AFRAA fraternity. This membership underscores Enugu Air’s commitment to safe, reliable, and affordable air travel for Nigerians while contributing to the vision of a unified African aviation market.
“We look forward to collaborating with fellow AFRAA members and leveraging the association’s support as we grow our network and pursue IOSA certification,” Tolu stated.
Founded on July 7, 2025, Enugu Air commenced commercial operations with a fleet of Embraer E170/E190/E195 aircraft.
The airline, which has its headquarters in Enugu and operates from the Akanu Ibiam International Airport, currently serves nine domestic destinations including Enugu, Abuja, Lagos, Port Harcourt, Kano and Benin City.
As part of the airline’s growth strategy, Enugu Air plans to expand further across Nigeria and, in subsequent phases, to launch regional and international routes across Africa, Europe, and beyond.
As part of its growth strategy, Enugu Air plans to expand further across Nigeria and, in subsequent phases, to launch regional and international routes across Africa, Europe, and beyond.
The admission of Enugu Air aligns with AFRAA’s strategic priorities and strengthens the voice of the association. Nigeria, as Africa’s most populous nation and one of its fastest-growing economies, remains central to the realization of a truly integrated African aviation market.
Meanwhile, AFRAA association, which was founded in Accra, Ghana, in April 1968, and headquartered in Nairobi, Kenya, has a mission meant to promote, serve African Airlines and champion Africa’s aviation industry.
The association envisions a sustainable, interconnected and affordable air transport industry in Africa, where African airlines become key players and drivers of African economic development.
AFRAA membership cuts across the entire continent and includes all the major intercontinental African operators.
The association’s members represent over 85 per cent of total international traffic carried by African airlines.
The Minister of Finance and Coordinating Minister of the Economy, Taiwo Oyedele, has rejected calls for the Federal Government to publish details of how it plans to spend funds drawn from its $5bn financing facility with First Abu Dhabi Bank.
Oyedele said the transaction had been subjected to unnecessary scrutiny, arguing that the facility was approved by the National Assembly and was structured to help the government refinance more expensive debt.
He spoke on Wednesday during a media briefing in Abuja.
The Federal Government recently drew about $1.5bn, the first tranche of the $5bn Total Return Swap facility arranged with First Abu Dhabi Bank, despite concerns from the International Monetary Fund and Fitch Ratings over the transparency and risks associated with such financing structures.
The $5bn facility was approved by the National Assembly on March 31, 2026, while the initial drawdown was expected to support the 2026 budget, infrastructure projects and the refinancing of existing debt obligations.
Responding to a question on the borrowing plan and whether details of the First Abu Dhabi Bank transaction would be made public, Oyedele said the government would publish information on how it spends public funds but questioned why the particular facility was receiving special attention.
“We will not publish how we are spending it. We will publish how we spend government money. There’s nothing special about that loan,” he said.
He added, “Nobody has asked us whether we’re going to publish the money we took from the World Bank, whether we publish the one from Eurobond, whether we publish the one from Sukuk. Why is this one special?”
Oyedele also dismissed suggestions that the transaction was conducted without due process, noting that it had been presented to the National Assembly.
“The loan was approved not only by FEC, it was taken to National Assembly because what some people are doing is they comparing with other countries where they did it under the table.
“What else can be more public than what you gave to the National Assembly?” he said.
The minister said the government had assessed the transaction carefully and was accessing the funds in phases to avoid incurring unnecessary costs.
“We’re assessing it in phases. You don’t want to take all the money at once because if you don’t spend it at once, you incur cost on the extra amount you’ve taken,” he said.
He explained that the financing arrangement was different from Nigeria’s traditional fixed-rate borrowing because the First Abu Dhabi Bank facility had a flexible interest rate.
“You need to understand the transaction. You know, there’s always the textbook analysis and there’s the real life of what you’re doing.
According to him, Nigeria could not benefit from the lower yield on its existing fixed-rate debt.
“This First Abu Dhabi Bank transaction is flexible rates. It means if rates go up, we pay more. If rates come down, we benefit more.
“There’s nothing that says we must always do one thing. And the all-in rate for this transaction is lower than our existing portfolio,” he said.
Oyedele said the primary objective was to refinance more expensive debt and reduce the government’s borrowing costs.
“So the objective is to use it to refinance expensive debt so you can save money,” he said.
The Federal Government is required to pledge securities worth about 133 per cent of the amount drawn as collateral under the arrangement.
The International Monetary Fund and Fitch Ratings had raised concerns about the financing structure, including issues around transparency and sovereign debt risks.
The IMF had warned that derivative financing structures such as total return swaps could be difficult to track and value in real time, potentially obscuring the extent of a country’s financial obligations.
Fitch Ratings also warned that Nigeria’s planned $5bn arrangement could increase sovereign debt risks and reduce transparency in public debt reporting.
Oyedele, however, said the government would soon publish frequently asked questions on the transaction to provide further clarification.
“In the next few days, you will see on the website both the Ministry of Finance and DMO the frequently asked questions about this particular debt or bond, just so everybody can please themselves,” he said.
