How Wande Abimbola rejected IBB’s ING bait, and other stories (2)

Tunde Odesola

(Published in The PUNCH, on Friday, March 28, 2025)

Once upon a time in the land of Ìwásè, Orunmila, Yoruba god of Wisdom and Divination, thought to showcase Yoruba science, divination, arts and philosophy to mankind; so, he codified the four aforementioned essence of human existence into a body of knowledge called Ifa.

As science, Ifa embodies the study and prescription of herbal medicine for healing, with its practitioners being ‘babalawo’ or ‘iyanifa’ (male or female Ifa priests) and ‘onisegun’ (medicine men or women). Ifa, as science, unravels astronomy, time cycles, and energy balance in understanding cosmology – the science of the origin and development of the universe.

Ifa’s science is also contained in its corpus called Odu Ifa, a humongous collection of 256 voluminous books, passed down orally within Yoruba culture. The 256 books are a cornucopia of Ifa literature containing stories, poems, revelations, findings, assertions, songs, taboos, laws, etc that explain the Yoruba worldview on far-ranging issues of existential proportions. The vast 256 collections of voluminous books are divided into 800 sections, making the totality of the corpus 204,800 compendia of orature.

In the 256 Odu Ifa is the coded knowledge system called the binary coding found in computer science, and derived from mathematical probability, observation and pattern recognition. With this similarity, Ifa shows an amazing connection between ancient wisdom and modern technology. Abimbola says no other religion has more body of books, noting, however, that adherents of foreign religions in Nigeria erroneously throw away the science, arts, divination and philosophy of Ifa for imported religions that are not better. “Something is wrong with us,” he says.

He continues, “I am not a Christian, but I use western medicine when necessary – along with herbs and divination. You might not be an Ifa worshipper, but that shouldn’t stop you from benefiting from its truths, which are so natural and pure. The truths of Ifa are contained in its accurate divination, diagnosis, treatment and healing. The efficacy of Ifa explains why you find people of other religions sneaking to it in secret and benefiting from it while pretending publicly not to have anything to do with it.”

READ ALSO:

• FG declares public holidays for Eid-el-Fitr
• JUST-IN: Ex-Oyo gov Ajimobi’s first child Bisola dies At 42
• Crisis hits LagRide, drivers threaten protest as operators move to withdraw vehicles

The art of Ifa is seen in its rich poetic recitations, panegyrics, historic accounts, music, storytelling and symbolism, just as Yoruba sculpture, smithing, beadwork, weaving and many other art forms are believed to be inspired by the gods.

As philosophy, Ifa teaches moral and ethical wisdom symbolised by Orí (Destiny), Èsù (Choice and Consequence), Ìwà Pèlé (Good Character), Omolúàbí (Virtue), Owú (Jealousy), Ìbínú (Anger), and Ànìkànjopón (Greed), among other behavioral traits.

Through divination, Ifa offers insights into the past, interrogates present possibilities and reveals future prospects while prescribing solutions via sacrifice, rituals, offerings, or behavioral changes. Ifa divination involves an interactive engagement that gives room for guidance and encourages personal responsibility.

According to Abimbola, ‘writing is an enemy of remembrance’. What do you mean, sir? I asked. “The 256 Ifa corpus can be sectionalised into 800 large volumes. This means there are 204,800 volumes of verses, recitations, poems, stories, etc in the corpus. In prehistoric times, the whole of the corpus was crammed by Ifa students, but nowadays that they are in book form, people are forgetting them. That’s why I said writing is an enemy of remembrance. When I was in school, I didn’t jot down notes during lectures; I preferred to listen and understand first, and form my notes later, from my understanding. In writing my notes, I borrowed the notes of my classmates who had jotted down notes. My style gives room for deeper comprehension,” Abimbola explains.

The Araba of Osogbo, Chief Ifayemi Elebuibon, affirms the tenet of loyalty in Ifa corpus, reciting the Ìwòrì Bògbé verse during a telephone chat with me, when I asked for an esè Ifa that teaches loyalty.

Ogunwande exemplifies the loyalty displayed by the partridge in the Ìwòrì Bògbé verse of Ifa, which Elebuibon describes as the story of the partridge, who having wined and dined with the houseowner, will not desert the houseowner in time of trouble, “eyele kii b’onile je, ko b’onile mu, ko di ojo kan ijongbon, ko yeri.”

When MKO, the friend of his youth, came under political oppression after winning the June 12, 1993 presidential election, Abimbola stood by him like Jonathan stood by David in the Holy Bible.

