Opinion

Should Emergency Rule In N’East Be Extended?

Published

11 years ago

December 8, 2014

Following the expiration of emergency rule in Adamawa, Borno and Yobe States last month, and the urgent need to stem the activities of Boko Haram insurgents in these states, President Goodluck Jonathan, has requested the approval of the National Assembly for an extension of the state of emergency.
This request has faced serious opposition with some lawmakers, mainly those from the affected states vowing to ensure the plan was rejected.
What do ordinary Nigerians think of this development? Should emergency rule in the North East be extended?
Our Chief Correspondent, Calista Ezeaku sought answers to these and more questions from members of the public. Our photographer, Dele Obinna captured their images.
Miss Gomba Goya-Unemployed Graduate.
In my opinion, I think the National Assembly should approve the request for the extension of the emergency rule in the North East. If you observed, the rate of killings in this area has increased since the expiration of the emergency rule-people are dying every day. If emergency rule will help in curtaling this waste of lives, Why not endorse it. I also think its high time government got to the root cause of this problem, fish out the sponsors of this terrorist group and make them face the wrath of the law.

Mr Ikenna Osuoha-Journalist
Ordinarily, the state of emergency has helped in curtailing the insurgency in the North East to a large extent, but it has also failed to some extent.
Over time, the North East has been riddled with lots of religious fanaticism which was occasioned by the called of by Boko Haram for Islamist states in the north. Now, Jonathan as the President and Commander-In-Chief of the Armed Forces moved into the solution with a view to arresting the situation by declaring state of emergency in the North East which was commendable. But to some extent, there is a problem of compromise. That, I think is the reason why the emergency rule has not completely been successful. There is compromise on the part of the military, compromise on the part of the residents and citizens of the area. There are allegations that they have been conspiring or working in collaboration with insurgents.
Personally, I suggest Federal government should declare total state of emergency in these states. The partial emergency is not helping matters. The constitution needs to be suspended. Both the governors, the executive, the National Assembly members from these states need to vacate their positions. The army has to take full charge and full control, so that the army will say, “we are fully responsible. Now they are not fully responsible.
During Obasanjo’s regime when he declared state of emergency in Plateau State, there was total emergency and that went to a large extent to stem the crisis. Obasanjo’s government was a democratic one just like the present government.
Democracy does not entail anarchy. It does not entail insubordination to constituted authority. It doesn’t entail rebellion against a constituted authority. It promotes the rule of law. These people are lawless. They have formed a parallel government.
But as I said earlier, you cannot bring peace in an area where the people are against peace. Abraham Lincoln said that no one has the right to rule over another without his consent. In other words, you don’t have the right to rule me or impose whatever on me without my consent.
Just like here in the South-South, at a point the stakeholders, the indigenes agreed to put an end to militancy. Until the north agrees to put an end to insurgency the thing will continue.
Above all, I look at insurgency in the north as a ploy designed by the northerners to destabilise Jonathan’s government. That is why I said earlier on, until the north agrees to put an end to it, it will continue.

Mr Tsaro Neeka
I believe strongly the state of emergency should continue until Boko Haram is subdued in Adamawa, Yobe and Borno states. The governors of these states as the chief security officers failed in their responsibilities to provide security for the people, that was why the federal government had to intervene, so that there will be peace in that region. So I think the lawmakers should stop politicizing the issue and approve the President’s request so that there will be peace in that region.

Mr Nte Lucky – Student.
I want to say that the state of emergency in the north east has helped in checking the activities of Boko Haram. In as much as I cannot claim that the emergency rule has been 100% effective but considered what the situation would have been in these states if there was no state of emergency. The reason for declaring state of emergency is to maintain peace and harmony so it should continue until the insurgents are wiped out. I think the president should do all within his powers to see that he achieves his aim of extending the emergency rule in the north east irrespective of what the lawmakers may say or do. What we want is peace and security of lives and properties of people living in this area and if state of emergency will help in achieving that, why should it be opposed?