He added that there was “nothing special” about the loan, despite the attention it had received from critics and international media.
“I spend time on it because I think it’s important and the international media also, for some reason, have taken so much interest in it. But that is what it is.” Oyedele said.
News
2027 Elections: 146 Presidential, Governorship Candidates to Spend Not More Than N571bn on Campaigns
No fewer than 146 candidates currently in the race for the 2027 presidential and governorship elections could collectively spend up to N571bn under the campaign expenditure limits prescribed by the Electoral Act 2026.
The figure comprises 19 presidential candidates, each with a campaign spending ceiling of N10bn, and 127 governorship candidates, each allowed to spend a maximum of N3bn under Section 92 of the new Electoral Act.
The 19 presidential candidates alone have a combined spending ceiling of N190bn, while the 127 governorship candidates could collectively spend up to N381bn.
The combined ceiling for the two categories therefore stands at N571bn, although the amount represents the maximum permissible expenditure and not money guaranteed to, or actually received by the candidates.
The development comes as the Independent National Electoral Commission published the personal particulars and credentials of the 19 presidential candidates and their running mates ahead of the 2027 poll, paving the way for the commencement of the presidential campaign on Wednesday, August 19, 2026.
According to the election tracker NGelections.com, 127 candidates across 28 states will be running for governor in 2027. Of the number, 122 have been nominated, four have declared, and one is still being monitored.
A check on the INEC website showed that the commission had yet to publish the total number of 2027 governorship candidates, with its official 2027 election page stating under the list of candidates that “This will be available soon.”
INEC has confirmed that governorship elections will be held in 28 states in 2027, with Anambra, Bayelsa, Edo, Ekiti, Imo, Kogi, Ondo and Osun excluded because they are on the off-cycle schedule.
The commission had fixed January 16, 2027, for the presidential and National Assembly elections, while the governorship and State House of Assembly elections are scheduled for February 6, 2027.
New spending limits
Section 92 of the Electoral Act 2026 substantially raises the amount candidates are permitted to spend on election campaigns compared with the previous statutory limits.
Under the new law, a presidential candidate may spend up to N10bn, while a governorship candidate is limited to N3bn.
For the National Assembly, the ceiling is N500m for a senatorial candidate and N250m for a House of Representatives candidate.
A candidate seeking election to a State House of Assembly may spend up to N100m, the same ceiling prescribed for an Area Council chairmanship candidate, while the maximum campaign expenditure for an Area Council councillorship election is N10m.
The law also places a ceiling on individual contributions to candidates, providing that no individual donor may contribute more than N500m to a single candidate.
Section 92 further provides sanctions for candidates who knowingly exceed the prescribed limits.
Such a candidate faces a fine equivalent to one per cent of the permitted expenditure limit, or imprisonment for up to 12 months, or both.
The provision makes compliance with the new spending thresholds a statutory obligation rather than a voluntary guideline.
It could not ne confirmed if INEC has successfully prosecuted and secured a conviction against a Nigerian politician specifically for exceeding the statutory election/campaign spending limit.
Also, there is no reported case of a politician or party being prosecuted for exceeding campaign-spending limits.
When asked how INEC would enforce the spending limits, the INEC National Commissioner and Chairman Information/Voter Education Committee, Mohammed Haruna, simply stated, ‘’It’s the Commission’s statutory responsibility to monitor the campaign finance of all political parties.’’ The anti-graft agencies are expected to collaborate with the INEC in monitoring and enforcing the spending limits.
The restriction on individual donations means that while a presidential candidate can spend as much as N10bn, a single donor cannot contribute more than N500m.
Similarly, a governorship candidate’s N3bn spending ceiling is six times the maximum individual donation.
Governor of Enugu State, His Excellency, Dr. Peter Ndubuisi Mbah, has approved fresh appointments in the state.
The new appointees include Special Advisers (SPAs) and Senior Special Assistants (SSAs).
