The Supreme Court has affirmed the constitutional power of the President to declare a state of emergency in any state to prevent a breakdown of law and order or a descent into chaos and anarchy.
A split decision of six to one Justices of the apex court on Monday, December 15, 2025 upheld the President’s authority under the Constitution to proclaim a state of emergency and further held that, during such a period, the President may suspend elected officials, provided any such suspension is for a limited duration.
In the lead majority judgment delivered by Justice Mohammed Idris, the apex court held that, Section 305 of the 1999 Constitution empowers the President to adopt extraordinary measures to restore normalcy where a state of emergency has been declared
He noted that the provision does not specify the exact nature of those extraordinary measures, thereby vesting the President with the discretion on how to act in such circumstances.
The judgment followed a suit brought before the court by the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) governors, challenging the declaration of a state of emergency in Rivers State by President Bola Tinubu, during which elected state officials were suspended for six months.
The Supreme Court had, in October, reserved judgment in the matter to a date to be communicated to parties.
The suit has the Attorneys-General of Adamawa, Enugu, Osun, Oyo, Bauchi, Akwa Ibom, Plateau, Delta, Taraba, Zamfara, and Bayelsa states as plaintiffs, while the defendants were the Federal Government and the National Assembly.
In the suit, marked SC/CV/329/2025, the plaintiffs asked the Supreme Court to determine whether the President has the constitutional authority to suspend a democratically elected government in a state and whether the procedure adopted in declaring a state of emergency in Rivers State contravened the 1999 Constitution.
Among other reliefs, the plaintiffs urged the apex court to determine, “Whether, upon a proper construction and interpretation of Sections 1(2), 5(2), 176, 180, 188, and 305 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999, the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria can lawfully suspend, or in any manner whatsoever interfere with, the offices of a Governor and the Deputy Governor of any of the 36 component States of the Federation and replace them with his unelected nominee as a Sole Administrator, under the guise of, or pursuant to, a Proclamation of a State of Emergency in any of the Plaintiffs’ States.
“Whether, upon a proper construction and interpretation of Sections 1(2), 4(6), 11(4) & (5), 90, 105, and 305 of the Constitution, the President can lawfully suspend the House of Assembly of any of the 36 States under the guise of, or pursuant to, a Proclamation of a State of Emergency in such States.”
Earlier in the judgment, Justice Idris upheld the preliminary objections raised by the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) and the National Assembly (Defendants in the matter) against the competence of the suit and held that the plaintiffs failed to establish any cause of action capable of activating the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court.
In the six-to-one majority judgement, the apex court agreed that the plaintiffs did not demonstrate the existence of an actionable dispute between them and the Federation to warrant the exercise of the court’s original jurisdiction.
Consequently, Justice Idris struck out the suit for want of jurisdiction.
However, in a dissenting judgement, Justice Obande Ogbuinya held that the suit of the plaintiffs succeeded in part.
He agreed that the President has the power to declare a state of emergency, but held that such power cannot be used to suspend elected state officials, including governors, deputy governors, and members of state legislatures
