The Nigerian Association of the Diaspora (NDA-USA) has condemned the statement of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu of an emergency state in the state of Rivers, describing it as a “war against the Nigerians and the international community.”
The Association rejected the emergency rule, which suspended the governor of the State of Rivers, his deputy and all the elected members of the State Assembly, and appointed a single administrator to govern the State for six months.
According to a statement signed jointly by its president, Comrade Martins Tayo and Dr. Benson Obinna, the measure is a shameless contempt for democratic principles and the rule of law.
The group also said that the statement of an emergency state is not a better alternative, given its potential for abuse of power and denial of democratic principles.
Instead, he argued that the president should have used the existing legislation and the ordinary powers of the government to address the situation in the state of Rivers.
The Association expressed concern that the Federal Government, led by the Congress of all progressives (APC), is using the emergency rule as a pretext to improve its power, expand its agenda and remove the balance of power from the legislative and judicial branches of the government in the state of the rivers.
In addition, the association warned that the emergency rule could lead to deterioration in the protection of democracy, citing examples of countries that have turned the emergency rule into a route for a long -term dictatorship.
The group, therefore, demanded that the president revert his decision immediately, restore the governor and his deputy and restore the State Assembly Chamber. They also asked that the only administrator give power to the democratically chosen administration.
The Nigerians in the association of the diaspora promised to take more measures, including protests in the main foreign cities of the United States, to force their demands, emphasizing their commitment to defend democracy and the rule of law in Nigeria.
The statement says in part: “that it is categorically noted that, the statement of the state of emergency is not a better alternative given its potential for the abuse of power and its denial of the principles of democracy,” said the statement.
“The best option would have been the exclusive use of ordinary legislation and even in the worst case the doctrine of need. If the actions of Mr. President were in this regard, it would have been more indicative of concern.
“This is because, ultimately, although there are no 'perfect' responses to the crisis, there would have been evidence of good practices and the institutionalization of the precedence that is completely demilitarizing democracy instead of encouraging it.”