Abuja — The Supreme Court on Monday affirmed the constitutional authority of the President to declare a state of emergency in any part of Nigeria to prevent a breakdown of law and order or avert a descent into chaos.

In a split decision of six to one, the apex court ruled that the President is empowered under the 1999 Constitution to proclaim a state of emergency and, where necessary, suspend elected state officials for a limited period.

Apex Court Backs Presidential Powers Under Section 305

Delivering the lead judgment, Justice Mohammed Idris held that Section 305 of the 1999 Constitution grants the President wide powers to adopt “extraordinary measures” once a state of emergency has been declared.

According to the court, the Constitution does not expressly define the scope of such extraordinary measures, thereby leaving the President with discretion to determine the appropriate steps required to restore normalcy.

Justice Idris noted that these powers are not absolute but must be exercised within constitutional boundaries and for a limited duration, particularly where elected officials are affected.

Legal Challenge Over Rivers State Emergency

The ruling followed a suit filed by Peoples Democratic Party (PDP)-controlled states, challenging President Bola Tinubu’s declaration of a state of emergency in Rivers State, during which elected state officials were suspended for six months.

The Supreme Court had reserved judgment in the matter in October.

The plaintiffs were the Attorneys-General of 11 PDP-governed states, namely Adamawa, Enugu, Osun, Oyo, Bauchi, Akwa Ibom, Plateau, Delta, Taraba, Zamfara, and Bayelsa. The defendants were the Federal Government and the National Assembly.

The suit, marked SC/CV/329/2025, was anchored on eight grounds questioning the legality of suspending elected governors, deputy governors, and state Houses of Assembly under the guise of emergency powers.

Supreme Court Strikes Out Suit on Jurisdiction Grounds

In the earlier part of the judgment, Justice Idris upheld the preliminary objections raised by the Attorney-General of the Federation and the National Assembly.

He ruled that the plaintiffs failed to establish a cause of action capable of invoking the Supreme Court’s original jurisdiction, stressing that there was no actionable dispute between the states and the Federation.

As a result, the court struck out the suit for want of jurisdiction.

Despite this, the Supreme Court went further to examine the substantive issues raised and ultimately dismissed the case on its merits, reinforcing the President’s emergency powers.

Dissenting Opinion Raises Constitutional Concerns

In a dissenting judgment, Justice Obande Ogbuinya agreed that the President has the constitutional authority to declare a state of emergency.

However, he strongly disagreed with the majority on the suspension of elected officials, holding that emergency powers do not extend to removing or suspending governors, deputy governors, or state legislators.

Justice Ogbuinya maintained that such actions undermine democratic principles and violate constitutional safeguards protecting elected offices.

Implications for Nigeria’s Democracy

The ruling represents a landmark interpretation of executive emergency powers in Nigeria and is expected to shape future political and constitutional disputes.

Legal analysts say the decision strengthens presidential authority during crises but may also reignite debates over federalism, separation of powers, and democratic safeguards at the state level.

Further reactions are expected from political parties, civil society groups, and constitutional scholars in the coming days.

More details to follow…