Abimbola said, “Twice, they made me offers to head the Interim National Government. Firstly, I asked those sent by the military authorities if, after being sworn in as Head of State, I could pronounce that the election would be held afresh? Secondly, I dilly-dallied by saying the seven-month lifespan of the ING was too small to do anything. Thirdly, and morally, I couldn’t do that to a friend. Fourthly, and above all, I consulted Ifa, and Ifa told me in unmistakable terms to reject the ING offer.

READ ALSO:

• Rivers administrator Ibas fires Fubara’s political appointees
• Natasha: Murray-Bruce slams Atiku, defends Akpabio
• Tinubu shops for new INEC chairman for 2027 elections

“A few days after the offer was made to me, Abiola called a world press conference. We were all present at the conference where he announced the full results of the election. A day after the press conference, Ernest Shonekan was announced as the Head of the Interim National Government. I was happy I didn’t betray my friend. I would have regretted all the days of my life if I had accepted the offer.”

Named Ogunwande because his forebears were the spiritual heads of Ogun worshippers in Oyo, the Awise Agbaye says all the children of his grandfather and father bear Ogun in their names.

And, Ògún, the Yoruba god of Iron and War, was king over Irè, hence the appellation Ògún Ònírè. But Ògún wasn’t an indigene of Irè, a town in Ekiti; he only stopped by Irè-Ekiti on the way from an expedition with his men. Abimbola reveals Ògún was a native of Sakí, though he lived in Ile-Ife.

According to a myth, Ògún, thirsty and tired, came across some palm wine gourds as he passed through Irè. He stopped and lifted one of the gourds, hoping to quench his thirst. But the gourd was empty. He lifted the second, third and fourth gourds; all were empty. He became incensed and broke the four gourds and more, ordering that henceforth, empty gourds should be laid sideways while empty calabash for drinking should be placed face down. Ogun later rose to become the king of Ire.

The Ogun courage of Ogunwande came to bear when he thwarted the efforts of his fellow senators who attempted to fix their salaries during the Third Republic. He said, “As soon as we were inaugurated, senators began agitating to legislate and fix our salaries. As Majority Leader, I presided over intra- and inter-party caucus meetings. They said I should call a meeting for us to discuss the issue. I delayed by saying we should wait till the President and his ministers were sworn in before we discuss our salary.

“They would have beaten me up if not for the aura (òwò) innate in my personality. They would hear none of my advice. During one of our arguments over the issue, I asked some of them, “Are you here for money or service?” They looked at me in shock and asked, “If you’re not here for money, what are you here for? After some days of stand-off, I called a meeting of the elders of both parties – the Social Democratic Party and the National Republic Convention – and explained why I felt we shouldn’t fix our salaries.

“I said if we fix our salaries now and the President and his cabinet come in and fix their salaries lower than ours, are we not going to look greedy and stupid? When I said this, they saw reason with me. They said, ‘You should have explained it clearly like this. We shall wait’.”

Abimbola’s view on Yoruba bulletproof

All hell broke loose on November 26, 2020, a day the devil himself was appeased to drink water, and cease hostility. That date was an ‘ojo buruku, esu gbomimu’ day, when some suspected kidnappers shot the second-in-command to the gods of the land. It was the day the Olufon of Ifon, Oba Adegoke Adeusi, a first-class Ondo monarch, was felled by the bullets of assailants in Elegbeka community of Ose Local Government Area.

Abomination! No one sacrifices the child of Orè to Orè; ‘ai fi omo Orè b’Orè!’ The igbakeji orisa cannot be killed just like that, I thought. Shocked and sad, I called the Ooni of Ife, Oba Adeyeye Ogunwusi, to ask what happened to the efficacy of Yoruba bulletproof aka ayeta, if a first-class Yoruba oba could be gunned down just like that.

I grabbed my pen, scratched my head and penned the article, “Can African bulletproof stop AK-47 bullets?”, published in The PUNCH, on January 18, 2020.

In the article, the Ooni said the Yoruba had bulletproof ‘ayeta’ aka ‘odeshi’ for bullets. Ogunwusi said, “Everything has a name. If you call ‘ota’ (bullet) by its real name, it’ll deflect bullets from you. Even when the bullet hits its target, it won’t have any effect. This is why it’s called ‘ayeta’. But it has its taboos.”