This was announced on Wednesday through a public notice signed by Prof. Chidiebere Onyia, Secretary to the Enugu State Government
Full List Below:
1. Hon. Chukwudi Ezinwa — Special Adviser on Labour Union and Association Matters
2. Hon. Sunday Nnamani (Orlando) — Special Adviser on Special Duties
3. Mr. Williams Chukwu — Special Adviser on Agriculture
4. Prince Afam Agana — Special Adviser on Infrastructure Compliance
5. Humphrey Onyima — Special Adviser on Investment Strategy and Public Relations
6. Hon. Tony Ugwu — Special Adviser on Rural Development
7. Chief Ernest Nweze — Special Adviser on Party Coordination and Mobilisation
8. Hon. Emeka Onunze — Special Adviser on Monitoring and Evaluation
9. Mr. Robinson Odo (mni) — Special Adviser on Labour and Productivity
10. Pastor Kenneth Asogwa (Ebube Muonso) — Senior Special Assistant on Heritage and Community Relations
11. Pastor Tochukwu Ogbodo — Senior Special Assistant on Social Engagement
12. Barr. Lucky Chukwu — Senior Special Assistant on Public Affairs
13. Belonwu Nnaji — Senior Special Assistant on Cultural Orientation
14. Hon. Steve Odo — Senior Special Assistant on Tourism
15. Hon. Francis Ikewette Ede — Senior Special Assistant on Public Communication
16. Mr. Sunny Okafor — Senior Special Assistant on General Duties
17. Hon. Chinedu Okwu Otaka — Senior Special Assistant on Social Orientation and Mobilisation
18. Otaba Cosmas Ikechukwu — Senior Special Assistant on Protection of Public Utilities
19. Pius Okeagu — Senior Special Assistant on Assets Management
20. Rt. Hon. Innocent Emeka Ugwu — Senior Special Assistant on Inter-Party Affairs
21. Mrs. Eucharia Offor — Senior Special Assistant on Human Resource Management
22. Mr. Kenneth Oforma — Senior Special Assistant on Policy and Communication
23. Kelvin Ede — Senior Special Assistant on Research and Strategy
The appointments take effect immediately.
Dr. Samuel Ogbuku climbs another rung on the golden-floor ladder of life on August 19, 2026, marking 51 years of a life defined by purpose, resilience, and an unwavering commitment to the Niger Delta region.
Born in Ayakoro, Ogbia Local Government Area of Bayelsa State, his journey from the creeks and crowded neighbourhoods of the region to the helm of the Niger Delta Development Commission (NDDC) is more than a personal story. It is a living expression of what he has described as “Rewind to Rebirth”: the deliberate act of learning from the past to rebuild a stronger, more hopeful future.
Dr Ogbuku’s early years were shaped by the realities of the Niger Delta. He attended public schools in Port Harcourt before earning a Bachelor’s degree in Political and Administrative Studies from the University of Port Harcourt. Further studies led to a Master’s and a Ph.D. in Development Studies.
Alongside academic excellence, he cut his teeth as a student activist and later served as Public Relations Officer of the Ijaw Youth Council (Central Zone). Those formative experiences instilled in him a deep understanding of the region’s struggles and a firm belief that dialogue, education, and opportunity remain the most effective paths to lasting peace. His career has been a steady progression of service. He worked as a Personal Assistant in the Ministry of Petroleum, served as Chief of Staff in the Bayelsa State Government House, managed agricultural enterprises, and later acted as Senior Special Assistant on Niger Delta Affairs.
In 2023, President Bola Ahmed Tinubu appointed him Managing Director and Chief Executive Officer of the NDDC. He inherited an agency long criticised for inefficiency and uncompleted projects. Under his leadership, the Commission has shifted from what he terms a “transactional” approach to a “transformational” one.
The results are visible across the region. Thousands of kilometres of roads have been constructed or rehabilitated. Bridges and jetties have improved connectivity. Health centres have been built and equipped, while free healthcare outreaches have brought medical services to thousands.
The “Light Up the Niger Delta” initiative has extended electricity to communities long left in darkness. Scholarships have opened doors for young people, with many achieving distinction both at home and abroad. These interventions reflect a consistent philosophy: development must be felt by ordinary people in their daily lives.
At the heart of this work lies the “Rewind to Rebirth” agenda, articulated in his writings, including Rethinking the Niger Delta. It is a call to examine past mistakes honestly, discard what has not worked, and rebuild institutions, infrastructure, and trust with clearer purpose.
For Dr. Ogbuku, turning 51 is not merely a personal milestone. It is another opportunity to reaffirm that the Niger Delta’s future can be brighter than its past if leadership remains focused on results, accountability, and the people.As communities, colleagues, and well-wishers celebrate this birthday, the most fitting tribute is continued support for the unfinished work of regional transformation. Dr. Samuel Ogbuku’s 51 years remind us that purpose, when rooted in service, has the power to rewrite the story of an entire region one project, one community, and one generation at a time.
Happy Birthday, Dr. Samuel Ogbuku.
The Mission Continues!!!
Jim George Willy Ibimina
Writes from Niger Delta.
-
Crime5 days agoArmy Destroys Three Suspected IPOB/ESN Camps, Kills Three in Anambra
-
Crime5 days agoBreaking: Knight Attacks Catholic Priest After Mass in Enugu
-
Politics4 days ago2027 Enugu Guber: NDC’s Odalije Chinyeaka Ohaa Reiterates Power of Electorates to Hire and Fire Leaders
-
News5 days agoOsun Guber: Adeleke Sweeps 19 LGAs, Oyebamiji Wins 11
-
Special Report5 days agoFederal Roads: Umahi Closing the Gap as Tinubu Addresses Years of Neglect in South-East
-
Crime5 days agoOkigwe Road: The ‘Uniformed Robbery’ Motorists Can No Longer Ignore
-
News5 days agoBREAKING: INEC declares Adeleke winner of Osun guber poll
-
Education5 days agoOdii Vows to Revamp EBSU, Improve Lecturers’ Welfare Within Six Months As Governor