The political crisis in Rivers State, which started with the judgment of Justice Ishaq Bello of the Federal Capital Territory High Court, Abuja, on April 15, has claimed the legislative functions of the House Assembly, which have now been taken over by the National Assembly.
I was in the House of Assembly on July 9 with the Deputy Governor, Mr Tele Ikuru, who came on behalf of Governor Rotimi Amaechi to present a budget variation request. Those who watched one of the several video clips now circulating on the internet would have seen me in black suit striving to tame one of the lead aggressors to discourage him from breaking and entering into the Assembly Chambers with his supporters. The deputy governor had embraced him in a bid to restrain him. It was in that warm embrace which lasted some minutes, during which I thought the deputy governor had succeeded in discouraging him from his course of action, that he, the lead aggressor, uttered the now (in)famous words concerning how, according to him, Governor Amaechi, has been abusing the president and the president’s wife, whom he referred to as mummy, and metaphorically too, as his Jesus Christ on earth. This is not hearsay as I repeat that I was there myself and heard him.
As the events in the video clips show, the deputy governor and I were unable to dissuade him. The rest, as we say, is now history.
As we left the Assembly complex that fateful July 9, it was certain that the contrived commotion would continue the next day. It was certain and clear too, that the sitting of the House would be disrupted.
This is because the group of five was resolute in its desire to make the world believe it was now in charge of the Assembly while the 27 members resisting the group were equally resolute, if not more, in their stance that five can never be more than 27.
The next day as the five against 27 respective parties made for the Assembly Complex, violence suddenly erupted as their supporters entered the arena, resulting in the Police throwing teargas canisters and the subsequent interim takeover of the Assembly by the House of Representatives through its timely and proficient intervention.
It is curious that this timely, proficient, patriotic intervention, was discouraged by some for one reason or the other.
Perhaps, to those opposed to the take over, the National Assembly should have remained uninterested in the crises as the Rivers State Police Command was, which disinterest provided, ab initio, the leeway for the commencement and festering of the Assembly disturbances. (I had, about a month ago in a press conference, warned of our slide to lawlessness in Rivers State through the machinations of the Police Command under the present Commissioner of Police). With such disinterest and with no authority in sight apart from the governor’s intervention which saved the situation on the first day, the lawmakers and their respective supporters would have concluded the massacre of themselves and then, at that stage, it would be ripe, as some argue, to intervene; only at that stage and certainly not before. This is not logical. It is unacceptable as nothing is more precious than human lives.
Let us grant it without conceding it, that the intervention, according to some viewpoint, is immature or premature or precipitous, etc. However, to the extent that it saved several lives on both sides of the contrived disturbance, it should still be commended especially since it is not without constitutional basis. What is immature, premature, or precipitous is not necessarily unconstitutional as the cardinal issue is whether there is constitutional basis for such immature or premature action especially in the face of clear and imminent danger to several lives and property if no action is taken at all.
I have stated in the past that the disturbances are contrived: In other words, they were planned in advance, they were invented and not genuine, all to achieve a predetermined end and that is why the planners and their sponsors do not want any genuine approach to resolving it as such genuine resolution will not hit their target of removing the Governor by any means whatsoever and howsoever. This is the cause of action: Remove Governor Amaechi at all cost and by any means whatsoever and when that is accomplished, he can go to court and speak the grammar outside power and the period of the litigation will certainly last longer than his remaining tenure as in the Ladoja case. To many Nigerians, the courts are the place where disputes are buried and never resolved. So, those who seek any advantage at all cost, employ any means, fair or foul, legal or illegal, to attain it and then turn round to taunt their hapless victim by advising them to go to court. This is the tragedy of the judiciary and it helps in promoting impunity as we are seeing in Rivers State in particular. Whenever a conqueror tells you to go to court, he is actually taunting you knowing that he will wear you out in court and the matter will never get resolved while he is enjoying the subject of the looting. Such persons do not really want a genuine resolution of the dispute because the dispute was contrived.
The Rivers State crises are contrived and the sponsors do not really want any genuine resolution unless that which will ease out the governor prematurely and incapacitate him politically. Below are the activities of the sponsors of the crises which form the bases for my personal view:
By the Supreme Court judgment in Fawehinmi & 2 Ors Vs Babangida & 3 Ors, which judgment can be found from pages 604 to 691 of the Nigerian Weekly Law Reports, [2003] 3 NWLR Part 808, the Federal Government cannot constitutionally set up a Commission of Enquiries for any activity outside the Federal Capital Territory as such commissions of enquiry are adjudged residual matters for the states. Presidential spokesman on political matters, Alhaji Ahmed Gulak, clearly, with knowledge of this constitutional incapacity of the National Government, rightly suggested an enquiry into the disturbances – he did not state that the Federal Government should set it up since this is constitutionally impossible, but that such an enquiry should be set up. Since only the Rivers State Government can, and as a responsible and duty-conscious government, it has since constituted a Judicial Commission of Enquiry headed by Justice B. A. Georgewill to ascertain the role played by all in the saga amongst other terms of reference and make appropriate recommendations.
This exercise is pursuant to the Commissions of Enquiry Law, Cap 30, Laws of Rivers State.
Because the sponsors of the disturbances are not interested in the resolution as that will not achieve their target, they have filed a suit in which they are seeking to restrain the commission from carrying out its assignment.
Again, and as is already widely known, the same group wrote to the Senate intimating it that it has instituted an action in court to restrain it from concurring with the House of Representatives on the matter. Whether such a cause of action can be founded in the face of Section 30 of Cap L12, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004, the court will decide.
Add to it the fact that up till the time of this writing, none of the five minority lawmakers, not even the one who reportedly ordered that the governor be shot, has been invited by the police or declared wanted.
The situation therefore is this:
Intervention by the House of Representatives is said to be premature or unnecessary; in other words, they should not have intervened.
The Senate is being litigated against to prevent it from intervening; in other words, the Senate, too, should not intervene.
The Commission of Enquiry in Rivers State set up to investigate the matter and make findings, is being fought in court to prevent it from looking into the matter. In other words, the Rivers State Government, which alone has the constitutional power to set up a Commission of Enquiry into the matter, should also not do anything.
How, then, will the bloodbath and disturbances be curtailed and prevented from reccurring or escalating? Perhaps, only when the governor is removed by any means whatsoever.
This is precisely why I do not still agree with those who reason that the National Assembly, like the police in Rivers State, should do nothing until someone dies or the governor is illegally removed or a state of emergency is declared. To the contrary, the National Assembly should receive fulsome commendation from us all, regardless of which side of the divide we stand, because, but for their timely intervention, the police in Rivers State, by now, would be calling for reinforcement and assistance from the armed forces and media practitioners would be refusing posting to Port Harcourt for fear of suffering harm from the inevitable violence and killings that would have inexorably followed the institutional inaction as planned by the sponsors.
I commend the House of Representatives and the Senate and, indeed, all well-meaning Nigerians, who saw through the plot and rose against it, and urge them to celebrate the intervention for, through it, countless lives have been saved. By this, the National Assembly has proved, beyond doubt, that the primary responsibility of governments is the preservation of lives and property.