Yoruba activist, Sunday Adeyemo, aka Sunday Igboho, supported the view of the Ooni, but a former Governor of Osun State, Prince Olagunsoye Oyinlola, who’s a retired Brigadier General, disagreed, saying there was no ‘ayeta’ for AK-47, a view supported by Elebuibon.

To be concluded.

Email: tundeodes2003@yahoo.com

Facebook: @Tunde Odesola

X: @Tunde_Odesola

Tinubu as yesterday’s rebel and today’s tyrant, By Farooq Kperogi

President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s demonstrably unconstitutional suspension of the elected leaders of Rivers State and his illegal imposition of a retired military lickspittle as sole administrator in the exercise of his otherwise constitutional privilege to declare a state of emergency in any part of the country is the latest addition in a long list of instances of his embrace of the very things he once resented and fought against when he was outside the reins of federal power.

For example, he was brutally censorious of Goodluck Jonathan’s withdrawal of fuel subsidies in 2012. He expressed sentiments in writing and in speeches that resonated with the angst of the masses. He even helped finance a nationwide mass protest that so convulsed the country that Jonathan was compelled to back off his plans.

Yet, one of the first acts Tinubu did as a president in May 2023 was to announce an economically and socially disruptive withdrawal of fuel subsidies that has deepened poverty, annihilated the middle class, and ruptured the very fabric of Nigerian society.

Again, when Olusegun Obasanjo unconstitutionally suspended Plateau State’s Governor Joshua Dariye—along with state legislators— in May 2004 and appointed General Chris Ali as the state’s sole administrator, then Governor Bola Ahmed Tinubu of Lagos rightly called the act “illegal.”

“It is unfortunate and illegal,” he said. “This has to be discouraged. It is a bad precedent. What the president of the country has done, I pray it doesn’t stand.”

In fact, when Goodluck Jonathan declared states of emergency in the three northeastern states of Borno, Yobe, and Adamawa without suspending the elected leaders of the states, which I commended in a May 25, 2013, column titled “The Malcolm Xian Logic in Jonathan’s Praiseworthy Boko Haram Offensive,” Tinubu condemned it as unacceptable federal overreach.

READ ALSO:

• Communal Clash: Gov Adeleke imposes new curfew on Ifon, Ilobu communities
• BREAKING: IGP redeploys 38 police commissioners
• Osimhen breaks Odegbami’s Eagles goal record

“No governor of a state in Nigeria is the chief security officer,” he said. “Putting the blame on the governors, who have been effectively emasculated, for the abysmal performance of the government at the centre which controls all these security agencies, smacks of ignorance and mischief.”

He contended that Jonathan’s action “seeks to abridge or has the potential of totally scuttling the constitutional functions of governors and other elected representatives of the people” and that it would be “counterproductive in the long run.”

Given an opportunity to give materiality to the principles he espoused when he had no access to federal power, he has become indistinguishable from, and in many cases worse than, the objects of his erstwhile censure.

Tinubu now implements the same policies he once condemned and has become the same personality he once reviled. He exemplifies the aphoristic wisdom (often attributed to historian Ariel Durant or her husband Will Durant) that says, “Today’s rebel is tomorrow’s tyrant.” In Tinubu’s case, he was yesterday’s rebel and today’s tyrant.

Why do most people who initially invested symbolic and political capital in fighting against authority or oppression eventually become the very oppressors they once resisted? Why do firebrands and idealists often morph into the very thing they once denounced after assuming power?

The evidence of history shows us that resistance to tyranny can, and often does, end in new tyrannies. Critics of war or corruption frequently adopt those same practices when they find themselves in the circles of power.

So, this is beyond Tinubu as a person, who probably never really had any principles to begin with, whose resistance to past oppressive policies was probably mere calculative opportunism.

But why do previously genuinely adversarial people become the very things they once opposed with such regularity? Observers from psychology, philosophy, and political theory have long studied this phenomenon.

A previous column I wrote (and republished twice) on the psychology of power pointed out that “people under the influence of power are neurologically similar to people who suffer traumatic brain injury” and posited that situational, power-induced brain damage may be responsible for this.

READ ALSO:

• 2026 WCQ: Super Eagles move up to third place with 2-0 win in Rwanda
• Nnamdi Kanu returns to court, apologises over attacks on judge, others
• Binance delists five cryptocurrencies

Philosophers have also grappled with the paradox of noble ideals curdling into oppression. Friedrich Nietzsche, for example, famously warned of the moral danger that comes with fighting evil too intensely. “He who fights with monsters should look to it that he himself does not become a monster,” Nietzsche wrote, adding, “if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you.”

