President Bola Tinubu has intervened in the escalating political crisis in Rivers State, asking FCT Minister Nyesom Wike to halt impeachment proceedings against Governor Siminalayi Fubara—while simultaneously instructing Fubara that Wike "remains the undisputed political leader" of the party in Rivers State.
The intervention exposes the Byzantine nature of Nigerian politics, where a federal minister can effectively control a state government despite constitutional provisions for state autonomy. For international observers unfamiliar with Nigeria's patronage-based political system, the situation is bewildering: how can a minister in Abuja orchestrate the removal of an elected governor in Port Harcourt?
The answer lies in understanding Rivers State's unique importance. As Nigeria's second-largest oil-producing state after Bayelsa, Rivers generates enormous revenues—and whoever controls it controls billions in monthly allocations and oil-derived income. The state has been Nigeria's political ATM for decades, funding presidential campaigns and making kingmakers out of governors.
Wike, who served as Rivers governor from 2015 to 2023, handpicked Fubara as his successor. But the relationship soured almost immediately after Fubara took office, with Wike—now serving as Tinubu's FCT Minister—attempting to maintain control over state finances and appointments from Abuja.
The crisis escalated in recent weeks as state legislators loyal to Wike threatened impeachment proceedings. In Nigeria's system, governors facing impeachment can usually rely on presidential support to block their removal. But Tinubu's intervention reveals the president's delicate position: he needs Wike's political machinery and financial resources, but cannot afford the optics of allowing a federal minister to openly overthrow an elected governor.
"This is not about governance," said one political analyst in Lagos. "This is about who controls Rivers State's monthly allocation and oil revenues. Wike built that political structure over eight years and he's not ready to let it go."
The situation illustrates a fundamental problem in Nigerian federalism: states are constitutionally autonomous, but financially dependent on monthly federal allocations. This dependency allows federal officials and the presidency to interfere in state affairs in ways that undermine democratic governance.
In Nigeria, as across Africa's giants, challenges are real but entrepreneurial energy and cultural creativity drive progress. Yet political crises like Rivers State remind international investors why Nigeria's potential remains unrealized—governance is still driven by personalities and patronage rather than institutions and law.
For Fubara, Tinubu's intervention is a pyrrhic victory. Yes, the impeachment is halted—for now. But he's been publicly told to defer to Wike as "undisputed political leader," effectively reducing him to a figurehead governor taking orders from Abuja.
The crisis also demonstrates why many Nigerian governors resist selecting strong successors. Former governors who maintain control from the shadows—so-called "godfathers"—have wrecked state administrations across Nigeria when their handpicked successors attempted independence.
As Nigeria heads toward 2027 elections, the Rivers State crisis offers a preview of political battles to come. Control over oil-producing states will be fiercely contested, and presidents will continue to leverage federal power to maintain political alliances—democratic norms be damned.
For Rivers State's 7 million residents, the power struggle is less about governance than survival. While politicians fight over who controls oil revenues, basic infrastructure crumbles, and citizens wonder when leadership will prioritize development over political dominance.
