THIS DAWN — The African Democratic Congress (ADC) has issued a strongly worded condemnation of a recent judgment of the Supreme Court of Nigeria, accusing the apex court of handing the President sweeping powers that could undermine Nigeria’s federal structure and imperil its multi-party democracy.
In a statement released on Monday, the opposition party said it was “alarmed” by the Supreme Court’s interpretation of presidential powers under a state of emergency, particularly the court’s position that the President has the discretion to determine the measures required to restore peace and security in any affected state. According to the ADC, the ruling represents a critical turning point that could fundamentally alter the balance of power within Nigeria’s constitutional democracy.
While acknowledging that the judgment may appear “innocuously academic” on the surface, the ADC argued that its practical implications are far-reaching. The party said the court’s reasoning effectively authorises the President to take “extraordinary measures” once a state of emergency is declared, based solely on the President’s own assessment of what is necessary to restore order.
The ADC warned that this interpretation opens the door to abuse, arguing that a President could contrive or exaggerate security concerns in any state governed by an opposition party and then proceed to suspend an elected governor and the State House of Assembly. Such an outcome, the party said, would amount to a direct assault on Nigeria’s federalism, despite the Supreme Court’s acknowledgement in the same judgment that no arm or tier of government is constitutionally superior to another.
“The clear effect of the ruling suggests the opposite,” the ADC stated, asserting that the judgment grants the President firm control over the political conduct of state governors and subordinates elected state institutions to the federal executive. The party described this as an “extremely dangerous threat” to democratic governance.
The ADC also criticised the safeguards identified by the Supreme Court as checks against potential abuse of presidential discretion. These safeguards—proportionality, legislative oversight, and judicial review—were described by the party as illusory under Nigeria’s current political realities.
On proportionality, the ADC argued that restraint cannot be expected from an administration it accused of being determined to retain power at all costs. The party alleged that since assuming office, President Bola Ahmed Tinubu has presided over an environment in which opposition parties face systematic pressure and weakening, making the notion of measured executive action unrealistic.
Regarding legislative oversight, the ADC expressed deep scepticism about the capacity of the National Assembly to act as an effective check on the executive. It accused the legislature of surrendering its independence and functioning as “a mere appendage of the Presidency,” thereby rendering parliamentary oversight ineffective in preventing abuse of emergency powers.
The party was particularly critical of the role of the judiciary, arguing that the Supreme Court’s judgment itself undermines confidence in judicial review as a safeguard. According to the ADC, the court prioritised a narrow reading of constitutional provisions over their underlying democratic spirit, which it said was designed to prevent exactly the kind of executive overreach now being sanctioned.
In the ADC’s assessment, the judgment has inadvertently facilitated what it described as “constitutional tyranny”—a form of autocracy in which leaders consolidate and entrench power by exploiting legal frameworks and constitutional loopholes rather than overtly subverting the law.
The party warned Nigerians that threats to democracy do not always come in the form of military coups. Instead, it said, democratic erosion often occurs gradually, as elected leaders steadily weaken institutions and norms under the guise of legality. According to the ADC, developments over the past two years illustrate this pattern, culminating in a situation where neither the legislature nor the judiciary can be relied upon to arrest the decline.
The statement concluded with a call for heightened public vigilance, urging Nigerians to recognise the long-term implications of the Supreme Court’s ruling. While the government has yet to respond formally to the ADC’s claims, the party’s intervention adds to an intensifying national debate over the scope of presidential power, the resilience of federalism, and the role of the judiciary in safeguarding Nigeria’s democratic order.
