 |
| Vacant seats highlight crisis at Zamfara assembly. |
A team of public-interest lawyers has sued President Tinubu over Zamfara’s crisis. They filed suit FHC/ABJ/CS/1363/2025 to make him declare an emergency. Their case cites worsening insecurity and a suspended assembly that lacks quorum.
The plaintiffs named include Reuben Boma Esq., Okoro Nwadiegwu Esq., and One Love Foundation. They ask the court to compel the National Assembly to take over lawmaking. They claim this step would restore peace and democracy.
Filed July 8, 2025, by lead counsel Goddy Uche, SAN, the suit raises four key questions under the 1999 Constitution. First, can the president declare an emergency when security and legislative functions collapse? Second, does Section 305 allow him to remove the governor if needed?
Third, can the House of Representatives assume assembly duties when ten lawmakers face illegal suspension? Fourth, is the assembly’s quorum issue enough to justify federal takeover? Each point seeks declaratory and mandatory relief from the court.
The lawyers argue that outlaw groups now move freely thanks to this vacuum. They say locals fear for property and lives. They warn that delays could feed national instability beyond Zamfara’s borders.
Tinubu’s team must respond within the statutory 14 days. The AGF appears as co-defendant alongside the Speaker and the Zamfara governor. The outcome could set a major precedent for federal intervention in state crises.
Critics fear emergency measures could weaken state autonomy. They argue that political disputes, not only security issues, fuel this crisis. Some say court handling offers a better route than direct federal rule. Others warn against opening constitutional loopholes.
Supporters counter that assembly paralysis left citizens voiceless. They note that suspended lawmakers belong to both APC and PDP. They view the suspension as anti-democratic and harmful to governance. They back the lawyers’ call for swift federal action.
Experts say Section 305 grants broad emergency powers when “grave threat” exists. They note past use in Rivers State stoked debate on limits. They expect the court to weigh security needs against democratic norms.
Either way, this case shines a light on Nigeria’s fragile federal balance. It may reshape how crises link security, politics, and law at the state level. The nation watches as Abuja’s courtroom takes center stage.