Port Harcourt Federal High Court Adjourns Case Challenging Suspension of Rivers State Governor by President Tinubu — Hearing Rescheduled for May 26, 2025

 

In a case that has captured national attention and sparked constitutional debates, the Federal High Court sitting in Port Harcourt has officially adjourned hearing on a high-profile lawsuit challenging the controversial suspension of the Rivers State Governor, Siminalayi Fubara, his Deputy, Professor Ngozi Odu, and members of the Rivers State House of Assembly by President Bola Ahmed Tinubu. The suit, which raises critical questions about the limits of presidential powers in a democratic society, has now been postponed to May 26, 2025, for hearing.

The legal challenge was filed by Dr. Farah Dagogo, a former member of the House of Representatives and a 2023 governorship aspirant in Rivers State. In his suit, Suit No: FHC/PH/CS/50/2025, filed on April 9, 2025, Dagogo is taking a bold stand against what he describes as the unconstitutional and unlawful actions of President Tinubu. According to Dagogo, the President overstepped his constitutional boundaries by unilaterally suspending democratically elected leaders and replacing them with a presidential appointee—Vice Admiral Ibok-Ete Ibas (Rtd), who is now acting as the Administrator of Rivers State.

President Tinubu’s controversial decision to suspend the state officials and appoint a military administrator came on March 18, 2025, following his declaration of a state of emergency in Rivers State, citing “rising insecurity” as the justification for the dramatic move. However, Dagogo and his legal team argue that the security situation in Rivers does not warrant such an extreme constitutional intervention.

Legal Arguments and Defendants Involved

During the court session on Monday, the plaintiff’s lead counsel, Cosmas Enweluzo, SAN, informed Justice Adamu Turaki Mohammed that all five defendants in the matter had been successfully served legal notice. These defendants include:

1. President Bola Ahmed Tinubu

2. Senate President Godswill Akpabio

3. The Nigerian Senate

4. Speaker of the House of Representatives, Hon. Tajudeen Abbas

5. Vice Admiral Ibok-Ete Ibas (Rtd), Administrator of Rivers State

Among all the parties involved, only Vice Admiral Ibas was represented in court by his counsel, Kehinde Ogunwumiju, SAN, who promptly requested additional time to respond to the originating summons—a legal document that outlines the plaintiff’s claims and the reliefs being sought.

Justice Mohammed granted the extension, allowing the fifth defendant more time to prepare his response. However, he made it very clear that the court would not entertain further delays. He cautioned that on the next adjourned date—May 26, 2025—the court would proceed with the matter regardless of whether all the defendants were fully prepared or not.

“The President Cannot Act as a ‘Tin god’” — Plaintiff’s Counsel Blasts Tinubu's Action

Speaking to reporters after the adjournment, lead counsel Cosmas Enweluzo was unwavering in his criticism of the President’s decision. He argued that President Tinubu’s actions are not only dangerous but also go against the very foundation of Nigeria’s democracy and constitution.

“The President cannot act as a ‘Tin god.’ He lacks the authority to suspend duly elected officials or assume control over the governance of more than four million citizens in Rivers State. This action is a constitutional aberration and cannot stand,” Enweluzo declared firmly.

He emphasized that only lawful constitutional procedures—such as impeachment by the State House of Assembly or judicial rulings—can remove elected officials from office. He described the President’s move as an abuse of executive power and an attack on the will of the people of Rivers State, who democratically elected their leaders.

Rivers State Is Peaceful — Insecurity Claim Dismissed

One of the central justifications given by the Presidency for the declaration of a state of emergency was rising insecurity. But Enweluzo strongly pushed back against that claim, pointing out that many other states in Nigeria face far more severe security challenges and have not been placed under emergency rule.

“Rivers State remains relatively peaceful,” he said. “If insecurity is the benchmark, then states like Benue, Plateau, and Borno—where attacks, killings, and displacement are regular—should have been placed under emergency rule long before Rivers.”

This argument aims to show that the President's decision was politically motivated rather than based on genuine security concerns.

No Responses Yet from Other Defendants

While Vice Admiral Ibas’s legal team requested more time to respond to the lawsuit, Enweluzo revealed that none of the other four defendants—including President Tinubu himself—had filed any form of legal response or even a memorandum of appearance in the case. Despite this, he expressed confidence that the court would proceed accordingly.

He also noted that, as a gesture of fairness and due process, the plaintiff’s legal team did not oppose the extension request from Vice Admiral Ibas’s counsel.

“As it was their first application for an extension, we did not object,” Enweluzo said, adding that time is of the essence in a matter with such significant constitutional implications.

Standing Up for Democracy

Enweluzo went on to commend Dr. Farah Dagogo for having the courage to initiate this landmark case. He stressed that what is at stake is not just the fate of Rivers State, but the future of democratic governance in Nigeria.

“Nigerians have the right to be governed by their elected representatives, not by presidential fiat,” he said.

This case is being closely watched by legal scholars, political analysts, and citizens across the country, as its outcome could set a precedent on whether the President of Nigeria has the constitutional power to unilaterally suspend elected state officials and impose an administrator.

Next Steps

With the matter now adjourned to May 26, 2025, all eyes will be on the Port Harcourt Federal High Court as it decides whether the President’s actions were within the bounds of the Nigerian Constitution—or an unconstitutional overreach of executive power.

NaijaRush will continue to monitor developments in this case and provide detailed, reliable updates as they unfold.