Vice President Kashim Shettima, has warned the media and politicians to stop fabricating fictitious conflicts between him and President Bola Tinubu.
He detested the “practice of wrenching statements from context in order to fabricate nonexistent conflicts” between Nigeria’s first two leaders.
Shettima gave the warning in a statement by his spokesman and Senior Special Assistant to the President on Media and Communications, Stanley Nkwocha.
The warning came against the backdrop of his remarks at a book launch on Thursday in Abuja, which he said were distorted by some online news outlets.
Nkwocha noted with concern the “gross misrepresentation” of remarks made by Shettima during the public presentation of the book OPL 245: The Inside Story of the $1.3 Billion Oil Block by Mohammed Bello Adoke (SAN), held at the Yar’Adua Centre, Abuja.
He said there is no link between what the Vice President said at the event and the declaration of a state of emergency in Rivers State.
According to the statement, “Certain online news outlets and individuals have distorted the Vice President’s comments in pursuit of a mischievous agenda, twisting his account of how the administration of former President Goodluck Jonathan considered removing him from office — then as governor of Borno — at the height of the insurgency in the North East.
“This sensational reporting, which strips the Vice President’s remarks of their proper context, ventures into fiction by drawing false equivalence between his personal experience and the state of emergency declared in Rivers State, as well as the subsequent suspension of Governor Siminalayi Fubara by His Excellency, President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, President and Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of the Federal Republic of Nigeria”.
Nkwocha wrote: “We wish to state categorically that Vice President Shettima’s comments were made within the context of acknowledging the author’s professional conduct during his tenure as Attorney General of the Federation—a tribute to his public service record.
“His remarks were historical references to events during the Jonathan administration and were intended as a discourse on Nigeria’s constitutional evolution. They served to highlight how complex federal-state tensions have been managed through legal mechanisms and the country’s progress in that regard.
“For the avoidance of doubt, President Tinubu did not remove Governor Fubara from office. The constitutional measure implemented was a suspension, not an outright removal. This action, along with the declaration of a state of emergency, was taken in response to the grave political crisis in Rivers State at the time.
“The situation was unprecedented, with the State House of Assembly complex under demolition and the governor facing a looming threat of impeachment by aggrieved members of the legislature. No objective observer can deny that this decisive intervention by the President brought stability and calm to Rivers State.
“This situation is not comparable to that of the North East under the Jonathan administration, where violent non-state actors were directly challenging the sovereignty of the Nigerian state, demanding unified action by both federal and state authorities to confront terrorism.
“In contrast, President Tinubu acted strictly within constitutional limits and in consultation with relevant stakeholders to preserve democratic institutions and restore order in Rivers State.
“Nigeria’s laws provide a clear framework for addressing such matters. Section 305(3)(c) of the Constitution authorises extraordinary measures when there is ‘a breakdown of public order and public safety in the federation or any part thereof to such extent as to require extraordinary measures to restore peace and security.’
“The situation in Rivers clearly met this constitutional threshold, with persistent politically motivated violence, systematic attacks on federal institutions, and near-complete paralysis of governance—conditions intolerable in any democratic society. According to credible security reports, these acts even escalated into attacks on national assets.
“President Tinubu acted with constitutional fidelity. His proclamation invoking Section 305(2) was ratified by an overwhelming bipartisan majority in the National Assembly, as required by Section 305(3).
“This cross-party consensus in suspending the government of Rivers State, led by Sim Fubara, reflects a shared understanding among our elected representatives that the situation had reached a point of constitutional necessity, requiring immediate federal intervention.
“Clearly, without mincing words, the action of President Tinubu in suspending Mr Fubara and others from exercising the functions of office averted the governor’s outright removal. To conflate suspension with removal is misleading. Therefore, interpreting Senator Shettima’s remarks as commentary on current events is either a willful misrepresentation or a deliberate neglect of constitutional context.
“The Vice President, speaking extemporaneously, focused on the importance of public officials documenting their stewardship and on the enduring principle of accountability in public service. His historical references were made to illustrate the principled stands taken by past public servants, as well as his personal ties to Mohammed Bello Adoke and former Speaker Aminu Waziri Tambuwal.
“His remarks were not in any way a criticism of President Tinubu’s actions, which the Vice President and the entire administration fully support and stand by without reservation.
“Vice President Shettima stands in loyal concert with President Tinubu in implementing these difficult but necessary actions to safeguard our democracy. We urge media organisations and political actors to desist from the destructive practice of wrenching statements from context in order to fabricate nonexistent conflicts.”
Responding however, the African Democratic Congress (ADC) has dismissed the clarification issued by the Presidency on Vice President Shettima’s recent remarks regarding the powers of the President to remove elected officials, describing it as “a mere attempt at political correctness.”
The party, in a statement by its interim National Publicity Secretary and spokesperson, Mallam Bolaji Abdullahi, insisted that Shettima’s original comments were accurate, constitutionally sound, and they resonated with Nigerians.
ADC maintained that the Vice President’s statement—that the President lacks the constitutional authority to remove even an elected councillor, let alone a governor — was a necessary reminder of constitutional limits on executive power.
It said, “This simple truth, which is anchored in the Nigerian Constitution, must not be lost in the fog of political correctness that is currently emanating from Aso Rock.
“Truth does not respect political correctness. What was wrong and unconstitutional under President Jonathan in the case of Borno State remains wrong and unconstitutional under President Tinubu in the case of Rivers State.
“This is not just history. It is precedent. Unlike Jonathan, who respected the law, President Tinubu has chosen to tread the path of unconstitutionality in Rivers State,”
In fact, the ADC described the current political situation in Rivers State as an “executive overreach,” warning that it sets a dangerous precedent and undermines Nigeria’s democratic foundations.
“For the avoidance of doubt, the breakdown of law and order cited by the Presidency as justification for the disruption of democratic order in Rivers is nothing compared to the Boko Haram insurgency under Jonathan’s tenure — yet the constitution was respected”.
The party insisted that Shettima’s comments were not a slip but a factual recollection of constitutional history.
The ADC demanded that President Bola Tinubu “immediately restores democratic governance in Rivers State, end all unconstitutional interference, and apologise to Nigerians for what the party termed an abuse of power and blatant disregard for constitutional order.”
It said, “The ADC will continue to stand with the Nigerian people in defence of democracy, justice, and constitutionalism”.
