MARCEL MBAMALU
Rivers State: A Cycle of Chaos – Will Anyone Listen?
For three years, Rivers State has been trapped in a vortex of political turmoil, with no end in sight.
The latest drama: a third impeachment attempt against Governor Siminalayi Fubara, amidst a bitter power struggle with his predecessor, Nyesom Wike, the current Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja. But amidst the finger-pointing and blame game, a crucial question gets lost: what about the people of Rivers State?
This isn’t just a tale of political rivalry; it’s a symptom of a deeper disease – a system that prioritizes power struggles over public welfare. The federal government’s repeated interventions, including a controversial state of emergency, have only exacerbated the crisis. It’s time to ask: are we managing crises or just perpetuating them?
Join our WhatsApp ChannelDespite a recent interim injunction from the Rivers State High Court, which restrained Speaker Martins Amaewhule, the Chief Judge, Justice Simeon Amadi, and others from receiving, forwarding, considering, or acting on any impeachment-related documents for seven days, it might seem the tension will calm, but the city remains unsettled.
For ordinary citizens who protested against the six-month emergency last year and remain at the epicentre of the crisis, life since 2023 has brought little but uncertainty and disruption. They have seen no meaningful governance, only repeated political clashes that fuel fear and frustration. The saga exposes a systemic failure of Rivers State and Nigeria’s institutions.
With the All Progressives Congress now entangled in the conflict, the question is urgent: how much longer will the people of Rivers bear the cost of political gamesmanship?
At its core, the turmoil in Rivers State springs from a bitter struggle for control of the state’s political structure and resources between Governor Fubara and Wike, his predecessor and erstwhile political godfather.
Fubara has repeatedly framed the crisis as a battle for governance autonomy, insisting the feud is about who controls the state’s resources and how they are used for public benefit. He has urged citizens to rise above what he calls “political noise”, saying his focus is on stability and prudent use of state funds.
Wike, on the other hand, has openly criticised Fubara for reneging on peace directives agreed under federal mediation, and has said he aimed to see Fubara removed from office outright, not merely pacified by temporary measures. He has accused the governor of failing to implement agreed actions and of disrespecting the spirit of reconciliation, describing the conflict as a struggle over who controls the machinery of government in the oil-rich state.
Yet none of these actors, across the federal, state, and party lines, has paused to confront the central issue: the rights and welfare of the people of Rivers State. Not the federal government that imposed emergency powers, not the institutions that brokered peace deals, and not the political camps locked in endless rivalry.
READ ALSO: AFCON FINAL: How Referee Chaos, Officiating Outrage Tainted Senegal’s Win
When Fubara urges citizens to remain calm, it is fair to ask whether this calm serves the public interest or merely buys time for political survival. And when Wike presses his influence relentlessly, questions arise about motive. Is this about legacy and principle, or about power, relevance, and control of resources? In this silence around citizens’ rights, Rivers people remain spectators to a struggle fought over them, but never for them.
Strings of Confusion: From Federal to State and from State to Court
For months after President Tinubu declared a six-month state of emergency in the state in March 2025, citizens and legal minds alike waited for clarity from the judiciary on one central question: was the suspension of the elected government and the imposition of a federal administration lawful? The answer never came cleanly.
All of the string of over 40 suits by Rivers indigenes challenging the emergency rule went unanswered, leaving their questions unresolved. Rather, most were demised. On 2 October 2025, Justice James Omotosho of the Federal High Court in Abuja dismissed three suits challenging the emergency rule, holding that the court lacked jurisdiction to entertain the matter and that only the Supreme Court could determine the legality of the proclamation or suspension of elected officials.
He said the plaintiffs, including Rivers indigenes, could not show they had the legal standing to sue because none was a member of the State Executive Council or House of Assembly, and without that standing, the court could not entertain the complaints.
Months later, after the emergency rule had already been lifted, when it already felt the judgment was largely useless for the people of Rivers, the Supreme Court delivered a split judgment on the matter. In December, a seven-member panel upheld preliminary objections and struck out the suit brought by 11 Peoples Democratic Party-led states against the emergency declaration because the plaintiffs failed to establish a dispute within the court’s original jurisdiction. Lead Justice Mohammed Idris said the court could only hear disputes between the federation and a state if a clear cause of action existed, and that threshold was not met in the Rivers case.
The confusion has even been compounded by mixed signals from key political actors. Wike has repeatedly warned that Fubara would not go for a second tenure, while the All Progressives Congress (APC) has attacked Wike, questioning his motives and involvement in the state’s political chaos.
It is hard not to ask: if Fubara had been in APC from the outset, would the federal government have declared a state of emergency? Yet even as interventions falter, the federal government initially seemed to support Wike’s position.
This confusion persists even as the 2027 general elections approach raising fresh questions about how any future federal intervention would be justified. Even if Fubara secures a second term next year, will Wike step aside, or will the struggle simply assume a new form?
Government as Symbolic Measures or Solutions?
In essence, the federal and state authorities appear to be repeating past mistakes rather than learning from them, intervening again and again without confronting the structural causes of Rivers State’s instability.
Political dominance has been prioritised over institutional balance, and personal influence over democratic renewal. Instead of constantly managing crises, the government must allow governance to breathe.
This means enforcing agreements, respecting the separation of powers, and creating space for new political actors to contest freely without intimidation or godfatherism.
Stability will not come from emergency declarations or fragile peace deals, but from deliberate restraint by powerful figures and a willingness to let institutions function without manipulation. If those who have dominated Rivers politics for years cannot resolve the conflict, then it is time for them to step back and allow a new political order to emerge.
Rivers State’s recurring confusion now threatens to become a dangerous national precedent, one where political rivalry routinely overrides law, order, and public welfare.
Therefore, without such a reset, continued federal and state interventions will only waste public resources, erode trust, and deepen the cynicism of ordinary Rivers people who have endured years of disruption without relief.
The people of Rivers State deserve better. They deserve governance, not just symbolic measures. It’s time for the powerful to step back and let institutions work. The question is: will they listen?
