Time for Dialogue in Rivers State, By Sam Akpe

My perspective is that the current stand-off can be settled if both parties choose to pursue a resolution. It is essential that no one has to endure hardship over political power, and Rivers residents should not bear the consequences of individual aspirations. A conflict often emerges when disagreements cannot be resolved around the negotiation table, and history demonstrates that every conflict concludes with parties returning to that same table. This situation should not be an exception.

The loyalty of elected representatives within the Rivers State House of Assembly is becoming increasingly hard to discern. Whose interests do they genuinely serve?

According to the 1999 Constitution, the state legislature, composed of elected officials, functions as a crucial branch of the state government akin to the executive and judicial branches.

This fact accounts for why these lawmakers receive salaries funded by the government, utilize luxury vehicles, and reside in lavish homes financed by taxpayers.

Without question, the foremost devotion of each lawmaker should be to their constituents—the individuals they represent—and to the constitution that dictates their governmental roles.

Additionally, it is fundamental to understand that the primary duty of lawmakers is to create laws that contribute to the peace and development of the nation or state.

It follows that one cannot be considered a lawmaker or treated as such if their contributions do not encompass the essential duties associated with that title, which are indeed their core responsibilities.

Globally, any time lawmakers stray from law-making—especially during the passage of the Appropriation Bill—they forfeit that identity and the rights associated with being law-makers. This is a straightforward concept to grasp.

To clarify, an appropriation bill is a vital legislative tool in any democracy. Failing to enact that bill amounts to halting government functions, which inevitably leads to chaos.

Nonetheless, Rivers State has been plagued with constitutional irregularities for nearly three years. The individual elected to govern the state has been rendered ineffective due to the very body established by law to support him in that role.

The State House of Assembly, consisting of constitutionally elected members, appears to be operating under the influence of one person—a self-styled political mentor rather than the serving governor.

This political figure dictates to elected representatives what actions to take, regardless of the stipulations in the 1999 Constitution to which they all pledged to adhere.

During this period, the political climate in Rivers State has become paralyzed and toxic due to unusual political maneuvers orchestrated by a select few in power.

Those outside this inner circle have fallen prey to aggressive political tactics aimed at undermining the governor's authority to carry out his constitutional responsibilities.

The entire situation reportedly stemmed from an enigmatic agreement purportedly reached between Governor Siminalayi Joseph Fubara and his powerful predecessor, Minister Nyesom Wike.

Daily, unnecessary negative events continue to arise. President Bola Ahmed Tinubu has already declared and then lifted a state of emergency—a critical constitutional measure intended to restore order to governance.

However, this approach appears ineffective. The widespread sentiment is that the state of emergency was implemented to placate Minister Wike, whose antagonism towards Governor Fubara seems to enjoy covert presidential support.

While no one has provided substantial evidence to corroborate this view, it raises the question: if a child passes away the morning after an ominous bird's cry at night, is it not apparent who is responsible? Personally, I do not possess definitive proof of who is culpable!

Despite significant protests and threats, the state of emergency was imposed, later ratified by legislative endorsement. Wike is thought to have emerged victorious from this episode. Yet, unbeknownst to him, the struggle is far from over.

Months after the emergency was enacted and subsequently repealed, Minister Wike continues to maintain a tight grip on Fubara's administration.

Governor Fubara has declined to capitulate. His perseverance should be a subject of scholarly study on political resilience at our universities.

The current impeachment efforts have dual aspects. On one hand, Fubara is seemingly gaining unpredictable political momentum following his transition to the All Progressives Congress, which may secure him the governorship nomination for 2027.

If this transition startled Wike, his subsequent strategies indicate he still possesses a repertoire of political tactics. It is true that Wike excels in times of crisis. Even when he suffers defeat in a confrontation, he does so boldly and without shame.

On the other hand, it is becoming evident that even though Fubara has been denied a budget to pay for essential services and carry out projects for the Rivers populace, he appears undeterred. He demonstrates a growing confidence and political significance with each passing day.

Therefore, how does one approach a formidable force termed Fubara—hard to dismantle, impossible to overlook—who, while nearly written off, continues to forge ahead?

How can one manage a tempest like Wike—a man whose extensive political prowess and tactics provide a balance against Fubara's efforts?

Wike seems to defy the norms of political mentorship with remarkable dexterity! His brand of politics lacks a rulebook. He embodies the rule. There are no alternatives for challengers. One must either conform or face extinction.

