Why Jonathan Didn’t Remove Governors During 2013 Emergency – Adoke

In his memoir, Burden of Service: The Reminiscences of Nigeria’s Former Attorney-General, Mohammed Bello Adoke sheds light on the constitutional reasoning behind President Goodluck Jonathan’s decision not to remove governors when he declared a state of emergency in Adamawa, Borno, and Yobe states in May 2013. Amid the worsening Boko Haram insurgency, many expected the dismissal of local leaders, but Adoke clarifies that such an action would have been unconstitutional....CONTINUE READING>>>

Adoke explains that while the 1961 State of Emergency Act allowed for the removal of Premiers, both the 1979 Constitution and the 1999 Constitution set clear limitations on emergency powers. He states, “The removal of a Governor is not included in the provisions,” emphasizing that Jonathan had no legal basis to suspend elected state leaders.

Citing Section 305 of the 1999 Constitution, Adoke notes that the President can only declare a state of emergency in cases of imminent danger, invasion, or a breakdown of public order. However, this section does not grant the power to remove governors, reinforcing Jonathan’s decision to allow them to remain in office.

Jonathan’s approach was seen as a break from past political tactics, where emergency declarations had been used to unseat opponents. Critics labeled him a weak leader for not dismissing the governors, particularly in Borno, where Governor Kashim Shettima remained in office despite the region being at the center of the insurgency. However, Adoke argues that Jonathan prioritized constitutional integrity over political maneuvering. He further explains that governors, while designated as Chief Security Officers of their states, lack direct control over security forces, limiting their ability to tackle insurgencies effectively.

Comparing Jonathan’s decision to past administrations, Adoke reflects on how former President Olusegun Obasanjo had previously used emergency powers to remove governors for political reasons. He asserts that true leadership should uphold the constitution rather than manipulate it for political gain.