Prominent human rights lawyer Inibehe Effiong has sharply criticised Nigeria’s Attorney General of the Federation (AGF), Lateef Fagbemi, over his comments regarding the constitutionality of a potential state of emergency in Rivers State, as proposed by President Bola Tinubu.
Effiong, speaking on the matter on Thursday’s Breakfast Central, expressed disappointment with Fagbemi’s perspective, particularly his insinuation of Governor Siminalayi Fubara’s involvement in recent pipeline bombings.
The human rights lawyer began by acknowledging Fagbemi’s distinguished legal career, noting that many lawyers held high expectations for him, hoping he would offer professional and non-partisan legal counsel to the government. “But the comments he made were quite disappointing coming from the Attorney General of the Federation,” Effiong stated.
He took issue with Fagbemi’s suggestion that Governor Fubara, through his supporters, instigated the bombing of pipelines in Rivers State.
“For the Attorney General to insinuate that Governor Fubara instigated the bombing of the pipeline, if there is an intelligence report before the president or evidence before the president, showing that Governor Fubara has a hand in the blowing of the pipeline, they should come out and say so,” Effiong challenged.
He further questioned the basis of such an accusation, drawing a parallel with other instances of crime and violence across the nation. “How many crimes has Bola Tinubu condemned since he was sworn in as president almost two years ago? How many acts of vandalism has he addressed? The farmers being killed in Ondo State, has Tinubu come out to address it? Should we now say Tinubu is sponsoring the killing in Ondo State?”
Effiong argued that holding a governor liable for not condemning a crime within their state sets a dangerous precedent.
He further questioned Governor Fubara’s control over federal security apparatus and pipeline protection contracts, labelling the AGF’s statement as “baseless.”
Addressing the possibility of Governor Fubara’s involvement in the pipeline vandalism, Effiong asserted that it would still not justify his suspension due to constitutional immunity.
“Let’s even assume that Fubara had a hand in blowing pipelines; that does not justify his suspension. He still has constitutional immunity. Otherwise, we will be saying that a governor or a person involved in crime should be suspended,” he explained.
Effiong suggested that if the President or the Attorney General are opposed to the immunity provision under Section 308 of the 1999 Constitution, they should openly advocate for its amendment.
“They cannot say that because they suspect that a person entitled to immunity is involved in a crime, that would give you the power to remove the person. That is completely not tenable,” Effiong concluded.
Effiong’s comments highlight the growing debate surrounding the constitutionality and justification of declaring a state of emergency in Rivers State, particularly in light of the Attorney General’s recent pronouncements. The human rights lawyer’s intervention adds a critical legal perspective to the ongoing political tensions in the state.
