In recent days, a coalition of civil society organizations (CSOs) in Osun State under the sponsorship of the opposition APC has made headlines by urging President Bola Tinubu to declare a state of emergency in the state, because it is obviously politically motivated and I can say these group are working for the APC and the Osun people needs to be careful of them.
Their rationale? Alleged persistent disregard for court orders concerning local government administration by Governor Ademola Adeleke’s administration. This call comes amid an ongoing tussle over control of local government councils, where the opposition All Progressives Congress (APC) claims that court judgments recognize their elected chairmen and councilors as the legitimate administrators, while the ruling People’s Democratic Party (PDP) under Adeleke maintains otherwise.
Tragically, the dispute has escalated to violence, including the reported killing of a local government chairman, heightening fears of anarchy.
However, this plea for a state of emergency is not just misguided it’s a dangerous ploy that threatens the very fabric of democracy in Osun and Nigeria at large. Anyone pushing for such a drastic measure is, in essence, an enemy of the people, prioritizing political vendettas over peaceful resolution and constitutional governance.
Let’s unpack why this call should be rejected outright, and add more compelling reasons beyond the surface-level drama.
The Context: A Politically Charged Local Government Impasse
The crisis in Osun’s local governments stems from long-standing disputes over elections and administration. In 2022, under former Governor Gboyega Oyetola (APC), local elections were held, but Adeleke’s PDP government, which took office later that year, challenged their legitimacy. Courts, including the Appeal and Supreme Courts, have issued rulings that the CSOs claim affirm the APC-led councils’ rights. Yet, the state government accuses the APC of mismanaging funds, illegally occupying councils, and provoking violence to create instability.
Governor Adeleke has dismissed the CSOs’ call as a “failed desperate act” orchestrated by Oyetola and his allies, including Bola Oyebamiji, to destabilize the state after failing to regain power through other means. He argues that the APC is the root cause of the disturbances, having seized local funds and used police to enforce their claims illegally. This isn’t a neutral cry for order; it’s a partisan maneuver in a state where political rivalries run deep.
Why Declaring a State of Emergency Would Be a Grave Mistake
Under Section 305 of the 1999 Constitution, a president can declare a state of emergency if there’s a clear breakdown of public order or if governance can’t proceed constitutionally. The CSOs invoke this, claiming lives are at risk and the rule of law is collapsing. But Osun isn’t in a state of widespread chaos akin to a war zone or natural disaster. Isolated incidents of violence, while regrettable, do not justify suspending democratic processes and handing control to federal appointees.
Here are additional reasons why this move would harm rather than help:
1. Undermining Federalism and Democracy: Nigeria’s federal structure grants states significant autonomy, including over local governments. Imposing emergency rule from Abuja would set a precedent for federal overreach, allowing the central government to meddle in state affairs for political gain. In a multi-party democracy, this could be weaponized against opposition-led states, eroding trust in institutions and fueling separatist sentiments.
2. Escalating Tensions Instead of Resolving Them: Emergency declarations often lead to more unrest, as seen in past Nigerian cases like in Plateau or Ekiti States. Suspending the governor and assembly could provoke protests, deepen divisions between PDP and APC supporters, and even invite external agitators. The CSOs’ call ignores that dialogue and judicial enforcement through contempt proceedings or police action could address court non-compliance without such extremes.
3. Economic and Social Fallout: Osun is already grappling with economic challenges, including infrastructure deficits and unemployment. An emergency rule would disrupt ongoing projects under Adeleke, such as road constructions and health initiatives, leading to job losses and stalled development. Innocent citizens, already burdened by inflation and insecurity nationwide, would suffer the most from this unnecessary upheaval.
4. Lack of Genuine Crisis Justification: Reports indicate the crisis is contained to political actors, not a broad societal breakdown. The governor’s office asserts there’s no basis for emergency, pointing to the APC’s frustration over lost elections as the real driver. If court orders are being flouted, the judiciary has mechanisms to enforce them without presidential intervention. Why bypass these for a sledgehammer approach?
5. Risk of Authoritarianism: In a nation still healing from military rule eras, emergency declarations evoke memories of suppressed freedoms. It could curtail civil liberties, muzzle the press, and empower security forces excessively, leading to human rights abuses. The people of Osun deserve better than to be pawns in a power game.
A Call for Truth-Seeking and Peaceful Resolution
Rather than heeding these alarmist calls, President Tinubu should encourage mediation through bodies like the National Judicial Council or a bipartisan committee. Both sides must respect court rulings, but allegations of misrepresentation need impartial review. The focus should be on strengthening local governance nationwide, perhaps through clearer constitutional amendments on LG autonomy, as recent Supreme Court decisions have aimed to do.
In the end, those advocating for a state of emergency aren’t champions of justice they’re antagonists to progress. Osun’s people want stability, development, and fair play, not federal imposition. Let democracy prevail; anything less makes one an enemy of the very people they claim to protect.
E-signed: Hon. Comrade James Onifade
Advocate for Good Governance and A Better Judicial System
