After many months of high-stakes political drama in Rivers State, the Supreme Court restored order via two judgments that settled matters. All eyes are now on Governor Siminalayi Fubara to comply, write Assistant Editor ERIC IKHILAE, ANNE AGBI and ELIZABETH EZE.
The Supreme Court, last Friday, brought the Rivers State political crisis to an end.
On February 10, it heard and reserved judgments on eight appeals and cross-appeals files by the Martin Amaewhule-led faction of the Rivers State House of Assembly members, Fubara and Zenith Bank.
Two of the appeals marked SC/CV/1105 and 1106 were against the November 21 judgment of the Court of Appeal in Abuja which reversed an earlier decision by Justice Peter Lifu of the Federal High Court, Abuja restraining the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) from releasing voters’ register to the Rivers State Independent Electoral Commission (RSIEC) for the purpose of conducting the LG election.
Justice Lifu had hinged his decision (in the suit marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/987/2024 filed by the APC) on the grounds that conditions precedent for the conduct of such election were not met by RSIEC.
In reversing the Federal High Court judgment, the Court of Appeal held that the lower court lacked jurisdiction to hear the case and issue the orders.
The other appeals and cross-appeals were on the December 13, 2034, judgment of the Court of Appeal, Abuja which set aside all orders made in an October 30, 2024 judgment by Justice Joyce Abdulmalik of the Federal High Court in Abuja restraining the Central Bank of Nigeria and the Accountant General of the Federation (AG-F) from further releasing financial allocations to the Rivers State Government pending when a lawful appropriation act is passed by a validly constituted State House of Assembly.
A three-member panel of the Court of Appeal, led by Justice Hamman Barka, had, in the December 13, 2024 judgment, held that the subject matter of the case was not within the jurisdiction of the Federal High Court, because it related to the revenue of a state.
The appellate court further held that the appeal, filed by the Rivers State Government against the October 30 judgment by Justice Abdulmalik, was meritorious.
Justice Abdulmalik had, in the October 30 judgment, also restrained Access Bank and Zenith Bank from allowing the Rivers State Government and the governor to make withdrawals from the state’s funds being held in the banks.
She held that the decision by Fubara to present the Rivers State’s 2024 Appropriation Bill to a four-member Assembly, that was not properly constituted, should not be allowed to stand.
The judge noted that the issue about the legality of the budget purportedly passed by four members of the Rivers State House of Assembly, which Fubara claimed he had assented to, was declared invalid in a January 22 judgment by Justice James Omotosho of the Federal High Court in Abuja.
She also noted that in the same judgment, which was affirmed by the Court of Appeal in a judgment on October 10, Justice Omotosho found that Amaewhule is the authentic Speaker of the Rivers State House of Assembly.
Justice Abdulmalik held the decision by Fubara to present the 2024 Appropriation Bill of Rivers State before only four members of the state’s Assembly amounted to a gross violation of Section 91 of the Constitution.
Judgments
In far-reaching judgments, the Supreme Court, on Friday, restrained the CBN and the Attorney General of the Federation (AG-F) from further releasing funds to the Rivers State Government until a valid Appropriation Act is passed by a lawfully constituted House of Assembly, with Martins Amaewhule as the Speaker.
In a unanimous judgment, a five-member panel also ordered that Amaewhule and other 26 members of the Rivers State House of Assembly, who are alleged to have defected, should be allowed to resume legislative duties unhindered.
The Supreme Court also ordered that all members of the Rivers State House of Assembly are to resume normal legislative businesses without any hindrance to any members.
Justice Emmanuel Agim, in the lead judgment, agreed with the arguments made by lawyer to the Amaewhule-led members of the Rivers Assembly, Dr. Ogwu James Onoja (SAN).
Justice Agim condemned the conduct of Governor Simi Fubara, who he noted, chose to destroy the government of Rivers State and resort to acting unlawfully by pulling down the House of Assembly owing to his fear that there were moves to impeach him.
He said: “It must be stated loud and clear that the crisis in Rivers State is a result of non-adherence to the rule of law as well as the fragrant disregard of court orders.”
Justice Agim faulted the Court of Appeal for holding that the Federal High Court lacked the jurisdiction to hear the suit, marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/984/2024 which sought to restrain the CBN and AG-F from releasing funds to the Rivers government.
He said: “The view of the Court of Appeal that suit number FHC/ABJ/CS/984/2024 is over the consolidated revenue fund of River State is wrong as it is not supported by the reliefs claimed for in the originating summons.
“This wrong view influenced it to hold that the subject matter of this suit is not within the scope of the justification of the Federal High Court.
“It is glaring that the objective of suit number FHC/ABJ/CS/984/2024 is to stop the release of funds to the first and second respondents herein – the Government of Rivers State and Simi Fubara – so as to compel them to comply with the judgment in suit number: FHC/ABJ/CS/1613/2023 by causing the passage of the appropriation law by the Rivers State House of Assembly properly constituted as prescribed by the Constitution.