However, it is clear that if Fubara remains affiliated with the APC or any other viable political entity, he is poised to reclaim authority in 2027—an outcome that would indisputably curtail Wike's political sway in Rivers State.

Can Fubara secure re-election in the current environment of Rivers State? Absolutely! This is achievable! History shows that such scenarios repeat themselves in Rivers State.

Since 1999, no political hostility from any quarter has impeded a first-term governor in Rivers from securing a second term!

In 2003, the late Chief Marshall Harry and other prominent figures in Rivers politics tried this tactic with Dr. Peter Odili, but it failed miserably. Instead, Odili triumphed with renewed vigor and influence.

After concluding his term in 2007, Governor Odili faced unwarranted, albeit expected, opposition from Rotimi Amaechi, who took over as governor.

Amaechi was upset that, after years of being Odili's aide and acting as political cover for him as the speaker of the state legislature for eight years, Odili would not put him forward as a candidate for governor.

On the day of the ceremonial flag presentation to the gubernatorial nominee in Port Harcourt, President Obasanjo, using a contrived political phrase, nullified the people's choice by announcing Amaechi’s disqualification from the race.

Whether this action was instigated by Odili or due to circumstances beyond his control remains open to debate. Amaechi fought back legally and ultimately ascended to the governorship.

He believed it was in his interests to keep Odili at a distance, which became not only uncomfortable but also quite humiliating for the senior figure who had nurtured Amaechi’s political career.

Upon assuming office, Amaechi appointed Wike as his chief of staff. In any democratic system, the chief of staff serves as the closest administrative and political adviser to a president or governor.

The chief of staff governs the core circle of power within a political environment, a role that Amaechi exclusively entrusted to Wike—an office of immense trust.

Wike held that role until being appointed Minister of State for Education by President Goodluck Jonathan.

Then something went awry. Political discord. Wike and his political mentor, Amaechi, clashed—almost violently. It was astonishing!

When Wike eventually succeeded Amaechi as governor of Rivers, it was clear that an unceasing conflict would ensue.

At that juncture, Wike subtly gravitated towards the comfort of Odili's alliance—a validation of the saying that the enemy of my enemy is my friend.

I recall my one visit to Amaechi when he served under the late President Muhammadu Buhari as a minister. I advised him to refrain from engaging Wike and to focus on his ministerial duties.

Amaechi gazed at me and insisted that this was not an option. He expressed, “Sam, you fail to comprehend politics. I cannot permit Wike to undermine me.” Regardless, they continued their war—and it persists.

How did Fubara ascend to the governorship of Rivers State? I do not have pertinent details worth discussing here. I have personally never met Fubara. However, I appreciate his resolute disposition. He has an impassive demeanor; whenever he coughs, Wike seems to be affected.

Many theories have been circulated by political brokers regarding why Wike and Fubara have yet to reach an understanding since Wike transferred Fubara to the Rivers State Government House.

All that has been articulated by Wike is ‘an agreement is an agreement!’ What that agreement precisely entails remains a clandestine matter between them.

It appears Wike's ambition is to dominate the political landscape in Rivers State. Regrettably, Fubara has turned into his obstacle—a steadfast iron bar obstructing that ambitious objective.

Indeed, the only event that would potentially bring a smile to Wike tomorrow morning would be news that Fubara has resigned from his post. However, that’s unlikely to take place!

The pivotal question is: Whose cause is Wike championing, and whose interests is Fubara safeguarding? Additionally, what motivates the lawmakers to act in the ways they do?

In truth, history leans in favor of Fubara—even if current political realities cast daunting shadows over him. He may be seen as politically simple-minded, but that does not detract from his intellectual acuity.

The effort to impeach Fubara resembles a significant joke—indeed, that's precisely what it is! Fortunately, it represents Wike’s final strategy in his endless supply of political antics.

Ultimately, I believe that this standoff can find resolution if both sides choose to seek it. No individual should experience suffering due to political conflict. The populace of Rivers must not endure hardships as a result of personal ambitions.

War becomes a consideration when dialogues collapse, and, historically, most wars conclude with the opposing factions returning to negotiation tables. This situation should not be an exception.

Wike, Fubara, and the elected lawmakers need to reflect on how history will evaluate their actions. What legacies will they carry in the years to come? Will they be remembered as heroes or as villains? Will they be hailed as patriots or condemned as destructors?

Each memoir attempts to respond to various queries, yet primarily: Where were you and what actions did you take when the crisis began?

Memoirs on Rivers State will raise these inquiries. It’s time to revert to the negotiating table.