The Court of Appeal yesterday affirmed Speaker Martins Amaewhule and 24 other lawmakers as members of the Rivers State House of Assembly
The court voided the state High Court order restraining the 25 lawmakers, known as G-25, from parading themselves as Assembly members.
There was jubilation in the camp of Federal Capital Territory (FCT)Minister Nyesom Wike, following the judgment.
Also hailing the verdict, the All Progressives Congress (APC) described it as the triumph of the rule of law.
The chairman of Emohua local government, Chidi Lloyd, said the judgment has invalidated the inauguration of the local government caretaker committees by Governor Siminalayi Fubara.
Oko-Jumbo had approached the High court to seek an interim injunction against Amaewhule and 24 others from further conduct of legislative duties, having left the party on which platform they were elected for another party.
Oko-Jumbo also prayed the court to legally declare their seats vacant.
The court granted the prayers and ordered that Amaewhule and his colleagues should stop parading themselves as lawmakers and not conduct legislative business.
Dissatisfied with the order, the 25 lawmakers challenged the jurisdiction of the High court at the Appeal Court.
Setting aside the order of the High Court restraining the 25 lawmakers who allegedly defected from the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) to the All Progressives Congress (APC) from further parading themselves as members of the Assembly, the Appeal Court said the order was faulty.
In a unanimous judgment, the three-member panel of the Court of Appeal, Port-Harcourt Division, which sat in Abuja, held that the High Court lacked the jurisdiction to hear the case.
The Appeal Court held that by the provision of Section 272(3) of the Constitution, it is only the Federal High Court that has the jurisdiction to determine whether or not the seat of a lawmaker was vacant or his term of office has ceased.
According to Section 272(3), “Subject to the provisions of Section 251 and other provisions of this Constitution, the Federal High Court shall have jurisdiction to hear and determine the question as to whether the term of office of a member of the House of Assembly of a state, a Governor or Deputy Governor has ceased or become vacant.”
In the lead judgment, Justice Jimi Bada held that by granting the far-reaching order restraining the lawmakers from further acting as members of the Assembly without hearing from the appellants amounted to a denial of their right to fair hearing.
The judge held that there was no urgency that warranted the grant of the ex-parte order by the Rivers State High Court.
Justice Bada said: “The trial court ought to have listened to both sides before coming to a decision prejudicial to the appellants.”
The court struck out the original suit filed before the Rivers State High Court, having held that the Rivers State High Court lacked the jurisdiction to hear and determine the suit.
The judgment was on the appeal marked: CA/PH/198/2024 filed by Martin Chike Amaewhule and 24 others, with Victor Oko Jumbo (Speaker, Rivers State House of Assembly) and two others as respondents.
Justice Bada held that the trial court lacked the jurisdiction to have made the interim ex-parte injunctions, adding that the ex-parte injunctions, having been made without jurisdiction, is null and void and of no effect.
He noted that as against the impression created by the plaintiffs at the lower court, there was no urgency to warrant the ex-parte order made by the Rivers State High Court.
He observed that while the cause of action arose on December 13, 2023, when the appellants announced their defection, the plaintiffs at the trial court waited for up to 140 days before filing the suit.
Justice Bada said: “What this means is that there is no more urgency on the part of the respondents. The delay is self induced.
“By virtue of the provision of Section 36(1) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) and the principles of natural justice, the appellants are entitled to be accorded fair hearing within a reasonable time by the trial court before the adverse and prejudicial pronouncements and determinations complained of, which were made through the said ex-parte order.
“It is my view that the trial court ought to have listened to both sides before coming to a decision prejudicial to the appellants.
“With the resolution of issues one, two, three, four and five in favour of the appellants and against the respondents, it is my view that the appeal has merit and it is allowed.
“In view of my finding earlier, that the trial court lacks the jurisdiction to hear and determine the suit filed by the first to third respondents, therefore, suit number: PHC/1512/CS/24, that is, Right Honourable Victor Oko Jumbo and two others against Honourable Martins Chike Amaewhule and 22 others, is hereby struck out.”
