Opinion
Police Permit Not Required For Rallies In Nigeria
In January 2012, the mass protests against the so-called
removal of fuel subsidy were violently disrupted by the police and the army personnel. During its recent industrial action the Academic Staff Union of Universities had cause to direct its members to embark on protests to draw public attention to the underfunding of public universities in Nigeria. The Police dispersed the protesting academics with tear gas. A fortnight ago, a political rally in Port Harcourt, Rivers State was brutally suppressed by the Police. In justifying the violent attack, Mr. Joseph Mbu, the Rivers State Commissioner of Police claimed that the rally was unauthorized, as the conveners did not obtain police permit. Since the disruption of public meetings and rallies is an infringement of the fundamental right of Nigerians to freedom of association, assembly and expression, it is pertinent to draw the attention of the authorities to the state of the law on public meetings.
Under the Public Order Act (Cap P42) Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004 the power to regulate public meetings, processions and rallies in any part of Nigeria was exclusively vested in the governors of the respective States of the Federation. Thus, by virtue of Section 1 of the Act, the Commissioner of Police or any other police officer could not issue a licence or permit for any meeting or rally without the authority of the governor. In other words, no police officer was competent to issue a permit for holding any public meeting or rallies or cancel any such public meeting or rally without the authority of the governor of a State.
In the case of All Nigeria Peoples Party & Ors. v. Inspector General of Police (2006) CHR 181,the Plaintiffs being registered political parties requested the Defendant, the Inspector-General by a letter dated 21st May, 2003 to issue Police Permits to their members to hold unity rallies throughout the country to protest the rigging of the 2003 elections. The request was refused. There was a violent disruption of the rally organized in Kano on the 22nd of September, 2003 on the ground that no police permit was obtained.
In a suit filed at the Federal High Court against the Inspector-General of Police, the Plaintiffs challenged the constitutional validity of Police permit under the Public Order Act and the violent disruption of the rally. In defending the action, the Defendant contended that the conveners of the rally did not obtain a Police permit. In dismissing the contention of the Police, the trial judge, the Honourable Justice Chinyere stated inter alia:
“The gist of the provision in Section 1 of the Act is that the Governor of each State is empowered to direct the conduct of all assemblies, meetings and processions on public roads or places of public resort in the State and prescribe the route by which and times at which the procession may pass. Persons desirous of convening any assembly or meeting or of forming a procession in any public resort must apply and obtain the license of the Governor. The Governor can delegate his powers to the Commissioner of Police of the State or to other police officers. Persons aggrieved by the decision of the Commissioner of Police may appeal to the Governor and the decision of the Governor shall be final and no further appeal shall lie therefrom.”
On the inconsistency of police permit with Sections 39 and 40 of the Constitution and Article 11 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights Act (Cap A9) Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004, the learned trial judge said:
“In my view, the provision in Section 40 of the Constitution is clear, direct and unambiguous. It is formulated and designed to confer on every person the right to assemble freely and associate with other persons. I am therefore persuaded by the argument of Mr. Falana that by the combined effect of Sections 39 and 40 of the 1999 Constitution as well as Article 11 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, the right to assemble freely cannot be violated without violating the fundamental right to peaceful assembly and association. I agree with Mr. Falana that violation can only be done by the procedure permitted by law, under Section 45 of the Constitution, in which case there must be a state of emergency properly declared before theses rights can be violated.
I also agree with Mr. Falana that the criminal law is there to take care if protesters resort to violence in the course of demonstration and that once the rights are exercised peacefully, they cannot be taken away.
The Public Order Act so far as it affects the right of citizens to assemble freely and associate with others, the sum of which is the right to hold rallies or processions or demonstration, is an aberration to a democratic society. It is inconsistent with the provisions of the 1999 Constitution. In particular, Sections 1(2),(3),(4),(5) and (6), 2, 3 and 4 are inconsistent with the fundamental rights provisions in the 1999 Constitution and to the extent of their inconsistency, they are void. I hereby so declare.”
After declaring the provisions of the Public Order Act which require police permit for public meetings and rallies illegal and unconstitutional, the Federal High Court proceeded to grant the following reliefs:
1. A DECLARATION that the requirement of police permit or other authority for the holding of rallies or processions in Nigeria is illegal and unconstitutional as it violates section 40 of the 1999 Constitution and Article 11 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (Ratification and Enforcement) Act (Cap 10) Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 1990.
2. A DECLARATION that the provisions of the Public Order Act (Cap 382) Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 1990 which require police permit or any other authority for the holding of rallies or processions in any part of Nigeria is illegal and unconstitutional as they contravene section 40 of the 1999 Constitution and Article 7 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (Ratification and Enforcement) Act (Cap 10) Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 1990.
3. A DECLARATION that the Defendant is not competent under the Public Order Act (Cap 382) Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 1990 or under any law whatever to issue or grant permit for the holding of rallies or processions in any part of Nigeria.
