President Bola Tinubu and the Attorney-General of the Federation, Prince Lateef Fagbemi, SAN, on Thursday, failed to send legal representatives to the Federal High Court in Abuja for the scheduled hearing of the suit seeking to sack the Sole Administrator of Rivers State, Vice Admiral Ibok-Ete Ekwe Ibas, Rtd.
At the resumed proceeding on the matter, neither President Tinubu nor the AGF was represented, though the Attorneys-General of Lagos, Bayelsa, Taraba and Edo states announced their appearances.
However, counsel to the plaintiff, Mr. Chimezie Enuka, informed the court that all the defendants in the matter, except the Attorneys-General of Zamfara and Bauchi state, were duly served with both the originating processes and the hearing notice.
Following an agreement by all the lawyers that appeared for the case, Justice James Omotosho deferred the hearing till June 11.
The court ordered the service of fresh hearing notices on all the defendants.
Aside from President Tinubu who is the 1st defendant in the matter, the AGF and Attorneys-General of the 36 States of the federation, were listed as 2nd to 39th defendants in the suit marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/572/2025.
The legal action was instituted by an Abuja-based legal practitioner, Mr. Johnmary Jideobi, who is praying the court to set-aside as void, “all actions and decisions [howsoever described or made] of the 3rd Defendant [Vice Admiral Ibas (Rtd)] in the name of Sole Administrator of Rivers State, same being unconstitutional, null and of no constitutional force throughout the Federal Republic of Nigeria for all purposes.”
The plaintiff is further praying the court to issue a perpetual order of injunction, restraining the 1st defendant (Tinubu, either by himself, his officers, agents, privies, servants or any other person acting under his command howsoever named, “from either removing, suspending or otherwise tampering with the tenure of the Governor and Deputy-Governor of Rivers State [and indeed any other State in Nigeria].”
Likewise, an order of perpetual injunction, barring President Tinubu, “either by himself, his officers, agents, privies, servants or any other person acting under his command howsoever named, from appointing any Sole Administrator into any State Government House in the thirty (36) of the Federation for any purpose whatsoever.”
In the Originating Summons he filed through a consortium of lawyers led by Mr. Enuka, the plaintiff urged the court to determine: “Whether in view of the combined provisions of the entirety of Sections 1, 5(2), 180, 188, 189, 305 and 306 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria as amended and their conflated interpretation, the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria [1st Defendant herein] has any constitutional authority [whatsoever] to either remove, suspend or otherwise tamper with the tenure of the duly elected Governor and Deputy Governor of Rivers State [and indeed of any other State in Nigeria] and appoint a sole Administrator [or any other substitute howsoever called or described] such as the 3rd Defendant for that State?”
Upon the determination of the question, he prayed the court to declare that upon an intimate reading and complete understanding of the entirety of section 305 of the 1999 Constitution, as amended, there is NO other circumstance contemplated by the Constitution for the removal OR interruption of the tenure of an elected Governor and Deputy Governor of a State EXCEPT the circumstances contemplated under Sections 180, 188, 189 and 306 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria as amended.
“A declaration of this Honorable Court that in view of the entirety of Sections 1, 5(2), 180, 188, 189, 305 and 306 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria as amended the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria has NO constitutional authority to either remove, suspend or otherwise tamper with the tenure of a duly elected Governor and Deputy Governor of a State and appoint a sole Administrator [or any other substitute howsoever called or described] such as the 3rd Defendant herein for that State.
“A declaration of this Honourable Court that the purported suspension of the Governor and the Deputy-Governor of Rivers State of Nigeria by the 1st Defendant on Tuesday the 18th day of March, 2025 is unconstitutional, null and void and of no legal effect whatsoever.
“A declaration of this Honourable Court that the purported nomination/appointment and swearing in of Vice Admiral Ibokette Ibas (Rtd)by the 1st Defendant as the Sole Administrator of Rivers State of Nigeria is unconstitutional, null and void and of no legal effect whatsoever.
“An order of this Honourable Court setting aside the suspension of the Governor and the Deputy-Governor of Rivers State of Nigeria by the 1st Defendant on Tuesday the 18th day of March, 2025 for being unconstitutional, null and void and of no legal effect whatsoever.
“An order of this Honourable Court setting aside the nomination/appointment and swearing in of Vice Admiral Ibokette Ibas (Rtd) as the Sole Administrator of Rivers State of Nigeria by the 1st Defendant.”
As well as: “An order of this Honourable Court directing Vice Admiral Ibokette Ibas (Rtd) [the 3rd defendant herein] to vacate, forthwith, the Government House of Rivers State of Nigeria.”
In a 32 paragraphed affidavit he deposed in support of the suit, the plaintiff maintained that though President Tinubu has the constitutional power to declare a state of emergency in deserving circumstances in any part of the federation, he does not have the power to suspend elected officials like a governor who is not his appointee.
“As a Nigerian Lawyer and all through my years of practice, I have never seen the word ‘Sole Administrator’ in the amended 1999 constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.
“I know that neither the 1st Defendant nor the 2nd Defendant appointed the Governor and Deputy-Governor of Rivers State of Nigeria and that no Governor or Deputy Governor in Nigeria is an appointee of the 1st and 2nd Defendants.
“I know that Nigeria practices Federalism hinged on separation of power.
“I have instituted this suit in the public interest, in the defence of the Rule of Law and accentuation of the supremacy of the Constitution and to preserve the integrity of the Nigerian Constitution which is the most sacred document that holds the Nigerian State in balance and in being.
“I am genuinely worried that, in the absence of the intervention of this Court, removal of duly elected Governors and Deputy-Governors, may become the pastime of the President thereby opening the floodgate of anarchy capable of consuming this nation.
“It will be in the interest of justice for this Honourable Court to grant the prayers contained on the face of this Originating Summons,” the plaintiff averred.
VANGUARD
