A Federal High Court in Abuja has scheduled March 9 to deliver judgment in a fresh suit challenging the legal authority of President Bola Tinubu to remove elected state officials during a state of emergency.
Justice James Omotosho set the date after lawyers for both sides adopted their processes and presented arguments for and against the case.
Which was filed by the Civil Society Observatory for Constitutional and Legal Compliance (CSOCLC).
The suit specifically contests actions taken by Tinubu following his declaration of a state of emergency in Rivers State last year.
Including the suspension or removal of elected officials and the appointment of an interim administrator.
Plaintiffs argue that while the president may declare an emergency under Section 305 of the Constitution, he lacks the power to suspend or remove elected executive and legislative officers and install an interim administrator.
Calling such actions unconstitutional, null and void.
Lawyers for the defence, which includes the president and the Attorney‑General of the Federation, have urged the court to strike out the case.
Saying the Emergency Powers (Jurisdiction) Act of 1962, and a 2025 presidential order modifying it, give the president authority and that only the Supreme Court has original jurisdiction over such disputes.
The case revives a long‑running constitutional debate over the extent of presidential emergency powers in Nigeria, a question previously addressed by the Supreme Court in related litigation.
A previous suit challenging Tinubu’s emergency measures in Rivers State was dismissed by the apex court on jurisdictional grounds.
With the court ruling that the plaintiffs had failed to establish a cause of action invoking the Supreme Court’s original jurisdiction.
The outcome of the March hearing could have implications for how emergency powers are defined and exercised in Nigeria’s federal system.