4. AN ORDER OF PERPETUAL INJUNCTION restraining the Defendant (the Inspector-General of Police) whether by himself, his agents, privies and servants from further preventing the Plaintiffs and other aggrieved citizens of Nigeria from organizing or convening peaceful assemblies, meetings and rallies against unpopular government measures and policies.”
Completely dissatisfied with the judgment of the Federal High Court on the issuance of Police permit, the Inspector-General of Police appealed to the Court of Appeal. Upon hearing the case, the Justices of the Court of Appeal unanimously affirmed the judgment of the Federal High Court. With respect to the powers of governors to authorize the issuance of permit for holding public meetings and rallies in their States, Olufunmilayo Adekeye JCA (as she then was) had this to say:
“On a proper perusal of the provisions particularly section 1 subsection 1-6, and sections 2-4 there is no where the name of the Inspector General is mentioned in connection with the issuance of permit for the purpose of conducting peaceful public assemblies. Such application is to be forwarded to the Governor within forty-eight hours of holding such. The Governor may delegate his powers under the Act to the Commissioner of Police of the State or any superior police officer of a rank not below that of a Chief Superintendent of Police as applicable to this case in hand.”
To be continued
Falana (SAN) is a human rights lawyer
Femi Falana
The political atmosphere in Rivers State has been anything but calm in 2025. Yet, a rare moment of unity was witnessed on Saturday, June 28, when Governor Siminalayi Fubara and Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, Chief Nyesom Wike, appeared side by side at the funeral of Elder Temple Omezurike Onuoha, Wike’s late uncle. What could have passed for a routine condolence visit evolved into a significant political statement—a symbolic show of reconciliation in a state bruised by deep political strife.
The funeral, attended by dignitaries from across the nation, was more than a moment of shared grief. It became the public reflection of a private peace accord reached earlier at the Presidential Villa in Abuja. There, President Bola Ahmed Tinubu brought together Governor Fubara, Minister Wike, the suspended Speaker of the Rivers State House of Assembly, Martin Amaewhule, and other lawmakers to chart a new path forward.
For Rivers people, that truce is a beacon of hope. But they are not content with photo opportunities and promises. What they demand now is the immediate lifting of the state of emergency declared in March 2025, and the unconditional reinstatement of Governor Fubara, Deputy Governor Dr. Ngozi Odu, and all suspended lawmakers. They insist on the restoration of their democratic mandate.
President Tinubu’s decision to suspend the entire structure of Rivers State’s elected leadership and appoint a sole administrator was a drastic response to a deepening political crisis. While it may have prevented a complete breakdown in governance, it also robbed the people of their voice. That silence must now end.
The administrator, retired naval chief Ibok-Ette Ibas, has managed a caretaker role. But Rivers State cannot thrive under unelected stewardship. Democracy must return—not partially, not symbolically, but fully. President Tinubu has to ensure that the people’s will, expressed through the ballot, is restored in word and deed.
Governor Fubara, who will complete his six-month suspension by September, was elected to serve the people of Rivers, not to be sidelined by political intrigues. His return should not be ceremonial. It should come with the full powers and authority vested in him by the constitution and the mandate of Rivers citizens.
The people’s frustration is understandable. At the heart of the political crisis was a power tussle between loyalists of Fubara and those of Wike. Institutions, particularly the State House of Assembly, became battlegrounds. Attempts were made to impeach Fubara. The situation deteriorated into a full-blown crisis, and governance was nearly brought to its knees.
But the tide must now turn. With the Senate’s approval of a record ?1.485 trillion budget for Rivers State for 2025, a new opportunity has emerged. This budget is not just a fiscal document—it is a blueprint for transformation, allocating ?1.077 trillion for capital projects alone. Yet, without the governor’s reinstatement, its execution remains in doubt.
It is Governor Fubara, and only him, who possesses the people’s mandate to execute this ambitious budget. It is time for him to return to duty with vigor, responsibility, and a renewed sense of urgency. The people expect delivery—on roads, hospitals, schools, and job creation.
Rivers civil servants, recovering from neglect and under appreciation, should also continue to be a top priority. Fubara should continue to ensure timely payment of salaries, address pension issues, and create a more effective, motivated public workforce. This is how governance becomes real in people’s lives.
The “Rivers First” mantra with which Fubara campaigned is now being tested. That slogan should become policy. It must inform every appointment, every contract, every budget decision, and every reform. It must reflect the needs and aspirations of the ordinary Rivers person—not political patrons or vested interests.
Beyond infrastructure and administration, political healing is essential. Governor Fubara and Minister Wike must go beyond temporary peace. They should actively unite their camps and followers to form one strong political family. The future of Rivers cannot be built on division.
Political appointments, both at the Federal and State levels, must reflect a spirit of fairness, tolerance, and inclusivity. The days of political vendettas and exclusive lists must end. Every ethnic group, every gender, and every generation must feel included in the new Rivers project.
