Senator Henry Seriake Dickson has accused Senate President Godswill Akpabio of suppressing opposition voices during the deliberations on the controversial state of emergency declared in Rivers State. The accusation, made during a tense Senate session, has further fueled concerns over the legality and political motivations behind the federal government’s decision.
The emergency rule, declared by President Bola Tinubu, has been met with resistance from opposition lawmakers, civil society groups, and some legal experts, who argue that the move lacks constitutional justification. The Senate was expected to debate the matter extensively, but tensions flared when Senator Dickson attempted to challenge the process under Senate Order 135, which requires a presidential briefing before such a declaration.
Eyewitnesses at the closed-door session reported that Dickson was repeatedly interrupted by Akpabio, who allegedly dismissed his objections based on previous public statements made by the senator. The session ended with a contentious voice vote approving the emergency rule, prompting Dickson, alongside Senators Aminu Tambuwal and Enyinnaya Abaribe, to stage a walkout in protest.
“This is an affront to democracy,” Dickson stated in a press briefing following the session. “The Senate President refused to allow a full debate on an issue that fundamentally alters the governance of Rivers State. We will not sit back and watch the constitution trampled upon.”
The emergency rule suspends the Rivers State government and places the state under the direct administration of Vice Admiral Ibok-ete Ibas (retd.), the appointed Sole Administrator. Critics argue that the move is a calculated attempt to weaken political opposition in the South-South region ahead of the 2027 elections.
In response to Dickson’s allegations, pro-government lawmakers defended Akpabio’s conduct, arguing that the emergency rule was necessary to stabilize Rivers State following weeks of political turmoil. Senate Majority Leader Opeyemi Bamidele dismissed claims of bias, stating, “The decision was made in the interest of national security and the stability of the region.”
Legal experts and political analysts have warned that the federal government’s intervention in Rivers could set a dangerous precedent, with potential court challenges expected in the coming weeks. Meanwhile, labour unions and civil society organizations have vowed to resist what they describe as an “undemocratic imposition” on the people of Rivers State.
With the crisis deepening, all eyes are now on the judiciary and political stakeholders to determine the next steps in what is shaping up to be one of Nigeria’s most significant constitutional battles in recent history.
