TITLE:
Nigerian Governors Get Jittery When “State of Emergency” Is Mentioned: A Juristic Overview of S.305 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 as Amended
AUTHORS:
Benjamin O. Igwenyi, Chinwe C. Nwogbo-Egwu, Chinedu A. Igwe
KEYWORDS:
State of Emergency, Proclamation, Constitution, Amendment, Normalcy
JOURNAL NAME:
Beijing Law Review,
Vol.10 No.5,
December
20,
2019
ABSTRACT: The Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 as amended empowers the country’s President in section 305 to declare a State Emergency in the whole country or any part thereof if the country is involved in any crisis situation caused by either human beings or natural phenomena such as earthquake, floods, erosion etc. The essence of this provision is to enable the president to restore peace and order during that period of emergency after which normalcy will return. The International Convent on Civil and Political Rights 1966 (ICCPR) of the United Nations allows countries to declare state of emergency which will involve taking measures to solve either man-made or natural exigencies and to return the country immediately to constitutional order as soon as the emergency is over. Purportedly, acting under section 305 as aforementioned, two former Presidents of Nigeria in 2004, 2006 and 2013 declared state of emergencies in 5 (five) states of the country. In the 2004 and 2006 events, President Olusegun Obasanjo in declaring state of emergency in Plateau State and Ekiti State respectively suspended the Governors of the 2 (two) states and their Houses of Assembly for 6 (six) months and appointed former military officers to act as Administrators of the States. In the 2013 event, President Goodluck Jonathan declared state of emergency in Adamawa, Yobe and Borno States because of the activities of Boko Haram extremists in the region but did not suspend democratic structures. As a result of the events in the states where state of emergency had been declared in Nigeria in the past, sitting Governors and their Houses of Assembly live and work in fear whenever the word “state of emergency” is mentioned with regard to their States. This paper argues, using historical and doctrinal methods that section 305 of the Constitution does not give the President power to suspend any Governor or prevent the Houses of Assembly from performing their functions because of state of emergency and suggests that section 305 (3) should be amended to state clearly what the President should do in each occasion whenever a state of emergency is declared either because of natural disaster or civil disobedience in the country, instead of leaving the President to do whatever he wants whenever he declares state of emergency.