Rivers is too diverse to be governed by one faction. Lasting peace can only be built on concessions, maturity, and equity. The people are watching to see if the peace deal will lead to deeper understanding or simply paper over cracks in an already fragile political arrangement.
Wike, now a national figure as Minister of the FCT, has a responsibility to rise above the local fray and support the development of Rivers State. His influence should bring federal attention and investment to the state, not political interference or division.
Likewise, Fubara should lead with restraint, humility, and a focus on service delivery. His return should not be marked by revenge or political purges but by inclusive leadership that welcomes even former adversaries into the process of rebuilding the state.
“The people are no longer interested in power struggles. They want light in their streets, drugs in their hospitals, teachers in their classrooms, and jobs for their children. The politics of ego and entitlement have to give way to governance with purpose.
The appearance of both leaders at the funeral was a glimpse of what unity could look like. That moment should now evolve into a movement-one that prioritizes Rivers State over every personal ambition. Let it be the beginning of true reconciliation and progress.
As September draws near, the Federal government should act decisively to end the state of emergency and reinstate all suspended officials. Rivers State must return to constitutional order and normal democratic processes. This is the minimum requirement of good governance.
The crisis in Rivers has dragged on for too long. The truce is a step forward, but much more is needed. Reinstating Governor Fubara, implementing the ?1.485 trillion budget, and uniting political factions are now the urgent tasks ahead. Rivers people have suffered enough. It is time to restore leadership, rebuild trust, and finally put Rivers first.
By: Amieyeofori Ibim
Amieyeofori Ibim is former Editor of The Tide Newspapers, political analyst and public affairs commentator
Do the Fulani herdsmen have an expansionists agenda, like their progenitor, Uthman Dan Fodio? Why are they everywhere even the remotest part of other areas in Nigeria harassing, maiming, raping and killing the owners of the land?”
In a swift reaction, The Movement for the Survival of the Ogoni People (MOSOP) decried and strongly condemned the invasion by suspected Fulani herdsmen.
In his denunciation, MOSOP President Fegalo Nsuke described the incident as very unfortunate and deeply troubling, warning against a recurrence of the violence experienced in Benue State. “The killing of yesterday is bad and very unfortunate. We are getting preliminary information about how the herders gained access to the farmland, and it appears some hoodlums may be collecting money and granting access illegally.”
He called on the Hausa community in Rivers State to intervene swiftly to prevent further attacks.
“We want the Hausa community in Rivers State to take urgent action to ensure these issues are resolved”.
But will such appeal and requests end the violent disposition of the Fulani herdsmen? It is not saying something new that the escalating threat and breach of peace across the country by the Fulani herdsmen or those suspected to be Fulani herdsmen, leaves much to be desired in a country that is bedevilled by multi-dimensional challenges and hydra-headed problems.
Some upland Local Government Areas of Rivers State, such as Etche, Omuma, Emohua, Ikwerre, Oyigbo, Abua, Ogba/Egbema/Ndoni, have severally recounted their ordeals, as herdsmen invaded farmlands, destroyed crops, raped female farmers and killed protestant residents.
Again the wanton destruction of lives and properties which no doubt has overwhelmed the Nigerian Police, makes the clamour for State Police, indispensable. The National Assembly should consider the amendment of the Constitution to allow States to have their Statutory policing agencies.
As insurgency has risen to an all time high in the country were killings has now grown to be a normal daily activity in some part of the nation it may not be safe to say that Nigeria still practices democracy.
Several massacres coming from the Boko Haram and the herdsmen amongst all other insurgencies which have led to the destruction of homes and killing, burning of communities especially in the northern part of the country. All these put together are result of the ethnic battles that are fought between the tribes of Nigeria and this can be witnessed in Benue State where herders and farmers have been in constant clashes for ages. They have experienced nothing but casualties and unrest.
In the month of June 13-14, the Yelwata attack at the Guma Local Government Area by suspected gunmen or herdsmen who stormed the houses of innocent IDPs (Internally Displaced Persons) claiming the lives of families, both adults and children estimated to be 200 victims. They were all burnt alive by these unknown gunmen.
This has been recorded as one of the deadliest insurgencies that had happened in recent years. Some security personnel that were trying to fight the unknown gunmen also lost their lives.
Prior to the Yelewata attack, two days before the happening, similar conflict took place in Makurdi on June 11, 2025. 25 people were killed in the State. Even in Plateau State and the Southern Kaduna an attack also took place in the month of June.
All other states that make up the Middle Belt have been experiencing the farmers/herders clash for years now and it has persisted up till recent times, claiming lives of families and children, homes and lands, escalating in 2025 with coordinated assaults.
Various authorities and other villagers who fled for safety also blamed the herdsmen in the State for the attack that happened in Yelwata community.
Ehebha God’stime is an Intern with The Tide.