“Suit number FHC/ABJ/CS/984/2024 is not a fresh action with the subject matter independent of the subject matter of suit number FHC/ABJ/CS/1613/2023. It is sequel to the judgment in suit number FHC/ABJ/CS/1613/2023,” the judge said.
Justice Agim to set aside the December 13 judgment of the Court of Appeal.
He restored the October 30 judgment by Justice Abdulmalik and all the consequential orders made thereto.
The judge said: “In the light of the foregoing, I hold that the decision of the Court of Appeal that the Federal High Court lacked the jurisdiction to entertain and determine suit number FHC/ABJ/CS/984/2024 is wrong.
“The trial court validly exercised its jurisdiction to hear and determine suit number FHC/ABJ/CS/984/2024
“So appeal number SC/CV/1174/2024 is resolved in favour of the appellants. On the whole, this appeal succeeds as it has merit. It is accordingly allowed.”
Fubara wrong to deal with four lawmakers
Justice Agim faulted Fubara’s decision to deploy the doctrine of necessity and the provisions of sections 102 and 109 of the Constitution to justify his decision to relate with only four members of a 32-member Rivers State House of Assembly.
He held that, having created an environment that made it impossible for the state Assembly to lawfully function, Fubara could not rely on the provisions sections 102 and 109 and the doctrine of necessity to give validity to the proceedings of the Rivers State House of Assembly constituted by less than 1/3 of the members and the action of his actions, which included presenting the state’s appropriate bill before a four-member Assembly.
Justice Agim noted that Fubara had started preventing the House from conducting its businesses before the issue of defection occurred.
He held that having prevented the 27 members from conducting their legislative businesses by pulling down the Assembly complex, Fubara’s claim the 27 members were no longer members of the state Assembly, on grounds that they had defected, was incorrect.
“The claim that the 27 members are no longer members is a perpetuation of his attempt to prevent them from participating in the House business.
“The 27 members are still valid members of the House of Assembly,” Justice Agim said.
He added that Fubara’s fear of impeachment was not a justification for his attack on the House of Assembly.
“What he has done is to destroy the government because of his fear that he wants to be impeached,” he said while expressing concern that this practice was becoming a culture among politicians.
Justice Agim awarded a cost of N5 million against Fubara and the Government of Rivers State, to be paid to the Rivers State House of Assembly and Amaewhule.
Other members of the panel – Justices Uwani Abba-Aji (who presided), Ibrahim Saulawa, Chioma Nwosu-Iheme and Jamilu Tukur agreed with the lead judgment.
Council election voided
In another judgment also delivered on Friday by the same panel, the Supreme Court voided the Local Government election conducted in Rivers State on October 5 last year.
All members of the panel unanimously held that the election was conducted in violation of Section 150 of the Electoral Act 2024.
Justice Jamilu Tukur, in the lead judgment, agreed with the appellant – the All Progressives Congress (APC) that conditions precedent were not complied with before the RSIEC held the election.
Justice Tukur held that there was no evidence the voters’ registration continued until 90 days before the election and that the requisite notices were issued as required by law.
Fubara vows to comply
Forty-eight hours after the two judgments, Fubara on Sunday announced his intention to fully obey the orders.
He told Rivers people that he expected to get the Certified True Copy (CTC) of the judgment by Friday to enable him to take the necessary action.
In a broadcast, Fubara said: “I have had a meeting with my team of lawyers and they have assured me that the certified true copy of the judgments may be available to them by Friday 7th March 2025.
“I assure you that upon the receipt of certified judgments, we shall study their ramifications and implement them without reservations to move the state forward.
“Furthermore, given the outlawing of caretaker arrangements in the local government system, I hereby direct the heads of personnel management to immediately take over the administration of the 23 local government councils pending the conduct of fresh elections by the Rivers State Independent Electoral Commission.
“I further direct the outgoing local government chairmen to formally hand over the levers of power to the heads of personnel management by Monday, 3rd March 2025.”
Assembly issues 48-hour ultimatum
Yesterday, the Rivers Assembly reconvened for plenary and gave Fubara 48 hours to present the 2025 budget.
In their first sitting after the judgment, the lawmakers asked the governor to present the budget, which he had named the “Budget of Inclusive Growth and Development.”
A resolution signed by the Speaker Martin Amaewhule reads: “That pursuant to the order of the Supreme Court in Suit no.: SC/CV/1174/2024 for the stoppage of Statutory Federal allocations to the Rivers State Government and halting of spending from the Consolidated Revenue Fund of Rivers State pending the passage of an Appropriation Bill, you are requested to present the 2025 Appropriation Bill to the House in line with the provisions of the 1999 Constitution as amended.
“That the House expects you to present the 2025 Appropriation Bill within 48 hours.”
Amaewhule faulted Fubara’s directive to the heads of local government administration to take charge of the councils.