Other members of the Court of Appeal panel, Justice Hamma Barka and Bilikisu Aliyu, agreed with the lead judgment.
Justice Barka said the appellants shall revert to their position before the orders were made.
He added: “All actions taken pursuant to the order of the High Court of Rivers State are null and void.”
APC hails CP judgment
Rivers State All Progressives Congress (APC) Caretaker Chairman Sir Tony Okocha hailed the judgment, describing it as “a meticulous, perfect reasoning.”
He said the Appeal Court decision has settled the issues that have been raising dusts in the state.
Okocha said the court has restored the rights of Speaker Martin Amaewhule to resume full legislative business along with the 24 members, as the remaining three Lawmakers are on suspension.
He said: “I commend the industry of the court of Appeal Panelists. It was a perfect reasoning. This Court judgment has come to settle the issues that are raising dusts in the state.”
Okocha however, lamented that the Court failed to order the National Judicial Council(NJC) to sanction Justice Charles Wali of the State High court for hearing a matter his court was not qualified to adjudicate on.
He said the judgment would have served as deterrent to other judges who may be tempted to toe the wrong paths in the future.
Okocha added: “The court of Appeal would have recommended that judge who made restraining order to the NJC for scrutiny, so that some of them would learn their lessons.
“What the court of Appeal mean when it said the status quo should remain is that the positions, the way things were before the matter was instituted in any court should be returned.”
Jubilation in Wike’s camp
There was jubilation in Wike’s camp, following the judgment.
Supporters of the minister rolled out the drums to celebrate the judgment in Port-Harcourt, the state capital.
Some of the elected chairmen pushing for the extension of their tenures exuded happiness.
The Chairmen of Emohua, Lloyd, and his Ikwerre local government counterpart, Chief Samuel Nwanosike, said the judgment had invalidated the decisions and approvals by Fubara, while relying on the three-member House of Assembly.
Lloyd, who commended the judiciary for upholding the constitution and deepening democracy with its ruling, said the judge at the lower court, who created the confusion, should not be allowed to go free.
He said the order that stripped Amaewhule and 24 other lawmakers of their statuses was capable of creating anarchy and causing bloodshed in the state.
Lloyd said: “The issues are clear. We first give glory to God. We continue to have hope in the judiciary. The judiciary will continue to be the last hope of the common man.
“The laws are clear. It is not a respecter of anybody and it will not change because you are President or governor or chairman or senator. The law is clear. Once a court has no jurisdiction to hear a matter, everything it has done is null and void. That is what the court has said.
“The court has also affirmed the position of Martins Amaewhule, which was not disputed. Amaewhule has at all times remained the Speaker of the Rivers State House of Assembly.
“My only regret is that the judge who would have thrown this state into a state of anarchy should not be allowed to walk about freely because if anybody had died it would have been as a result of the decision of the judge.”
Lloyd observed that the judgment has far-reaching consequences on the tenure elongation dispute, which he said remained a subject of litigation in many other suits.
He said he and his colleagues would not be in a hurry to take advantage of the judgment to return to their offices, until the court of appealed ruled on the specific matter.
Lloyd said: “This particular judgment has consequences on the tenure elongation of the chairmen. If it were the other way round, it means that all that Martins Amaewhule and his colleagues had done would have been null and void.
“But because the court had said that Martins Amaewhule is at all times the speaker, everything he had done including the amendment to the 2018 law stands. The issue of the tenure of local government chairmen is still subject of litigation at various levels of court. The hearing continues today at the court of appeal.
“The full decision of the court of appeal had not been seen. The issues of whether there was a House when the law was made and whether Amaewhule and his colleagues are still members of the House and can discharge the functions of the House have been resolved in the affirmative; that everything they have done is the law”.
On the police continuous occupation of the local government secretariats, Lloyd said: “ What the police do in the state of dispute is to ensure that lives and properties are safeguarded. The court has taken a decision on who the Speaker is.
“It is just a little while the judgment on the other matter will be given. If Oko-Jumbo was not the speaker, everything he did including the screening of the purported caretaker committee members is null and void and of no effect.”
