Thursday, September 18, 2025, will mark the end of six months of emergency rule in Rivers State. Stakeholders, however, raise concerns on the skewed performances and ‘successes’ of the development, ANN GODWIN and OBINNA NWAOKU report.
In a move that shook the country, President Bola Tinubu, on March 18, 2025, went on air to declare a State of Emergency in Rivers State, an extraordinary step that swept aside Governor Siminalayi Fubara, his deputy, Prof. Ngozi Odu, and the entire House of Assembly for six months. In their place, the President appointed a Sole Administrator, retired Vice Admiral Ibok-Ete Ibas, with the mandate of restoring law and order, stabilising the polity and creating an environment for democratic governance.
Though many legal scholars and civic groups, including the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), faulted the action, describing it as unconstitutional and undemocratic, Tinubu defended his decision, citing provisions of Section 305 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended).
The section empowers the President to declare a State of Emergency in cases of war, breakdown of public order, natural disasters or a clear and present danger to national security. Critics, however, maintained that Rivers’ crisis did not fall within those categories, arguing that the proclamation amounted to an overreach of executive power.
At the peak of the feud between the suspended Governor Fubara and his predecessor, now Minister of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) Abuja, Nyesom Wike, the measure temporarily calmed tensions and bridged open hostilities between their camps. Yet beneath the surface, the rift and its political consequences remained.
Mandate versus actions
ON assumption of office, Ibas was expected to act as a neutral arbiter, adopting an inclusive approach, treating all parties fairly, and addressing underlying grievances that had fuelled the political turmoil.
Key among these was the agitation by former local government chairmen under Wike’s administration who sought to return to office, a move that had stoked protests and heightened divisions.
Instead, his early actions raised concerns. Almost immediately, he dissolved boards, parastatals and commissions, and sacked political appointees loyal to Fubara. He also appointed local government administrators outside of any electoral process, a development widely criticised for encouraging a lack of accountability and alleged mismanagement of council funds.
Observers said the Sole Administrator struggled to find neutral figures to fill the many vacancies, leading to appointments dominated by Wike’s loyalists across ministries, parastatals and local councils. This fuelled perceptions of bias and accusations that his administration was an instrument of political capture rather than reconciliation.
The imbalance deepened mistrust. While both Wike and Fubara publicly declared peace, Wike stressed that “no price is too big for peace to reign”, and many of Fubara’s loyalists felt excluded. Despite Fubara’s appeals for restraint, his supporters saw themselves as abandoned in the new order.
Elections as a test case
THE August 30, 2025, local government elections underscored this divide. None of Fubara’s loyalists emerged victorious across the 23 councils, while Wike’s allies swept the polls. For critics, this confirmed suspicions that emergency rule had tilted the balance of power, consolidating Wike’s influence.
Supporters of Tinubu’s intervention argue that the drastic measure prevented Rivers from descending into chaos at a time when governance had ground to a halt. They contend that the six months offered a cooling-off period and prevented bloodshed.
But for others, the manner in which Admiral Ibas exercised his mandate suggests otherwise. His sweeping dissolutions, partisan appointments and the electoral outcomes are cited as evidence that the emergency regime was used to entrench Wike’s hold on the state.
As Rivers returns to democratic governance on September 18, the state remains deeply divided. The feud between the two principal actors may have eased publicly, but the exclusion felt by Fubara’s camp and the dominance of Wike’s loyalists continue to fuel resentment.
For many political observers, the Rivers’ emergency rule highlights the thin line between constitutional intervention and political expediency. Whether history records it as a stabilising measure or a calculated state capture may ultimately depend on how the fragile peace holds in the months ahead.
Justifying his mandate and the reason for his posting to Rivers State, Vice Admiral Ibok-Ete Ibas (rtd.), on Friday, declared that the task assigned to him by President Bola Tinubu was “sufficiently achieved.”
Ibas made the remarks during a ceremony where the Rivers State Independent Electoral Commission (RSIEC) presented the report of the recently concluded local government elections to the state administrator. He described the council polls as peaceful, adding that the subsequent swearing-in of democratically elected chairmen and councillors marked the direct fulfilment of the presidential directive issued to him on March 18, 2025.
While preparations are underway to end the emergency regime and return Governor Fubara to office on Thursday, concerns remain about whether the suspended governor will be able to function effectively.
Residents are also anxious about whether Fubara will regain full executive powers and how he will navigate relationships with the newly elected council chairmen, state legislators who previously fought and insulted him, as well as new appointees across boards, institutions and parastatals.
Questions also linger on whether Fubara will initiate investigations into the activities of the sole administrator when he resumes office. Critics alleged that Ibas prioritised collaborations with federal security agencies, particularly the Nigerian Navy, to ensure technology-driven maritime security operations aimed at protecting national assets and fostering economic growth.
He also attempted to revive the agricultural sector, especially the Songhai Farm project, one of the contentious issues that fuelled the political standoff between Fubara and the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Nyesom Wike.
However, despite these efforts, business activities slowed in the past six months. Industries, market men and women, artisans and vendors recorded low patronage, while investors became reluctant to enter the state, largely due to the emergency regime.
Moreover, Rivers, once celebrated as the ‘Garden City,’ degenerated into a ‘refuse city,’ with heaps of waste dumps littering streets and corners.
