Kenneth Okonkwo, a renowned Nigerian actor, lawyer, and politician, has strongly condemned President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s recent declaration of a state of emergency in Rivers State.
Expressing his views through a detailed post on his Instagram page, the 56-year-old movie star labeled the move as both illegal and unconstitutional. According to him, such a drastic measure does not align with the principles of democracy, which safeguard the rights of elected representatives and the people they serve.
Okonkwo’s reaction has since sparked widespread debate, with many Nigerians questioning the legality and implications of the President’s decision.
Clarifying his stance, Okonkwo provided a detailed explanation of what a state of emergency entails. He stated that it is fundamentally aimed at restoring order in times of crisis and does not include the removal of duly elected officials.
“The removal of the elected Governor and House of Assembly members of Rivers State for six months in Tinubu’s declaration of a state of emergency in Rivers State is illegal and unconstitutional,” he emphasized.
According to him, suspending the fundamental rights of citizens may sometimes be necessary to restore order, but it must be done within the confines of the law.
“A state of emergency, when declared, simply means the suspension of some fundamental rights of citizens to enable the government to restore order in a state of anarchy. It does not involve the removal of elected representatives of the people,” he reiterated.
Drawing comparisons from historical precedents, Okonkwo reminded the public of how former President Goodluck Jonathan handled a similar situation in 2013. He pointed out that when a state of emergency was declared in the northeastern states of Borno, Yobe, and Adamawa to combat Boko Haram insurgents, Jonathan did not remove the sitting governors from office.
“President Jonathan declared a state of emergency in Borno, Yobe, and Adamawa in order to tackle the Boko Haram terrorists and did not remove Governor Shettima and others from office,” Okonkwo stressed. This, he argued, sets a clear precedent that a state of emergency does not justify the unconstitutional removal of elected leaders.
Furthermore, Okonkwo criticized the notion that the Rivers State Governor should bear the blame for the security challenges facing the state. He asserted that ensuring national security is the exclusive responsibility of the Federal Government, which controls all security agencies, including the police, military, and intelligence services.
“The security of Nigeria is the exclusive reserve of the Federal Government, which controls all the security forces,” he stated firmly. According to him, holding the Governor accountable for security lapses when he lacks direct control over law enforcement agencies is both unfair and misplaced.
Okonkwo’s remarks have ignited further discussions about the limits of presidential power and the importance of upholding democratic principles. His argument underscores the need for the Nigerian government to adhere to constitutional provisions when handling security matters.
Many Nigerians, including legal experts and political analysts, have echoed similar concerns, warning against any actions that could set a dangerous precedent for future administrations.
As the debate continues, the people of Rivers State and the nation at large await further clarifications on how the state of emergency will be implemented and whether any legal challenges will arise from this controversial decision.
