Court Asked To Remove Rivers State Sole Administrator Ibas And Declare Appointment Unconstitutional

While President Bola Tinubu was cited as the 1st defendant, the Attorney-General of the Federation, Vice Admiral Ibas (Rtd), and the Attorneys-General of the 36 states of the federation were listed as the 2nd to 39th defendants in the suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/572/2025, which was filed before the court on Tuesday.

The suit, filed by Abuja-based legal practitioner Mr. Johnmary Jideobi, is also seeking a court order declaring void “all actions and decisions [howsoever described or made] of the 3rd Defendant [Vice Admiral Ibok-Ete Ibas (Rtd)] in the name of Sole Administrator of Rivers State, same being unconstitutional, null, and of no constitutional force throughout the Federal Republic of Nigeria for all purposes.”

The plaintiff further urged the court to issue a perpetual injunction restraining the 1st Defendant (Tinubu), whether by himself, his officers, agents, privies, servants, or any other person acting under his command, “from either removing, suspending, or otherwise tampering with the tenure of the Governor and Deputy Governor of Rivers State [and indeed any other State in Nigeria].”

Additionally, the suit seeks an order barring President Tinubu “either by himself, his officers, agents, privies, servants, or any other person acting under his command, from appointing any Sole Administrator into any State Government House in the thirty-six (36) states of the Federation for any purpose whatsoever.”

In the Originating Summons filed through a consortium of lawyers led by Mr. Chimezie Enuka, the plaintiff asked the court to determine:

“Whether, in view of the combined provisions of Sections 1, 5(2), 180, 188, 189, 305, and 306 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended) and their conflated interpretation, the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria [1st Defendant herein] has any constitutional authority [whatsoever] to either remove, suspend, or otherwise tamper with the tenure of the duly elected Governor and Deputy Governor of Rivers State [and indeed of any other State in Nigeria] and appoint a Sole Administrator [or any other substitute howsoever called or described] such as the 3rd Defendant for that State?”

Upon the determination of this question, the plaintiff sought a declaration that:

In a 32-paragraph affidavit supporting the suit, the plaintiff maintained that while President Tinubu has the constitutional power to declare a state of emergency in deserving circumstances, he does not have the authority to suspend elected officials like a governor, who is not his appointee.

“As a Nigerian lawyer, throughout my years of practice, I have never seen the term ‘Sole Administrator’ in the 1999 Constitution (as amended).

“I know that neither the 1st Defendant nor the 2nd Defendant appointed the Governor and Deputy Governor of Rivers State and that no Governor or Deputy Governor in Nigeria is an appointee of the 1st and 2nd Defendants.

“I know that Nigeria practices federalism, which is hinged on the separation of powers.

“I have instituted this suit in the public interest, to defend the Rule of Law, uphold the supremacy of the Constitution, and preserve the integrity of the Nigerian legal framework, which is the most sacred document holding the Nigerian state together.

“I am genuinely concerned that, without judicial intervention, the removal of duly elected Governors and Deputy Governors may become a routine practice by the President, thereby opening the floodgates of anarchy capable of consuming this nation.

“It will be in the interest of justice for this Honourable Court to grant the prayers contained in this Originating Summons,” the plaintiff argued.

Meanwhile, no date has been fixed for the hearing of the case.