Recently, the new Chairman of the Rivers State Waste Management Agency, Samuel Nwanosike, announced measures to clean up the city through a monthly sanitation exercise.
Despite shortcomings, some state workers commended Ibas as the most civil service-friendly administrator, following his disclosure of saving N5 billion from a workers’ verification exercise.
But other workers and pensioners described the emergency period as disappointing, lamenting delayed salary payments and non-implementation of benefits under his leadership.
Lawyers, CSOs and residents react
SPEAKING on the developments, the Rivers State Civil Society Organisation (RIVCSO), led by Enefa Georgewill, criticised the tenure of the sole administrator, describing it as illegal.
He said Ibas failed to provide any foundation for sustainable development or peace, insisting that his actions largely favoured politicians allied to the President and the FCT Minister.
Georgewill argued that the administrator exceeded his brief in areas such as the conduct of council elections, auditing state accounts and overseeing workers.
In an interview, he faulted President Tinubu’s decision to impose emergency rule, saying it lacked legitimacy and fairness, and had not delivered peace or development.
Georgewill compared Rivers’ situation with states such as Yobe, Plateau and Benue, where insecurity has been rampant, but where democratic structures remain intact. He questioned the rationale for imposing a quasi-military regime in a democratic setting like Rivers, while other states with more severe security crises retained elected leaders.
“We have said that the action in itself is an illegality, and there is nowhere an illegal process will be able to serve the cause of justice, provide accountability, or show fairness.
“It is not possible. You cannot build something on nothing. We have also said it is lame to justify emergency rule on grounds of insecurity, especially when compared with what is happening in other states like Yobe, Jos, Benue and others. Just recently, you saw how soldiers and civilians were massacred in the North, yet democratic structures were not sacked.
“So, how can a quasi-military regime now serve any form of justice in a democratic setting? As far as I am concerned, it does not serve justice or fairness.
“Nothing has changed either. The state of security and the mood of the people remain the same. Nothing has taken a new order, except that people feel demobilised. While other states have political leaders, we now have a total stranger,” he stated.
But countering Georgewill, Convener of the Rivers Peace Initiative, Obinna Ebogidi, argued that the emergency rule recorded significant gains for the state.
He said: “The emergency regime was not meant to be a destination but a bridge. It bought time for tempers to cool, for institutions to breathe, and for fragile calm to return. Development cannot thrive in rancour, so while it may have slowed economic progress in the short term, it preserved the ground on which peace and progress can be cultivated.”
Ebogidi stressed that peace cannot be assumed, but must be deliberately built and nurtured. According to him, the Rivers experience has shown the cost of disunity and the urgent need to prioritise the welfare of ordinary citizens above elite rivalries. He maintained that no public officer should be above accountability, adding that Ibas’ activities as Sole Administrator could still be subjected to probe.
A lawyer and human rights advocate, Courage Nsirimovu, however, faulted both the declaration and its outcomes. He argued that justice and peace were far from achieved under the regime.
“There was no disorder or war to necessitate the emergency rule. It was simply a political strategy to move the state’s political structure back to the FCT Minister, who aligns with the President. What the President did was unconstitutional, amounting to an impeachable offence,” he declared.
Nsirimovu added that the Sole Administrator did not lay any foundation for sustainable development. Instead, he accused Ibas of complicity in handing the state over to “enemies of the good people of Rivers.” He cited the continued stagnation of projects such as the ring road and Trans-Calabar initiative, which he said worsened transportation hardship for residents.
He also criticised the hurriedly organised council polls, describing them as illegal. “If the Judiciary defends the Constitution, Governor Fubara will enjoy his return. But if they choose to preserve a peace deal among strange bedfellows, the Governor may have to lie in it,” he warned.
On his part, Vincent Gbosi, Special Assistant (Media and Publicity) to the State Chairman of the All Progressives Congress (APC), Tony Okocha, praised President Tinubu’s intervention. He maintained that without the emergency proclamation, Rivers would have descended into anarchy and chaos.
According to him, the regime brought peace, restored normalcy, and opened the door for development. But the Publicity Secretary of the African Democratic Congress (ADC) in the state, Luckyman Igilla, condemned the proclamation, insisting it amounted to injustice against Rivers people.
He argued that the declaration inflicted economic hardship and strangled development, noting that the state enjoyed relative calm before March 2025.
“The emergency rule was part of President Tinubu’s wider effort to impose a one-party system on the country, undermining democracy. In Rivers, it has led to six months of stagnation, with projects halted and livelihoods disrupted,” Igilla stated.
The ADC chieftain urged Rivers people to demand accountability from leaders and insist that those who mismanage resources are brought to book. As the curtain falls on the six-month regime, attention now shifts to Governor Siminalayi Fubara. Analysts remain divided on whether he will return politically weakened, his structures dismantled, or strengthened by the sympathy and resilience gained during his forced absence.
What is clear, however, is that he faces a delicate road ahead. Stakeholders advise him to embrace inclusiveness, display maturity, and combine the wisdom of hindsight with the courage of foresight. Only by adopting such an approach, they argue, can he steady the ship and navigate the storms that await him in the complex politics of Rivers State.