Mr Ayoado Alao- Traditional Medical Practitioner.
In my own view, I think more military personnel should be deployed to these troubled states to secure the people instead of declaring another state of emergency. The emergency rule was on in these states for more than six months and there was no positive result, instead more towns and villages were captured by the terrorists, innocent school children were abducted the others were massacred. Incidences of suicide bombing are on the increase.
If they extend the state of emergency, all these things will continue to happen. Let us change our strategy. We cannot continue to do the same thing over and over again even when no positive result is derived from that.
I believe the answer to this problem is prayer. There is no need extending the state of emergency because if that is done, there will be no election in these areas in 2015 which is not good. We are in democracy and we should practise it the way it is being done in other civilized countries. I don’t think it will be right to disenfranchise any Nigerian in 2015 because of emergency rule. I know the president can order that military men and women be deployed to any part of the country to maintain peace and order without necessarily declaring state of emergency. Let’s allow these people to take part in 2015 elections and if after the elections Boko Haram activities have not been quelled, then we should derive another means of tackling it but certainly not state of emergency because that has not yielded any positive result. There has been nothing to show for all the huge sums of money claimed been spent in the fight against terrorism in the country.

Mr Effiong Ekanem-Transporter.
A state of emergency is a welcome development. It is a very good idea. I really don’t understand what the northerners or people from the north east want. They are never satisfied with whatever President Goodluck Jonathan does. If the President does this, they will accuse him. For the President to seek for the extension of the emergency rule is a good idea and in the best interest of the north-east. Some people have said that even when the emergency rule was in place, people were being killed, properties were being destroyed by members of Boko Haram and all that. But I think the emergency rule must have helped in curtailing Boko Haram activities. Maybe if there was no emergency rule, more people would have been killed, so let the lawmakers agree with the president to continue the emergency rule, it’s a very good idea.
The federal government is doing its best to solve the problem of insurgency in this country but a few individuals are the problem. The northerners are playing politics with this. This thing didn’t start today. It started right from the time of Obasanjo. It just increased during Jonathan’s time. Maybe if the president was a northerner, the insurgency wouldn’t be the way it is today.

Opinion

Trans-Kalabari Road: Work In Progress

Published

2 days ago

January 12, 2026

The Tide

Quote:”This Dream project is one of the best things that have happened to the people and residents of Degema, Asari Toru and Akuku Toru Local Government Areas in recent times.”

This is the concluding part of this story featured in our last edition.

Good road network helps farmers to convey their agro-allied products to commercial hubs where buyers and sellers meet periodically to transact business. Road network engineers and motivates people resident in unfriendly geographical terrains, like riverine areas, to own property and shuttle home with ease. Some people will prefer living in their own houses in a more serene and nature-blessed communities to living in the city that is fraught with pollution, and other environmental, social and economic hazards. Prior to the cult epidemic that ravaged parts of Rivers State, the Emohuas, Elemes, Ogonis, and Etches were known for rural dwelling. Most public servants from these areas do their official and private transactions from their villages. For them it was comparatively easier to live in the village and engage in a diversified economic endeavours through farming, fishing or other lucrative business without outrageous charges and embarrassment associated with doing business in Port Harcourt, where land is as scarce as the traditional needle.

That is why the decision to construct the Trans-Kalabari Road by the administration of Dr. Peter Odili was one of the best decisions that administration took. When Dr. Odili vacated office as the Rivers State Governor, Rt. Hon. Chibuike Rotimi Amaechi took over and awarded contracts for continuation of the road project which in my considered view is the felt need of the people of Degema, Asari Toru and Akuku Toru Local Government Areas. Unfortunately, Rt. Hon. Amaechi’s efforts to drive the project was sabotaged by some contractors some of whom are Kalabari people. The main Trans-Kalabari Road is one project that is dear to the people and residents of Degema, Asari Toru and Akuku Toru Local Government Areas of Rivers State. This is because through the road commuters can easily access several communities in the three local government areas. For instance, the road when completed will enable access to eight of the ten communities in Degema Local Government Area, namely: Bukuma, Tombia, Bakana, Oguruama, Obuama, Usokun, Degema town and the Degema Consulate. It will also link 15 of the 16 communities in Asari Toru Local Government Area. The communities are: Buguma, the local government headquarters, Ido, Abalama, Tema, Sama, Okpo, Ilelema, Ifoko, Tema, Sangama, Krakrama, Omekwe-Ama, Angulama. The road will also connect 14 of 17 wards in Akuku Toru Local Government Area, and other settlements. It is interesting to note that It is faster, and far more convenient and economical for the catchment Communities on the Trans-Kalabari Road network to go to the State Capital than the East West Road. The people of the three local government areas will prefer to work or do their transactions in Port Harcourt from their respective communities to staying in Port Harcourt where the house rent and the general cost of living is astronomically high.

