Paragraph 1: The Supreme Court’s Decision and Immediate Reactions
The political landscape of Rivers State experienced a seismic shift with the Supreme Court’s ruling affirming Martin Amaewhule and 26 others as legitimate members of the State House of Assembly. This decision triggered widespread jubilation among supporters of FCT Minister Nyesom Wike, who viewed the verdict as a significant victory. The pro-Wike lawmakers wasted no time in convening a plenary session upon receiving news of the ruling, while Wike himself, along with prominent allies including senators and former political figures, celebrated the outcome with fervent displays of gratitude and joy. Wike framed the judgment as a triumph for democracy and accountability, emphasizing the importance of a duly constituted legislature in the budgetary process and overall governance.
Paragraph 2: The Supreme Court’s Critique of Governor Fubara’s Actions
The Supreme Court’s ruling went beyond simply affirming the legitimacy of the 27 lawmakers. The five-member panel sharply criticized Governor Siminalayi Fubara’s actions, particularly his decision to partially demolish the House of Assembly building to prevent the dissenting lawmakers from convening. This move, the court argued, constituted a blatant disregard for the rule of law and an abuse of executive power. The justices underscored the vital role of the legislature as a cornerstone of democratic governance and condemned Fubara’s attempt to undermine its function. The court further ordered the reinstatement of the Clerk and Deputy Clerk of the Assembly, who had been unlawfully removed from their positions. Justice Emmanuel Agim, in delivering the judgment, characterized the governor’s actions as "indiscipline born out of executive powers," highlighting the gravity of interfering with an independent branch of government.
Paragraph 3: Financial and Electoral Repercussions of the Ruling
The Supreme Court’s decision also carried significant financial and electoral ramifications. The court barred the Central Bank of Nigeria and the Accountant-General of the Federation from releasing funds to the Rivers State Government until the House of Assembly was properly constituted according to the 1999 Constitution. This action, affirming a previous Federal High Court ruling, effectively froze the state’s access to its monthly financial allocations. Furthermore, the apex court invalidated the local government elections held on October 5, 2024, setting aside the Court of Appeal’s decision and restoring the original ruling of the Federal High Court. The court faulted the Rivers State Electoral Commission (RSIEC) for failing to adhere to mandatory procedures, including the publication of a 90-day notice. These financial and electoral consequences added to the growing pressure on Governor Fubara.
Paragraph 4: Reactions from Political Actors and Groups
The Supreme Court judgment sparked diverse réactions from various political stakeholders. Speaker Amaewhule, emboldened by the ruling, expressed hope that Governor Fubara would reconsider his actions, characterizing his administration as operating illegally. The Tony Okocha faction of the All Progressives Congress (APC) in Rivers State lauded the judgment as a resolution to the protracted crisis between the executive and legislative branches. However, Chief Chukwuemeka Eze, an APC chieftain aligned with former Minister Rotimi Amaechi, viewed the decision as a "declaration of war" against Rivers State, expressing concern about the implications of the ruling. These contrasting views underscore the deep political divisions within the state.
Paragraph 5: The Rivers State Government’s Response and INEC’s Warning
The Rivers State Government, through its Commissioner for Information and Communications, Joseph Johnson, adopted a cautious stance, stating that it was awaiting a full briefing on the implications of the judgment before determining its next course of action. Johnson emphasized that the issue of the 27 lawmakers’ defection was still pending before a Federal High Court and therefore not a matter before the Supreme Court. Meanwhile, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) issued a warning against premature actions regarding vacancies in the State House of Assembly, emphasizing that the matter remained subjudice with ongoing court cases. INEC cautioned against any steps that could lead to wasteful spending of public funds and potential nullification of actions taken before the courts reached a final decision.
Paragraph 6: PANDEF’s Call for Review and the Wider Implications
The Pan Niger Delta Forum (PANDEF) voiced concerns about the impact of the Supreme Court judgment on the people of Rivers State, calling for a review of the decision. This highlights the broader implications of the ruling beyond the immediate political players, underscoring the potential for disruptions to governance and service delivery. The situation in Rivers State remains fluid, with the legal battles and political maneuvering likely to continue. The Supreme Court’s pronouncements have undoubtedly reshaped the political dynamics, but the long-term consequences remain to be seen. The interplay between the executive, legislature, and judiciary, along with the reactions of various political factions, will determine the future trajectory of Rivers State’s political landscape.