Nietzsche’s metaphor speaks to how the struggle for power or justice can warp people’s souls. Revolutionaries and reformers, in attempting to vanquish a “monster” (e.g. a tyrant or an unjust system), may take on the very methods and mindset of that monster.

His concept of the “will to power” also suggests that the drive to attain power can override other moral constraints, so that once the will to power is unleashed, individuals rationalize actions that serve dominance.

French theorist Michel Foucault provides another lens through which we can make sense of the phenomenon of people taking on the very methods and mindset of the beasts of power they once fought.

He said, “Power is everywhere; not because it embraces everything, but because it comes from everywhere.” By that, he means no one is ever truly outside power relations; even the most vicious critics of the most monstrous regimes operate within a field of power. Once the critics take control, he said, they often reproduce the very power dynamics they once criticized, even if their rhetoric changes.

The line between oppressor and liberator can blur: the roles may switch, but the play remains the same. Foucault’s insight is that systems of power tend to self-perpetuate, regardless of who is at the helm, unless conscious effort is made to dismantle those underlying structures.

In other words, a change in leadership without a change in what Foucault calls the “microphysics of power” is likely to yield similar repressive outcomes. The new boss becomes “same as the old boss,” because the circuitry of power channels them into that role.

That’s why the sadly familiar pattern of “condemning in opposition, then doing in government” is so widespread that it almost seems like a political law of gravity. It’s good to bear this in mind as we read and listen to the pronouncements of current “opposition” politicians who seem like they identify with popular causes and sentiments.

READ ALSO>:

• Akpabio told me I’d make good movements with my waist – Natasha
• Supreme Court declares Wike’s ally Anyanwu as PDP National Secretary
• Why we want Natasha out of Senate – Kogi Central constituents

Like Tinubu, today’s opponents of executive overreach may extend their own executive powers once they have the opportunity.

Like Tinubu, they will have a story to tell themselves and the public to justify their U-turn: the situation is different, their actions are for the greater good, their previous stance was based on incomplete information, etc. And indeed, sometimes circumstances do legitimately change.

But when the dust settles, the outcome looks awfully familiar. Pro-democracy activists become a congress of tyrants and justifiers of tyranny; the fierce social critic and human rights activist who once decried abuses now defends them; the liberator who once raged against oppressors now only liberates his stomach. As the Roman philosopher-politician Cicero once wrote, “It is easier to criticize than to do better.”

Fortunately, this cycle is not inevitable. Many thinkers advocate checks and balances, institutional limits, and personal integrity as antidotes, although even those seem to be insufficient.

Nigeria’s National Assembly, as we have seen in the last few years, particularly in the last few days, can neither check nor balance the excesses of the executive. It’s a slavish extension of Aso Rock. The voices of the few honest, conscientious ones among them are drowned out by the cacophony that the rapacious, unprincipled, mercenary self-seekers among them, who constitute the majority, emit. The judiciary is even worse.

It is easy to be disillusioned and to surrender amid this reality. To be frank, I have found myself in that state many times. But power must be continually guarded and checked. Philosopher Hannah Arendt observed that only constant vigilance and a commitment to plurality and law prevent rebels from calcifying into tyrants.

We must all do our part to hold people in power to account, even if we’re not sure we would do better ourselves. At this point, the only check and balance against creeping tyranny is the democratic rebellion of the people.

Tinubu as yesterday’s rebel and today’s tyrant, By Farooq Kperogi

Farooq Kperogi is a renowned columnist and United States-based Professor of journalism.

Rivers State emergency rule: A different view by Azu Ishiekwene

President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s proclamation of emergency rule in Rivers State on Tuesday surprised me for reasons different from those for which he has been severely criticised.
The mildest criticism is that Tinubu’s failure to call the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, Nyesom Wike, to order was responsible for the crisis.
The more severe criticisms range from accusations that the President has subverted constitutional rule to charges of potential destabilisation at the behest of Wike.
A common point of agreement is that a civilian president should never have to declare emergency rule. That is the ideal.
But Rivers State before Tuesday presented a dire and complicated situation that stretched idealism to its elastic limits.