Consequently, development will seamlessly spread to the 28 out of 34 communities of Degema, Asari Toru and Akuku Toru Local Government Areas. The only Communities that are not linked by the road project are Oporoama in Asari Toru, the Ke and Bille Communities in Degema Local Government Area and the “Oceania” communities of Abissa, Kula, Soku, Idama, Elem Sangama of Akuku Toru Local Government Area. But because of the economic value of the unlinked Communities to Nigeria, (they produce substantial oil and gas in the area), the Federal, State Governments and the Niger Delta Development Commission (NDDC), can extend the road network to those areas just as Bonny is linked to Port Harcourt and the Lagos Mainland Bridge is connecting several towns in Lagos and neighbouring States.Kudos to previous administrations who had constructed the Central Group axis.

However, what is said to be the First Phase of the Trans-Kalabari Road project is actually a linkage of the “Central Group” Communities which consists of Krakrama, Angulama, Omekwe. Ama, Omekwe Tari Ama, Ifoko, Tema, Sangama. It is the peripheral of the Trans-Kalabari Road. The completion of the Main Trans Kalabari project will free Port Harcourt and Obio/Akpor areas from congestion. It will motivate residents and people of the three local areas to contribute to the development of their Communities. If the Ogonis, Etches, Emohuas, Oyigbos, Okrikas, Elemes can feel comfortable doing business in Port Harcourt from home, residents and people whose communities are linked to Port Harcourt through the Trans-Kalabari Road will no doubt, do likewise. The vast arable virgin land of the Bukuma people can be open for development and sustainable agricultural ventures by Local, State and Federal Government.

It is necessary to recall that the Bukuma community was host to the Federal Government’s Graduate Farmers’ Scheme and the Rivers State Government moribund School-to-Land Scheme under Governor Fidelis Oyakhilome. Bukuma was the only community in Degema, Asari Toru and Akuku Toru Local Government Areas that has the capacity to carry those agricultural programmes. However the lack of road to transport farm produce to Port Harcourt and facilitate the movement of the beneficiaries of the scheme who lived in the community which is several miles away from the farms, hampered the sustainability of the programme. The main Trans-Kalabari Road remains the best gift to the people of Degema, Asari Toru, and Akuku-Toru Local Government Areas. Kudos to Sir Siminilayi Fubara.

By: Igbiki Benibo

Opinion

That U.S. Capture of Maduro

Published

2 days ago

January 12, 2026

The Tide

Quote:”Strategic convenience does not nullify sovereignty. Political frustration does not authorise military abduction.”

The first part of this story was published in our last edition.

In Africa and the Middle East, regime change—whether by invasion, proxy warfare, or sanctions—has often left behind fractured states, weakened institutions, and prolonged instability. Washington’s motivations in Venezuela are widely understood: vast oil reserves, alliances with U.S. rivals, and symbolic defiance of American influence in the Western Hemisphere. But none of these reasons confer legal or moral legitimacy. Strategic convenience does not nullify sovereignty. Political frustration does not authorise military abduction. If every powerful nation acted on its grievances in this manner, global chaos would inevitably follow. International law provides mechanisms for accountability. Under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC), individuals accused of crimes against humanity or other grave offences are subject to investigation and prosecution through judicial processes.

Likewise, extradition treaties, mutual legal assistance agreements, and Interpol mechanisms exist to ensure accountability while respecting due process. These frameworks were designed precisely to prevent unilateral enforcement of “justice” by military force. The most profound consequence of America’s action may not be in Caracas, but in the precedent it sets. If the world accepts that a superpower can unilaterally depose another country’s president, then the foundation of the international system is weakened. Sovereignty becomes conditional—no longer a right, but a privilege tolerated at the discretion of the powerful. Going forward, if another country invades its neighbour, will the United States retain the moral authority to impose sanctions or demand restraint? Some analysts already warn that parallels between Russia’s actions in Ukraine and America’s conduct in Venezuela risk further eroding global norms. Selective adherence to international law breeds cynicism and accelerates the drift toward a world governed by force rather than rules.

