Why Justice Emiaso Calls Tinubu's Move In Rivers State A 'Grave Error'

Ex-Judge Slams Tinubu's Actions: A Constitutional Crisis in the Making?

Let me break this down for you. A former President of the Delta State Customary Court, Justice Miakpor Emiaso (retd.), has come out swinging against President Bola Tinubu’s decision to release Rivers State's federal allocation directly to the Sole Administrator. He didn’t mince words, calling it a "grave error" and labeling it as unconstitutional. This isn’t just a small hiccup; it’s a big deal, folks.

In a sit-down with Vanguard, Justice Emiaso made his position crystal clear, emphasizing that President Tinubu's move was a direct violation of constitutional principles. He wasn’t shy about voicing his concerns. In his own words, he said, “It is unlawful, it is unconstitutional, you cannot release funds to a sole administrator, and I mean it is very wrong.” That’s a pretty strong statement, don’t you think?

Why the Constitution Doesn’t Back Tinubu’s Move

Now, let’s dive deeper into why Justice Emiaso is so riled up. He pointed out that the Nigerian Constitution doesn’t even mention the concept of appointing a sole administrator to govern a state. To him, this whole idea is fundamentally flawed. He explained that any actions taken by such an administrator would be considered "ultra vires," which is legal jargon for "beyond their legal powers." In simpler terms, those actions would be null and void, as if they never happened.

Read also:

Elaine Welteroths Net Worth 2024 The Journey Of A Powerhouse Journalist

He elaborated, saying, “The constitution does not conceive of a situation where you even appoint a sole administrator to run a state. Appointing a sole administrator is unconstitutional; anything the sole administrator does there is ultra vires, null, and void because there is no arrangement under the constitution for the appointment of a sole administrator to administer a state.” It’s like trying to fit a square peg into a round hole—it just doesn’t work.

The Bigger Picture: Democracy at Stake

Justice Emiaso didn’t stop there. He also expressed serious concerns about the implications of President Tinubu’s decision to suspend Rivers State Governor, Siminalayi Fubara. He warned that this sets a dangerous precedent, one that could undermine Nigeria’s democratic system. Imagine a scenario where the president can arbitrarily suspend any governor across the country. That’s a slippery slope, and it’s one that could erode the very foundations of democracy in Nigeria.

He stressed this point, saying, “There is no arrangement in the constitution that permits any authority in this country to suspend an elected officer, least of all a governor, so the president suspending the governor of Rivers State is a very major threat to our democratic system.” It’s not just about Rivers State; it’s about the future of governance in Nigeria.

Furthermore, Justice Emiaso cited numerous court decisions that reinforce the idea that no one—not even the president—has the authority to suspend an elected governor or members of a state legislature. He reminded everyone that there is a defined constitutional process for removing elected officials, and suspension is not part of that process.

He concluded by reiterating this crucial point, saying, “There are so many decisions of our courts to that effect that nobody can suspend the governor. Nobody can suspend even members of the House of Assembly if they are elected. There is a process for removing them, and it is not by suspension.” It’s a powerful reminder that the rule of law must always prevail.

As reported by Naija News, this controversy highlights the ongoing tension between executive power and constitutional boundaries in Nigeria. It’s a conversation that needs to continue if we hope to strengthen our democracy and ensure that leaders act within the limits of the law.

Read also:

Carroll Oconnors Net Worth 2024 A Legendary Career In Numbers