Does the President Have the Power to Remove or Suspend a Democratically Elected Governor of a State?

The recent declaration of a state of emergency in Rivers State has sparked a heated constitutional debate, particularly concerning the purported suspension of the Governor, Deputy Governor, and Members of the State House of Assembly. This development raises fundamental questions about the powers of the President under Nigeria’s constitutional framework and whether the removal of elected officials under emergency rule is lawful.

Understanding the President’s Emergency Powers Under the Constitution

Section 305 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended) empowers the President to declare a state of emergency under specific conditions. These include war, external aggression, a breakdown of public order to the extent that regular legal measures are ineffective, or other extraordinary public dangers.

However, while the President may declare an emergency, does this confer the power to remove or suspend elected officials?

A careful examination of the Constitution reveals that the removal of a Governor and other elected officials is a separate process governed by distinct constitutional provisions.

The Process For Removing a Governor of a State in Nigeria.

Section 188 of the Constitution explicitly outlines the process for the removal of a Governor or Deputy Governor. This process is strictly vested in the State House of Assembly and requires the following steps:

1. Notice of Allegations:

A written notice of allegations of gross misconduct must be signed by at least one-third (1/3) of the members of the State House of Assembly and presented to the Speaker.

2. Speaker Serves the Governor:

The Speaker must serve the Governor within seven (7) days of receiving the notice.

3. House of Assembly Resolution:

The Governor has 14 days to respond.

The House of Assembly must then pass a resolution by two-thirds (2/3) majority to continue the impeachment process.

4. Panel of Investigation:

Within 7 days of passing the resolution, the Chief Judge of the State must set up a 7-member panel to investigate the allegations.

The panel must complete its investigation within 3 months (90 days).

5. Final Resolution:

If the panel finds the Governor guilty, the House of Assembly can remove the Governor by another two-thirds (2/3) majority vote.

This clearly means that the President lacks the power to unilaterally remove or suspend a sitting Governor, even under emergency rule. Any such action bypasses constitutional safeguards and violates Nigeria’s democratic order.

Does a State of Emergency Automatically Remove Elected Officials?

The case of Plateau State House of Assembly v. Attorney-General of the Federation (2006) 17 NWLR (Pt. 1008) 179 established that a state of emergency does not give the President the power to remove or suspend an elected Governor, Deputy Governor, or State House of Assembly members.

The court held that:

A declaration of emergency does not suspend elected officials—they remain in office unless removed through constitutional means. The Constitution does not grant the President the authority to remove or replace elected officials, even when an emergency is declared. The role of emergency powers is primarily to restore order, not to usurp governance structures.

The court held further that:

The President cannot remove a Governor—only the State House of Assembly can do so under Section 188 of the Constitution.

Additionally, Section 305(2) states that any proclamation of emergency must receive approval from the National Assembly within a specific timeframe to remain valid. This further underscores the fact that emergency powers are not absolute and must align with constitutional processes.

The Dangers of Suspending Elected Officials Under Emergency Rule

Allowing the President to remove a Governor under emergency rule poses serious dangers to Nigeria’s democracy:

1. A Threat to Federalism – Nigeria operates under a federal system where state governments have constitutional autonomy. Any attempt to remove a Governor by executive order undermines this structure.

2. A Dangerous Precedent – If this action is permitted, it could set a precedent where future Presidents might use emergency declarations to remove political opponents.

3. A Violation of Democratic Principles – Elected officials derive their mandate from the people. Their removal should follow legal and constitutional processes, not executive fiat.

What should be done: Upholding Constitutional Governance

Given the implications of this situation, it is essential that all actions taken in Rivers State and elsewhere adhere strictly to the Constitution. The role of the judiciary, civil society, and international observers is crucial in ensuring that democratic norms are not eroded.

To protect Nigeria’s democracy:

The National Assembly must reject any attempt to ratify unconstitutional removals of elected officials.

Legal actions should be pursued to challenge any unconstitutional acts.

Political conflicts should be resolved through legal and democratic channels rather than arbitrary executive actions.

Conclusion

The decision in Plateau State House of Assembly v. AG Federation reinforces the illegality of removing or suspending a Governor under emergency rule. If the President or any other authority attempts to “suspend” a Governor without following the provisions of Section 188 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended), such an action is illegal and void.

Thus, the President’s purported suspension of Governor Fubara, the Deputy Governor, and the Rivers State House of Assembly is unconstitutional, as the Constitution does not empower the President to remove elected officials under emergency rule.

---

About Author