Chaos in slow motion
It’s convenient, especially for those who promoted and profited from the crisis, to pretend otherwise. Still, after the 27 state lawmakers loyal to Wike issued an impeachment notice, the outcome, if Governor Siminalayi Fubara had been impeached, might have been far worse for the state than can be contemplated under emergency rule. The proclamation was an unsolicited stitch in time.
If oil pipelines were already being blown up and militants deploying as the impeachment notice reached Fubara, what would have happened if the process had carried through? Rivers State has been chaos in slow motion for nearly two years, the only thriving business in the state being the politics of those who support Fubara and those who are against Wike.
The Supreme Court’s judgement invalidated the budget passed by Fubara and nullified the local government election. It affirmed the position of the 27 lawmakers, making Fubara’s government a lame duck. Emergency rule saved the governor from gunpoint, created a pause for the people to get their lives back, and made room for Wike and Fubara to stop and reflect. It’s a messy situation, but the counterfactual could have been worse.

READ ALSO:

• How Wande Abimbola rejected IBB’s ING bait, and other stories (1)
• Soldiers arrest 16 suspected oil thieves in Port Harcourt
• Controversial singer Portable apologises to Saheed Osupa over copyright dispute

Between Wike and Fubara
Popular media has framed Fubara as the victim of a grasping, unforgiving godfather, which suits his comportment. But during this inconvenient pause, it might be helpful for the governor to reflect on what he might have done differently, something that pressure by those egging him on for their narrow, selfish reasons might not have given him the space to do
President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s proclamation of emergency rule in Rivers State on Tuesday surprised me for reasons different from those for which he has been severely criticised.

The mildest criticism is that Tinubu’s failure to call the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, Nyesom Wike, to order was responsible for the crisis. The more severe criticisms range from accusations that the president has subverted constitutional rule to charges of potential destabilisation at the behest of Wike.

A common point of agreement is that a civilian president should never have to declare emergency rule. That is the ideal. But Rivers State before Tuesday presented a dire and complicated situation that stretched idealism to its elastic limits.
Chaos In Slow Motion

It’s convenient, especially for those who promoted and profited from the crisis, to pretend otherwise. Still, after the 27 state lawmakers loyal to Wike issued an impeachment notice, the outcome, if Governor Siminalayi Fubara had been impeached, might have been far worse for the state than can be contemplated under emergency rule. The proclamation was an unsolicited stitch in time.

If oil pipelines were already being blown up and militants deploying, as the impeachment notice reached Fubara, what would have happened if the process had been carried through? Rivers State has been chaos in slow motion for nearly two years, the only thriving business in the state being the politics of those who support Fubara and those who are against Wike.

READ ALSO:

• Bandits strike again in Benue, gun down 2 soldiers, 3 others
• UK announces new passport application fees starting April 2025
• Court lifts order stopping Senate probe on Natasha Akpoti

The Supreme Court’s judgment invalidated the budget passed by Fubara and nullified the local government election. It affirmed the position of the 27 lawmakers, making Fubara’s government a lame duck. Emergency rule saved the governor from gunpoint, created a pause for the people to get their lives back, and made room for Wike and Fubara to stop and reflect. It’s a messy situation, but the counterfactual could have been worse.
Between Wike and Fubara

Popular media has framed Fubara as the victim of a grasping, unforgiving godfather, which suits his comportment. But during this inconvenient pause, it might be helpful for the governor to reflect on what he might have done differently, something that pressure by those egging him on for their narrow, selfish reasons might not have given him the space to do.

In the public imagination, control of the state’s “political structure” is at the heart of the dispute between Fubara and Wike. Whether that is so, whether it’s about who the “authentic” party leader is, or it is more than what the public knows, Fubara and Wike know. We can only guess. But they both know.

Open War
The open war started after Fubara’s swearing-in when the governor wanted to install his candidate as speaker in the House of Assembly but failed. What was the point of demolishing the State House of Assembly complex built with hundreds of millions of naira of taxpayers’ money in December 2023 simply on the suspicion that the lawmakers were planning to impeach him there? Why did the governor think it was right to convene four of 31 lawmakers in his office to present the appropriation bill and then go on to implement it?
And why, after the peace deal brokered in Abuja, was it difficult for him to be his own man, free himself as the hostage of opportunistic local politicians and self-appointed opinion leaders and implement the decisions reached, instead of caving into busybodies in the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) whose primary interest is to continue the unfinished war of the 2022 Convention by other means?

Atiku could not have forgotten that when his boss did it again in Ekiti State two years later, it was mainly to facilitate Obasanjo’s hijack of the state for his political convenience, after lawmakers claimed to have impeached the governor. Fayose had become a thorn in his side, and he vowed to remove him by all means, fair and foul… Atiku may argue that he had been estranged from the government then and could not bear vicarious liability. However, he remained a part of the government until the end and must endure its glory and shame.

