The Presidency has dismissed claims linking Vice President Kashim Shettima’s remarks at a book launch in Abuja to recent developments in Rivers State involving Governor Siminalayi Fubara and President Bola Tinubu.
Naijaonpoint reports that Shettima during the public presentation of OPL 245: The Inside Story of the $1.3 Billion Oil Block, a book written by former Attorney General of the Federation, Mohammed Bello Adoke, (SAN) referenced a historical episode during the Jonathan administration when there were moves to remove him as Governor of Borno State at the height of the Boko Haram insurgency.
Speaking via a statement on Friday, the Senior Special Assistant to the President on Media and Communications (Office of the Vice President), Stanley Nkwocha, clarified that Shettima’s statement was in the context of acknowledging Adoke’s role as a public official and did not amount to commentary on current political events.
He described the media interpretations as “gross misrepresentation” and “reckless endangerment of national cohesion.”
Nkwocha said, “Some news outlets have irresponsibly twisted the Vice President’s account of how the administration of former President Goodluck Jonathan floated the idea of removing him from office, then as governor of Borno State, in the most intense and critical phase of insurgency in the North East region of the country.
“The sensational reporting disappointingly tried to erect a highly mendacious argument about the state of emergency declared in Rivers State and the subsequent suspension of Governor Siminalayi Fubara by His Excellency, Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu, GCFR, President and Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.
“We wish to state categorically that Vice President Shettima’s comments were made within the specific context of acknowledging the author’s past professional conduct during his tenure as Attorney General of the Federation. His remarks were historical references to events that occurred during the Jonathan administration, and constituted nothing more than an intellectual discourse on Nigeria’s constitutional evolution.
“This rare moment of retrospection was purely illustrative, intended to demonstrate how our constitutional democracy has matured within the capacity to resolve complex federal-state tensions through established legal mechanisms.”
Nkwocha said such a comparison was unfounded and misleading, stating that the President did not remove Governor Fubara from office.
For the avoidance of doubt, President Tinubu did not remove Governor Fubara from office. The constitutional action taken was suspension, and not outright removal. It was part of the measures implemented, including the state of emergency declared, in response to the grave circumstances surrounding the polity in Rivers State at the time.
“It is more so considering the unprecedented situation where the State House of Assembly complex was under demolition and the Governor was facing a looming threat of impeachment (outright removal from office) from the embattled members of the state legislature,” he said.
Nkwocha also defended the legality of President Tinubu’s intervention in Rivers State, noting that it was done in accordance with Section 305 of the 1999 Constitution following security threats and political instability in the state.
“President Tinubu followed the constitutional process with honest precision. The President’s proclamation properly invoked Section 305(2), which was subsequently ratified by an overwhelming bipartisan majority in the National Assembly,” he stated.