Impeachment in Rivers State: How Governor Siminalayi Fubara’s Political Crisis Reached a Constitutional Flashpoint
In a dramatic escalation of political tensions in Nigeria’s oil-rich Rivers State, the Rivers State House of Assembly has formally commenced impeachment proceedings against Governor Siminalayi Fubara and his Deputy, Professor Ngozi Oduh. The proceedings, which reignited a long-standing constitutional and political standoff in the state, unfolded during a plenary session on Thursday, January 8, 2026, at the Assembly complex in Port Harcourt.
This development comes amid months of factional battles between the executive and legislative arms of government, disputes over budgetary authority, interpretations of judicial rulings, and lingering schisms within the ruling Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and breakaway alignments with the All Progressives Congress (APC).
The Plenary That Changed the Political Landscape
At the centre of the impeachment proceedings was a plenary session presided over by Speaker Martins Amaewhule, where Major Jack, the Majority Leader of the House, formally read out a notice of gross misconduct against Governor Fubara, citing Section 188 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended) as the constitutional basis for the action.
The impeachment notice was duly signed by 26 members of the Rivers State House of Assembly, meeting the constitutional requirement of not less than one-third of the total membership of the House to initiate such proceedings.
Speaker Amaewhule announced that the impeachment notice would be formally served on Governor Fubara within seven (7) days, in compliance with due process and constitutional requirements.
Allegations Against Governor Fubara: Seven Counts of Gross Misconduct
In the impeachment notice, the lawmakers outlined seven specific allegations against Governor Fubara, asserting that his conduct constituted “gross misconduct” under the Constitution. Among the most prominent accusations were the following:
1. Demolition of the Rivers State House of Assembly Complex
The Assembly accused Fubara of ordering and supervising the demolition of the House of Assembly Complex — an action widely seen as unconstitutional and politically inflammatory. This demolition, which occurred in late 2023, had previously drawn legal condemnation and contributed significantly to the breakdown of trust between the executive and legislative arms of government.
2. Extra-Budgetary Spending
Fubara was accused of approving and undertaking extra-budgetary expenditures — that is, spending public funds without proper legislative approval, contrary to the constitutional provisions that require the Assembly to pass appropriation laws before funds can be legally spent.
3. Withholding Funds Meant for the Assembly Service Commission
Lawmakers alleged that the governor deliberately withheld funds that were constitutionally due to the Assembly Service Commission, effectively undermining the legislature’s autonomy and ability to function independently.
4. Refusal to Obey Supreme Court Ruling on Financial Autonomy
In addition to the above, a central allegation is that Governor Fubara refused to obey or implement a binding Supreme Court ruling affirming the financial autonomy of the Rivers State House of Assembly. This refusal, the Assembly argues, flouts the rule of law and undermines constitutional governance.
These charges reflect deeper disputes over constitutional interpretation, separation of powers, and the autonomy of the legislature — issues the Supreme Court has previously had to clarify in relation to the Rivers State political crisis.
Impeachment Against the Deputy Governor
Following the notice against the governor, the Deputy Majority Leader of the House, Linda Stewart, presented a separate impeachment notice against Deputy Governor Ngozi Oduh.
The allegations against the deputy governor focused primarily on alleged reckless and unconstitutional spending of public funds, obstruction of the Assembly’s constitutional functions, and connivance to allow unauthorized individuals to occupy government offices without proper legislative screening and confirmation.
Additional accusations included purported actions to seek budgetary approvals from entities other than the legitimate Rivers State House of Assembly, and seizing or withholding salaries and allowances due to members of the House and the Assembly Service Commission.
Political Backdrop: A State in Conflict
To fully understand the impeachment move, one must consider the broader political crisis in Rivers State, which has unfolded over several years.
Legal and Constitutional Battles
A significant moment in this crisis came with contentious disputes over the legitimacy of competing Assembly factions, disputes that escalated to the courts and drew Supreme Court intervention. These rulings touched on issues such as recognition of lawmakers, budget presentation, and compliance with constitutional processes.
Critics of Governor Fubara have accused him of presenting budgets or conducting state affairs through alternative, non-legislative channels — acts that, they argue, violate fundamental constitutional requirements for legislative oversight.
Historical Tensions and National Oversight
The political tensions in Rivers State were so acute that they previously prompted federal intervention, including a state of emergency declared in March 2025 under Section 305 of the Constitution, which suspended the state’s executive and legislative bodies for six months.
This extraordinary federal action, and subsequent realignments within the state legislature — including defections and shifts in party loyalty — have reshaped the political landscape and set the stage for the impeachment proceedings now underway.
External Influences and Stakeholder Dynamics
Internal political alliances, including the influence of national figures such as Minister of the Federal Capital Territory Nyesom Wike, have also played a notable role in the evolution of the crisis, with the impeachment move recently described as partly linked to alleged breaches of political agreements.
Constitutional Process and What Comes Next
Under Section 188 of the Nigerian Constitution, the impeachment process involves several critical steps following the reading of the notice of gross misconduct:
1. Service of Notice: The impeachment notice must be formally served on the governor and deputy within seven days, as announced by Speaker Amaewhule.
2. Reply to Allegations: The governor will have an opportunity to respond to the allegations presented against him as required by law.
3. Investigation and Panel: The House of Assembly may set up an investigative panel to examine the veracity of the allegations.
4. Voting Threshold: If the Assembly resolves to pursue impeachment formally, a two-thirds majority of members must vote in favor of removal for it to proceed. This high threshold ensures that impeachment is only successful with broad legislative consensus.
Potential Implications for Governance and Stability
The commencement of impeachment proceedings against Governor Fubara marks a critical flashpoint in Rivers State politics. Its implications extend beyond the individuals directly involved and touch on core principles of constitutional democracy, separation of powers, and public accountability.
If the proceedings advance, they could lead to one of the most significant overturns of executive authority in the state’s recent history. Conversely, drawn-out legal battles and political maneuvering could further destabilise governance and public confidence.
In either scenario, this chapter in Rivers State’s political trajectory underscores the complex interplay between law, politics, and institutional integrity in Nigeria’s federating units.
0 Comments