On Tuesday, President Bola Tinubu declared a state of emergency in Rivers State. He suspended Governor Siminalayi Fubara, his deputy Ngozi Odu, and all state legislators for six months. Tinubu appointed Vice Admiral Ibokette Ibas (rtd) as the interim administrator. This abrupt decision followed months of political conflict and escalating tensions in the state.

Political Instability in Rivers State

Rivers has been the epicenter of political chaos, with a bitter rivalry between Fubara and the state lawmakers. The conflict deepened after Fubara succeeded Nyesom Wike in May 2023. Despite efforts by Tinubu to mediate, the crisis continued to worsen. The declaration of a state of emergency now adds another layer of complexity to the already volatile situation.

Military Intervention: A Troubling Sign

Following the announcement, military vehicles were deployed to the Rivers State Government House in Port Harcourt. This move raises serious concerns about Nigeria’s democracy. If military personnel are called in to resolve political disputes at the state level, how long before this becomes a norm at the federal level? Such intervention is unsettling, especially given Nigeria’s fragile democratic system.

Shifting Stance on Military Intervention

This decision marks a sharp departure from earlier government stances. Just last year, many Nigerians voiced support for military intervention due to growing economic hardships. The government vehemently opposed these calls, arguing that the military had no role in governance. Yet, less than a year later, the military is being brought in to manage a political crisis in Rivers. This sudden shift in policy raises questions about the government’s consistency and commitment to democratic principles.

Tinubu’s Double Standards on State of Emergency

Tinubu’s actions also reflect his inconsistent views on the state of emergency. In 2013, he harshly criticized President Jonathan’s declaration of a state of emergency in Borno, Yobe, and Adamawa. Tinubu argued that Jonathan’s move was a political maneuver aimed at influencing the 2015 elections. Now, as president, Tinubu himself is using the same constitutional tool in Rivers State, citing security concerns and political instability.

A Change in Rhetoric

In his speech, Tinubu claimed that the situation in Rivers required extraordinary measures to restore governance, peace, and security. However, this reasoning contradicts his previous statements. Tinubu once condemned similar actions by Jonathan, calling them an assault on democracy. Now, as president, he is adopting the same approach he once criticized. This flip-flop raises questions about his political motivations and the true nature of his leadership.

Political Opportunism and Self-Interest

Many view Tinubu’s actions in Rivers as politically motivated. Rivers was a significant battleground in the 2023 elections, and Tinubu’s loss there likely weighs on his mind as he looks toward 2027. His intervention appears to be more about securing political control in the state than addressing the crisis at hand. This raises doubts about the sincerity of his actions.

The Cynicism Behind Tinubu’s Actions

Tinubu’s political career has often been marked by contradictions and self-interest. He has consistently criticized others for actions he now mirrors. From his opposition to emergency declarations to his recent embrace of them, Tinubu’s presidency has revealed a man willing to exploit any situation for his own gain. His double standards and opportunistic actions have eroded his credibility and weakened public trust in his leadership.

The Impact on Nigeria’s Democracy

This decision is not just about Rivers; it is a reflection of the state of Nigeria’s democracy. Allowing the president to wield such sweeping powers to suspend governors and lawmakers undermines the principle of checks and balances. It threatens the autonomy of state governments and sets a dangerous precedent for the future.

Learning from History: The Dangers of Military Intervention

History offers a stern warning against military involvement in political crises. In 1962, Prime Minister Tafawa Balewa declared a state of emergency in the Western Region, resulting in widespread violence. This intervention contributed to the political chaos that led to the military coup of 1966. The recent deployment of military forces to Rivers State echoes these troubling historical precedents, reminding us of the dangers of using the military to resolve political conflicts.

The Call for Dialogue, Not Military Action

While the political crisis in Rivers may have reached a boiling point, the solution lies in dialogue and constitutional processes, not military intervention. The use of the military in resolving state-level disputes risks further destabilizing Nigeria’s democracy. Instead of resorting to emergency measures, Tinubu should prioritize collaboration with key stakeholders to address the root causes of the crisis. By doing so, he can restore public trust and strengthen Nigeria’s democratic institutions.

A Democracy at a Crossroads

Tinubu’s state of emergency in Rivers State presents a critical moment for Nigeria’s democracy. If the president can suspend elected officials at will, it signals a weakening of democratic principles. The country’s future hinges on leaders who respect the Constitution and work within its bounds to resolve conflicts. As Tinubu’s presidency unfolds, it will be crucial to ensure that democracy remains intact and that such decisions do not become a norm.