Supreme Court Under Fire: ADC Alleges Threat to Federalism and Constitutional Order

By upholding the President’s authority to dismiss elected governors and state assemblies under a state of emergency, the Supreme Court has been accused by the African Democratic Congress (ADC) of turning the President into a “constitutional tyrant.”

The party cautioned in a statement signed by Mallam Bolaji Abdullahi, its National Publicity Secretary, that despite the ruling’s academic nature, it sets a dangerous precedent and concentrates excessive power in the Presidency in a way that threatens democracy in general as well as Nigeria’s federal system.

According to the ADC, Nigeria’s democracy and federalism are seriously threatened by the ruling.

It cautioned that constitutional dictatorship does not always result from military takeovers and that it frequently develops gradually as leaders gradually undermine democratic institutions and norms.

The entire statement said: “The Supreme Court of Nigeria’s ruling, which gives the President the authority to suspend elected governors and state assemblies during a state of emergency, has alarmed the African Democratic Congress (ADC).” Even while the decision seems harmlessly academic, it could mark a turning point in our democratic evolution and permanently change the character of our democracy.

The President has the “discretion to determine the measures required to restore peace and security” following the declaration of a state of emergency in any state, per the ruling of the Supreme Court. Essentially, the President is free to implement whatever “extraordinary measures” if he believes they are required to bring peace back to that state.

The top court’s stance clearly implies that the President of Nigeria or his representatives might easily create a security situation in any state where the governor is thought to be “unfriendly” and then suspend the governor and the State House of Assembly. Even though the same ruling states that “no arm or tier of government is constitutionally superior to another,” the ruling’s obvious implication is that the President has complete influence over state governors’ political behavior. Thus, the ADC views this ruling as a grave danger to Nigeria’s democracy and federalism.

Examining the protections outlined by the highest court as balances against abuse of presidential authority highlights the tremendous risk inherent in this ruling. Judicial scrutiny, parliamentary oversight, and proportionality are some of these protections.

“Proportionality is obviously out of the question when faced with a president who will stop at nothing to hold onto power, even completely destroying opposition parties, as Nigerians have seen under President Bola Ahmed Tinubu since taking office. Second, legislative monitoring is equally unlikely given the President’s successful takeover of the National Assembly and the legislature’s disgraceful reduction to a mere appendage of the Presidency. Lastly, with regard to judicial review, this same ruling has eliminated any uncertainty regarding the type of review that is now feasible when the nation’s top court decides to give precedence to the letter of the law above its spirit, which is specifically meant to avert the very risk that the Court has now approved.

The Supreme Court has unintentionally contributed to the imposition of constitutional dictatorship on Nigeria through this type of “judicial review,” a perilous form of authoritarianism in which those in positions of authority take advantage of legal frameworks and constitutional flaws to amass and solidify absolute power.

The ADC wants Nigerians to be aware that military takeovers are not the only way that constitutional tyranny may emerge. As we have seen over the last two years, it frequently develops slowly as leaders incrementally undermine democratic institutions and values. It is now painfully obvious that neither the judiciary nor the legislature can be trusted to stop this decline.