Power—military, economic, or political—should serve human progress and collective well-being, not domination and destruction. For African nations, many of which emerged from colonial rule through bitter struggle, this precedent is especially alarming. Sovereignty is not an abstract legal concept; it is a hard-won shield against external domination. Any erosion of that principle anywhere weakens it everywhere. Africa’s painful history of foreign interference makes this lesson especially urgent. For me, the real issue is not whether Nicolás Maduro is a good or bad leader. That judgment belongs, first and foremost, to the Venezuelan people. The larger issue is whether the international system still operates on law—or has quietly reverted to hierarchy. If America insists it is defending global order, it must ask itself a difficult question: can an order survive when its most powerful guardian feels entitled to violate it? Until that question is answered honestly, the capture of a foreign president will remain not a triumph of justice, but a troubling symbol of a world drifting from law toward force.

If the United States felt so strongly about the allegations of terrorism, drug trafficking against Maduro, were there no other lawful options? Judicial accountability, diplomacy, regional mediation, and multilateral pressure may be slow and imperfect, but they reflect respect for international law and sovereign equality. Military seizure is a blunt instrument. It humiliates institutions, radicalizes populations, and hardens resistance. It may remove a leader, but it rarely resolves the underlying crisis. History teaches that military interventions seldom result in stable democratic outcomes. More often, they breed resentment, resistance, and long-term instability. For the sake of global order and the rule of law, the United States should reconsider this path and recommit to diplomacy, legal cooperation, and respect for the sovereign equality of states. Former U.S. Vice President Kamala Harris reportedly described the invasion of Venezuela as “unlawful and unwise,” warning that such actions “do not make America safer, stronger, or more affordable.” Her words reflect a growing recognition, even within the United States, that force without legitimacy undermines both moral authority and global stability.

Should what happened in Venezuela serve as a wake-up call for corrupt African leaders who undermine the people’s right to choose their leaders? The answer is yes. The capture of Maduro should alarm African leaders who manipulate elections, weaken institutions, suppress opposition, undermine citizens’ rights, or cling to power at all costs. Venezuela faced widespread criticism over disputed elections and repression long before this episode, and that context shaped how the world reacted. This does not justify foreign military intervention, but it highlights an uncomfortable truth: prolonged democratic decay isolates nations and invites external pressure—from sanctions to diplomatic censure. Global opinion matters, and legitimacy at home strengthens sovereignty abroad. The Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) and several African leaders have rightly condemned the events in Venezuela, invoking the principles of sovereignty and non-interference enshrined in international and regional law.

Beyond condemnation, however, African leaders must look inward. The continent’s future cannot be built on repression, constitutional manipulation, and personal greed. Leadership must reflect the will of the people, not desperation for power. Two days ago, a social commentator on a radio station argued that Trump’s action—though condemnable—demonstrates how far a leader can go for his country’s interest. According to this view, he did not intervene in Venezuela for personal enrichment, but to strengthen his nation. In stark contrast, many African leaders plunder their own countries. They siphon public resources, impose crushing taxes and harmful policies, and leave their citizens poorer—all for selfish gain. That contradiction is the deeper lesson Africa must confront.True sovereignty is protected not only by international law, but by accountable leadership at home.

By: Calista Ezeaku

Opinion

Kudos Gov Fubara

Published

2 weeks ago

January 2, 2026

The Tide

Please permit me to use this medium to appreciate our able governor, Siminalayi Fubara for the inauguration of the 14.2-kilometre Obodhi–Ozochi Road in Ahoada-East Local Government Area. This inauguration marks a significant milestone in the history of our communities and deserves commendation. We, the people of Ozochi, are particularly happy because this project has brought long-awaited relief after years of isolation and hardship.

The expression of our traditional ruler, His Royal Highness, Eze Prince Ike Ehie, JP, during the inauguration captured the joy of our people. He said, “our isolation is over.” That reflects the profound impact of this road on daily life, economic activities, and social integration of the people of Ozochi and other neighbouring communities. The road will no doubt ease transportation, improve access to markets and healthcare, and strengthen links between Ahoada, Omoku, and other parts of Rivers State.

The people of Ahoada, Omoku, and indeed Rivers State as a whole are grateful to our dear governor for this laudable achievement and wish him many more successful years in office. We pray that God endows him with more wisdom and strength to continue to pilot the affairs of the state for the benefit of all. As citizens, we should rally behind the governor and support his development agenda. Our politicians and stakeholders should embrace peace and cooperation, as no meaningful progress can be achieved in an atmosphere of conflict. Sustainable development in the state can only thrive where peace prevails.

Samuel Ebiye