The Human Rights Writers Association of Nigeria (HURIWA) has called on the Supreme Court of Nigeria to deliver a fair and impartial ruling in the ongoing case challenging President Bola Tinubu’s state of emergency declaration and the suspension of Siminilayi Fubara, Governor of Rivers State.
According to HURIWA, the case represents a critical moment for the Nigerian Judiciary, which has been plagued by a significant loss of public confidence in its integrity.
In a statement issued by Emmanuel Onwubiko, the National Coordinator of HURIWA, the Advocacy Group emphasised that the Supreme Court now has the final opportunity to restore public trust in the judicial system.
HURIWA expressed concerns over what it perceived as a compromised Judiciary, with allegations that President Tinubu’s influence over the Court, particularly through his association with the current Chief Justice of Nigeria, had led to a series of controversial rulings.
Read also: HURIWA condemns state of emergency in Rivers, calls at a ‘Coup Against Democracy’
This, the Group said, included the 2020 Supreme Court decision that controversially declared Hope Uzodimma the winner of the Imo State Governorship election, despite him finishing fourth in the race.
HURIWA further criticised the Court for its recent judgment, which it described as politically motivated, in which Justice Emmanuel Agim ruled against Governor Fubara and stopped the Central Bank of Nigeria from remitting federal allocations to the Rivers State Government.
This ruling, according to HURIWA, destabilised the democratic structures in Rivers State and paved the way for the unconstitutional suspension of Governor Fubara by President Tinubu.
The Rights Group also raised alarms over the lack of accountability for Agim (Justice) who was seen fraternising with former Rivers State Governor and current Federal Capital Territory Minister, Nyesom Wike, at a University event.
HURIWA questioned the Judiciary’s independence, alleging a troubling alignment with the Executive Arm of Government.
“At the heart of the case before the Supreme Court is whether the President has the constitutional authority to suspend an elected state governor, an issue raised by a coalition of 11 opposition-led States.
“These States: Adamawa, Enugu, Osun, Oyo, Bauchi, Akwa Ibom, Plateau, Delta, Taraba, Zamfara, and Bayelsa are asking the court to clarify whether the President’s actions in suspending a governor and replacing him with an unelected administrator fall within the scope of his powers under the 1999 Constitution”, HURIWA noted.
Read also: Ijaw Youths Council challenges Rivers emergency rule at ECOWAS Court
According to the statement, the governors argued that the President’s actions are unconstitutional, citing several provisions of the Constitution, including those concerning the powers of state governors and the process for declaring a state of emergency.
It also noted that the suit, marked SC/CV/329/2025, challenges whether the President can lawfully interfere with state governments by removing governors and appointing administrators without due process.
HURIWA, which believes that there is no constitutional basis for the President’s actions, however, called on the Chief Justice of Nigeria, Kudirat Kekere-Ekun, to ensure that the Supreme Court rules in accordance with the Constitution, warning that the Court’s decision will significantly impact the future of Nigeria’s democracy.
“The judgment in this matter will be a litmus test for Nigeria’s commitment to constitutional democracy. If the Supreme Court endorses the President’s actions, it will signal the erosion of democratic structures in favor of authoritarian rule”, HURIWA declared.
