Kenneth Okonkwo, a prominent legal practitioner and chieftain of the African Democratic Congress (ADC), has sharply criticized a recent Supreme Court judgment that upheld President Bola Tinubu’s authority to declare a state of emergency, particularly in the context of ongoing tensions in Rivers State. The actor-turned-politician described the ruling as a dangerous endorsement of executive overreach, arguing it paves the way for authoritarianism under the guise of constitutional powers.
Delivering his remarks amid heightened political scrutiny, Okonkwo questioned the necessity and timing of such declarations, insisting they undermine Nigeria’s fragile democracy.
The Supreme Court, in a majority decision delivered around December 14, 2025, reaffirmed the President’s constitutional discretion under Section 305 to impose states of emergency in response to threats of law and order breakdown.
Justice Idris, reading the lead judgment, emphasized that the provision allows for “extraordinary measures” without a rigid definition, effectively validating executive actions in crises. This ruling comes against the backdrop of recent political unrest in Rivers State, where Governor Siminalayi Fubara has faced challenges from assembly defections and federal interventions, including earlier disputes over allocations that the court addressed by ordering withholdings until rectification.
Okonkwo, known for his outspoken critiques of governance, lambasted the decision as inconsistent with prior judicial precedents and real security threats elsewhere in Nigeria. He highlighted the absence of genuine crisis in Rivers prior to federal involvement, stating there was “no breakdown of law and order that warranted extraordinary measures” and accusing the President of initiating the turmoil himself.
“What was it in Rivers State that required extraordinary measure? 500 persons were roasted in Benue State. The President did not think there was need for extraordinary measure. Boko Haram has been liquidating our officers and citizens,” Okonkwo remarked, contrasting it with unaddressed national insecurities.
Further intensifying his rhetoric, Okonkwo labeled the use of the Supreme Court judgment to justify emergency measures as “bewitchment,” alleging the All Progressives Congress (APC) has evolved from deception to enchantment in controlling narratives. ”
APC has upgraded from deceiving people through lies to bewitching people through enchantment… Supreme Court judgment is meant to resolve disputes and Supreme Court judgment has resolved the disputes… So how can you use the same Supreme Court judgment to initiate crisis in Rivers State?” he questioned, pointing to the Governor’s public commitment to abide by the ruling. He argued that post-judgment peace in Rivers rendered any emergency declaration superfluous and politically motivated.
Okonkwo’s comments echo his history of challenging judicial outcomes, as seen in past statements where he accepted Supreme Court finality as a democrat despite disagreements, such as in 2023 election matters. In this instance, he warned that the ruling empowers presidents to weaponize emergency powers against opposition strongholds, drawing parallels to Rivers’ allocation disputes where the court intervened decisively.
As a legal expert with deep roots in Nigerian constitutional discourse, Okonkwo urged citizens to resist what he termed a slide into “full-blown dictatorship,” reminiscent of his earlier reactions to Rivers crises.