The lawmakers drew the governor’s attention to “the provisions of the 1999 Constitution as amended; the Rivers State Local Government (Amendment) Law, 2023 as well as the judgment of the Supreme Court in Suit No.: SC/CV/343/2024 that prohibits the administration of local governments by HLGAs or any other persons other than democratically elected officials.”
Fubara talks tough
Fubara yesterday said he was not “scared of anything”.
He declared his commitment to protecting the state’s interests, saying he was willing to make the “supreme sacrifice”.
Speaking at the inauguration of the Government House Staff Quarters, he said: “People should know that because no matter how we have been fooled in this state, it has gotten to a point where this state have decided to take their destiny by their hands.
“In as much as I don’t subscribe to violence when the time comes for us to make a decision, I will lead the cause for that decision.
“Let me say it again: I am not scared of anything. The worst that will happen is for me to leave the office, not that I am leaving the earth.
“Is it going to stop me from existing? So I am not bothered about that, but the right thing must be done and said when the opportunity is given to us.”
‘A good judgment’
Analysing the judgment on Arise TV, activist-lawyer Jiti Ogunye said Fubara should not have sidelined the majority lawmakers since no court declared their seats vacant.
He said: “If a governor that is elected under the rule of law and the constitution would not allow the lawmakers to sit, what then do we have? We have a dictatorship.
“I would salute the justices for covering all the issues, including the resort to self-help and demolition of the house. That was recklessness and lawlessness. That was a very good judgment.”
According to him, but for vested interests and the antics of political actors, the matter ought not to have been convoluted, at least from the judiciary angle.
“Political matters that ought to be resolved within political parties too often are taken to the courts for adjudication,” he said.
Ogunye added: “So, I think that it is necessary, moving forward, for the judiciary to develop a rule of law, flowing from all these case laws, or for outright legislation to further streamline instances in which politicians will go to court.”
Odinkalu raises fair hearing concerns
Some feel the judgment weighed heavily in favour of the pro-Wike group.
A professor of law, Chidi Odinkalu, in a post on X, stated: “So, the Supreme Court removed all the LG Chairmen in Rivers State in a case to which they were not party and in which they were not joined?
“I thought that courts generally were bound by basic rules of fair hearing?”
In another post, he said: “I will not hold forth on a judgment of the Supreme Court that I have not read.
“But now, folks may understand why it was worse than imprudent for the Chief Justice of Nigeria to go promenading in the company of a litigant in her court in the name of judicial housing.”
Way forward, by legal expert
Professor of Law, Fassy Yusuf, said the Supreme Court judgments are final, so all concerned must comply.
“The only place one can appeal to is the Almighty God. Not even the president, not the National Assembly because of the doctrine of separation of power,” he said.
Prof Yusuf said the best way forward is for all the gladiators to sheathe their swords and obey the judgments.
“I want to admonish them to take it as no victor no vanquished.
“They should endeavour to jaw-jaw and ensure an amicable resolution of the situations in River State.
“The Executive has its claim, the Legislature has its claim.
“Now that everybody knows where he belongs, I think common sense and logic should now reign.
“There must be dialogue, there must be give and take.
“The victor should see his victory as an opportunity to bring to his side the vanquished and the vanquished also should be able to learn his lessons and adhere to the principles of justice, equity and adherence to the rule of law.”
Prof Yusuf said the judgments are lessons to politicians that whatever they do is subject to the interpretation of the Judiciary.
Therefore, they must endeavour to ensure that justice and adherence to the rule of law will prevail at all times, he said.
“The Rivers people should not be made to be the losers.
“They should be the gainers. The issues should be resolved as quickly as possible so that the people can have what they are entitled to,” Yusuf said.
Shittu’s advice to political actors
Eminent legal scholar Dr Wahab Shittu (SAN) advised Rivers political actors to exercise utmost restraint and adhere strictly to constitutional and judicial directives.
He said: “In practical terms, all parties must unequivocally respect and abide by the Supreme Court’s rulings and any subsequent rulings from the Federal High Court.
“This includes refraining from any actions that could be construed as defying court orders.
“They should avoid any attempts to interfere with or obstruct the legal proceedings at the Federal High Court. Let the court do its work without undue pressure or influence.
“If any party has evidence related to the defection issue, it should be presented to the court through proper legal channels, avoiding public demonstrations or inflammatory statements.
“Political leaders should refrain from making public statements that could incite violence or exacerbate tensions. Focus on promoting peace and stability.
“They must refrain from personal attacks or accusations, and focus on addressing the legal and political issues at hand.
“They should prioritise the delivery of essential services to the people of Rivers State, regardless of political affiliations.
“They must remember that their duty is to the people of Rivers State and that working together is in the best interest of the state.
“The media should prioritise accurate and balanced reporting, avoiding sensationalism or biased coverage.
“The media should use its platform to promote peace and understanding, rather than fueling conflict.
“In summary, a balanced approach that marries strict legal compliance with inclusive, calm, and fact-based political dialogue is essential to defuse tensions and avoid igniting a fresh crisis in Rivers State.”
