Senate refuses to take motion on Rivers emergency rule

The Nigerian Senate on Wednesday deferred discussions on a motion seeking the approval of a state of emergency in Rivers State, despite it being scheduled as the first item on the day’s Order Paper.

The chamber adjourned its plenary session without mentioning the motion again, setting the stage for a contentious debate on Thursday.

After the plenary unusually began at 1 pm, Opeyemi Bamidele, Senate Leader (APC, Ekiti Central), who sponsored the motion, invoked Order 1(b) of the Senate Standing Orders 2023 (as amended) to step it down.

His motion was seconded by Minority Leader Abba Moro (PDP, Benue South), and the Senate promptly moved on to the next item without further deliberation.

The motion, initially expected to be debated and voted upon, underscores the deepening political and security crisis in Rivers State.

The document, as presented by Bamidele, warned of a worsening security situation and threats posed by militant groups.

“Worried that there is a clear and present danger of the crises as some militants had threatened fire and brimstone, with security reports indicating disturbing incidents of vandalization of oil pipelines,” the motion read in part.

It further emphasized the urgency of intervention, stating, “Convinced that there is the need to provide adequate and extraordinary measures to restore good governance, peace, order, and security in Rivers State.”

Under Nigeria’s constitutional provisions, a two-thirds majority vote in the Senate, at least 73 out of 109 senators is required to approve the emergency declaration.

President Bola Tinubu on Tuesday declared a state of emergency in Rivers State, suspending Governor Siminalayi Fubara, Deputy Governor Ngozi Odu, and all members of the state’s House of Assembly for six months.

Read also: Tinubu swears in Ibas as Rivers administrator for six months

The president appointed retired Vice Admiral Ibokette Ibas as the administrator to oversee the state’s affairs during this period.

The declaration requires legislative approval within two days (if in session) or ten days (if not).

If ratified, the emergency rule remains in effect for six months and may be extended if deemed necessary.

Despite the urgency, the Senate adjourned its plenary before the anticipated 3 PM debate, effectively postponing the motion to Thursday.

The sudden shift prompted varied reactions within the chamber.

Defending the decision to delay, Jimoh Ibrahim (APC, Ondo South) assured that the motion would be addressed promptly on Thursday morning.

He said, “First thing tomorrow morning, the proclamation will be debated. By then, information will have gone to other members. Some members are fasting; they are praying in their homes. Tomorrow, they will be here, and then by 10 o’clock, we pick it up. We are in tandem with Mr. President.”

He emphasized the gravity of the situation, arguing that security threats should not be taken lightly.

“Today, we had 68 members outside of 10 members of the leadership who are present, so we have a quorum. It’s not just about the numbers. I am in tandem with Mr. President. Because this borders on life and security. We don’t joke with life and security,” he asserted.

Ibrahim also sought to clarify misconceptions surrounding Tinubu’s emergency declaration, arguing that it was a necessary step rather than a complete dissolution of democratic institutions.

“The President did not dissolve democratic constitutions. He only suspended them for six months. And this six months will enable parties to go to the table, find out their differences, and come together so that there can be peace in Rivers State and, by extension, Nigeria,” he explained.

Backing Tinubu’s constitutional authority, he cited historical and legal perspectives, stating, “The President of Nigeria has the right and duty to protect and enforce the laws of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. To do otherwise would be disastrous.”

Drawing an analogy, Ibrahim likened the unfolding crisis to a boiling pot of water.

“When you put hot water on the pot, and you put fire in your cylinder, you can put your hand inside the water and be playing. In ten minutes, with your hand in there, who will tell you to remove your hand?

“Because the steam of the water has come up, so you cannot afford to put your hand. Without anybody telling you, you remove your hand quickly.

“But when you first put the water inside the hot pot, you can put your hand and be playing, even when you put fire. So this is exactly what war looks like. It starts brimming up.

“The earlier you quench the fire, the better for you. Otherwise, you’re going to get your fingers burnt. And that’s what the President has done.”

Ibrahim further lauded Tinubu’s approach as a measured and pragmatic response to a worsening crisis.

He added, “A liberalist like Bola Tinubu would ordinarily not want to declare things like this. If you read his speech, you know, he said, ‘Inside the Supreme Court, I intervene, I call this, I call that.’ These are liberalists, realists. But here we have a liberalist trying to ensure the sanity of democracy is protected. We must appreciate this fact.”

He dismissed allegations of presidential bias in the Rivers crisis and defended Tinubu’s approach to governance, citing Supreme Court precedence.

“Some people have accused the President of being biased before they instigated some of these crises. The Supreme Court exercises wider power because they are looking at the law. But the President was talking about a liberalism approach—cooperation and collaboration to foster peace.”

Quoting Justice Holland from 1644, Ibrahim said, “The prophecy of what the court will do is only pretentious. That’s what I mean by law. So if the court of law is even going to be a prophet, like a church pastor, it will not prophesy more than the law. The law is that you cannot run a state with the majority of the assembly suspended. That is the law.”