READ ALSO:

• Mohbad’s brother, Adura, arrested by police in Lagos
• UN staff member killed in central Gaza blast, five others injured
• Air Peace slashes Nigeria-London fare by N600,000

Atiku No 2 .
The PDP leadership and their cousins in Labour have never forgiven Wike for supporting Tinubu’s election. They have been quite loud in condemning the state of emergency. That’s their job as opposition. However, if the PDP is letting its testosterone rush get into its head and impair memory, we may need to remind the party how we got here.
Former Vice President Atiku Abubakar has been quite vocal in condemning emergency rule in Rivers State. In his earnestness, he has forgotten that the government in which he was the Number Two man had a shambolic record of infidelity to constitutional rule. And that is saying it nicely.

One can argue that President Olusegun Obasanjo’s proclamation of emergency rule in Plateau State in 2004, though controversial, was inevitable because of the horrific deaths caused by the sectarian violence, which led to reprisals in other states. Yet, former Governor Joshua Dariye’s suspected links to the crisis made his suspension inevitable.

Bayelsa’s Playbook!
Atiku could not have forgotten that when his boss did it again in Ekiti State two years later, it was mainly to facilitate Obasanjo’s hijack of the state for his political convenience, after lawmakers claimed to have impeached the governor. Fayose had become a thorn in his side, and he vowed to remove him by all means, fair and foul.

Atiku may argue that he had been estranged from the government then and could not bear vicarious liability. However, he remained a part of the government until the end and must endure its glory and shame.
Or perhaps he would have preferred the impeachment of Fubara from Obasanjo’s Bayelsa playbook? In that case, instead of an emergency rule, Tinubu would have provided a haven where the majority 27 lawmakers would have met under heavy security protection to remove the governor, as Obasanjo did under slightly different circumstances, in the case of former Governor Diepreye Alamieyeseigha.

Amaechi’s Forgotten Diary

Former Rivers State Governor Rotimi Amaechi, a longstanding foe of Wike, also weighed in, condemning the “power grab’s illegality.” He has a right to intervene and speak his mind. However, since he called the proclamation “an affront” to the rule of law and a power grab, it might be helpful to remind him of a typical, but by no means isolated, example from his record as governor.

The underlying currents may be similar – local politics gone rogue – but the consequences or potential consequences are not. Constitutional lawyers can debate the legal triggers because of the lack of clarity in Section 305 of the 1999 Constitution, compared with the 1960 Constitution, a pre-Republican document that gave the prime minister more expansive powers.

In 2013, when the position of chief judge in Rivers State was vacant, Amaechi appointed and swore in the president of the Customary Court of Appeal, Justice Peter Agumagu, against decency and the provisions of law. He joined issues with the National Judicial Commission (NJC), which was at its wit’s end to restrain him and keep him on the path of common sense. The state judiciary reeled under Amaechi’s blatant affront for one year, which he now conveniently forgets.

Apples and Oranges
Parallels have been drawn between the state of emergency in Rivers State and the one in 1962 during the Western Region crisis, especially as the latter was believed to have led the country down the slippery slope that eventually ended in the removal of the Tafawa Balewa government and the Civil War.

The underlying currents may be similar – local politics gone rogue – but the consequences or potential consequences are not. Constitutional lawyers can debate the legal triggers because of the lack of clarity in Section 305 of the 1999 Constitution, compared with the 1960 Constitution, a pre-Republican document that gave the prime minister more expansive powers.

While the emergency rule in the Western Region was mainly an opportunistic intervention by the federal government to undermine the Obafemi Awolowo-led opposition, the emergency in Rivers State was an inevitable step to prevent a potential descent into chaos, where the governor was not an innocent bystander.
Water in the Coconut

Since 1999, two administrations – Muhammadu Buhari’s and Umaru Yar’Adua’s being the only exceptions – have proclaimed emergency rule. Apart from 2013, when President Goodluck Jonathan left the governors of the three affected states in place because they had no link to the crises in their states, complicity has affected the scope of the application of emergency rule.

When Obasanjo threatened an emergency in Lagos, Tinubu said it was unacceptable because he was doing his best as governor to tackle the sectarian clashes in a small part of the state then. In Rivers, the governor is a part of the problem.
Those opposed to the proclamation should say how to leave Fubara in place and extract the water of peace from the coconut of Rivers State without breaking the shell on the head of the people.

Rivers State emergency rule: A different view by Azu Ishiekwene