A lawyer and public affairs analyst, Justice Osai Ahiakwo, has warned that recent political actions against the Rivers State governor represent a dangerous slide into what he described as “political gangsterism”.
In a statement released in Calabar, Ahiakwo said the political pressure being exerted on the state’s executive arm marks a troubling chapter in Rivers State’s democratic journey, one that will not be easily forgotten.
He noted that the state is facing one of its most difficult moments, as governance appears to be drifting away from constitutional order and public accountability.
According to him, governance in Rivers State has increasingly assumed a “monstrous posture,” exposing a serious deficit in leadership discipline and constitutional literacy among key political actors.
Ahiakwo observed that post-election periods often heighten political tension rather than calm it, pointing to what he described as confrontational and, at times, treasonable posturing disguised as political loyalty or dominance.
He warned that such conduct suppresses genuine democratic expression and creates room for mediocrity to thrive at the expense of institutional integrity and effective public service.
The legal practitioner expressed particular concern over the recent conduct of the Rivers State House of Assembly, which he said has strayed from its constitutional role as a stabilising force.
Citing Section 4 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), Ahiakwo stressed that the legislature is empowered to make laws for peace, order and good governance, not to function as a disruptive appendage of the executive under Section 5.
He further stated that Nigeria’s constitutional framework does not permit the exercise of political authority through intimidation, elite consensus or coercion, stressing that sovereignty resides with the people and must be exercised strictly through due process.
Referencing the Supreme Court’s decision in Inakoju v. Adeleke (2007), Ahiakwo noted that constitutional procedures, particularly in impeachment matters, are mandatory and not advisory, warning that any deviation renders such processes unconstitutional.
He added that impeachment remains a grave constitutional mechanism governed by strict safeguards under Section 188 of the Constitution, which exist to protect democratic stability, not individuals, and warned that failure to comply— as reaffirmed in cases such as Dapianlong v. Dariye (2007) and Shaibu v. Edo State (2024)— amounts to a direct assault on the rule of law.
