By Femi Falana, SAN
In its judgment delivered on December 15, 2025, in Attorney-General of Adamawa State & 19 Ors v Attorney-General of the Federation (Suit No. SC/CV/329/2025), the Supreme Court dismissed the suit for want of jurisdiction, holding that the plaintiffs lacked the requisite locus standi to institute the action.
Notwithstanding this finding, the apex court proceeded to consider the substantive issues raised in the case. Unfortunately, sections of the media have since misinterpreted the judgment. Contrary to these misleading reports, the Supreme Court did not endorse the dissolution of democratic structures during the imposition of emergency rule in any state of the Federation.
In the leading judgment, Mohammed Baba Idris, JSC, unequivocally held that Section 305 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) does not confer on the President the power to temporarily dissolve or displace the executive and legislative institutions of a state under emergency rule. His Lordship stated:
“By virtue of Sections 4–7 of the Constitution, governmental powers are divided among the Executive, Legislature and Judiciary, and distributed across the Federal, State and Local Government tiers. No arm or tier of government is constitutionally superior to another, and none may lawfully usurp the powers expressly vested in another.
“However, unlike the Constitutions of India and Pakistan, Section 305 of the Nigerian Constitution does not expressly confer power on the President to assume or temporarily displace executive or legislative institutions of a State. This omission is deliberate and reflects Nigeria’s constitutional commitment to federalism and the autonomy of state governments.”
The judgment, therefore, affirms the supremacy of constitutional federalism and rejects any interpretation that suggests presidential authority to dismantle democratic structures at the state level under the guise of emergency rule.
Mr Femi Falana is a Senior Advocate of Nigeria.
