Rivers Assembly Crisis: Wike’s Faction Knows Fate January 22

•As Amaewhule denies withdrawal of suit

Alex Enumah in Abuja

Barring any last minute changes the faction of the Rivers State House of Assembly loyal to Minister of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Nyesome Wike, would on January 22, know if they can continue to operate as lawmakers of Rivers State.

This is sequel to the decision of a Federal High Court, Abuja, to deliver its judgment on the said day, in the suit filed by the Rivers House of Assembly’s Speaker, Martin Amaewhule, against Governor  Siminalayi Fubara, National Assembly (NASS) and others.

Justice James Omotosho on yesterday announced that he will give his verdict in the matter, shortly after counsel to all parties adopted and argued their written addresses for and against the suit.

The Rivers House of Assembly and Amaewhule are 1st and 2nd plaintiffs in the suit marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/1613/2023, while the National Assembly, Senate President, Deputy Senate President, Senate Majority Leader, Senate Minority Leader are 1st to 5th respondents respectively.

Other respondents include House of Representatives Speaker, House Deputy Speaker, House Majority Leader, House Minority Leader, Clerk to NASS as 6th to 10th defendants.

The Governor of Rivers, Attorney-General of Rivers, Commissioner of Finance, Accountant-General of Rivers, Rivers State Civil Service Commission, Inspector-General (I-G) of Police and Rt. Honourable Edison Ehie, who is also listed as Rivers Assembly’s Speaker in the suit, are 11th to 17th respondents respectively.

The plaintiffs in the amended originating summons dated December 7, 2023 but filed December 11, 2023 by their team of lawyers led by Ken Njemanze, SAN, are asking the court for an order of injunction restraining the 1st to 10th defendants (NASS) from entertaining any request from the 11th defendant (Fubara) to take over the performance of the functions of Rivers Assembly, including its role to make laws for the peace, order and good government of Rivers in respect of matters that are within its constitutional and legislative competence.

Besides, they are also demanding from the court an order of mandatory injunction compelling the Inspector General of Police (whether by himself or by officers and men of the Nigeria Police Force under his command) to provide and continue to provide adequate Security and protection for the 1st Plaintiff under the leadership of the 2nd Plaintiff as the Speaker of the Rivers State House of Assembly for the purpose of transacting the business of the 1st Plaintiff.

In addition, they want the court to restrain the governor from impeding or frustrating the assembly under Amaewhule’s leadership as its speaker.

They equally sought an order of injunction restraining Fubara or the executive arm of the government of Rivers, including the 12th, 13th and 14th defendants from withholding any amount standing to the credit of Rivers Assembly in the state’s Consolidated Revenue Fund, including salaries and emoluments due and payable to the speaker, deputy speaker and other members of the house as well as to the clerk, deputy clerk and other members of staff of the assembly.

Alternatively, they sought an order of injunction restraining them from denying the assembly of the due funds for running its affairs including the payment of salaries, allowances, emoluments and meeting its financial obligations no matter how described, among other 11 reliefs.

Upon resumed hearing on Monday, Justice Omotosho granted the application for joinder filed by Ehie.

Ehie, who also listed himself as speaker of Rivers Assembly, was joined in the suit as 17 defendants and the court made an order deeming all processes filed by him as being properly filed.

Meanwhile, Njemanze told the court that contrary to insinuation, he did not file any motion of discontinuance of the case.

“We are ready to proceed on the substantive matter but we have a motion pending. It is a motion filed on December 15, 2023. We are asking for the restoration of status quo as at November 29, 2023,” he said.

Njemanze also drew the court’s attention to a motion filed on December 15, 2023, seeking an order to restrain Fubara, A-G, finance commissioner, and the accountant-general from continuing the demolition and destruction of the House of Assembly complex in Port Harcourt.

“We are saying that they want to deter us from performing our constitutional duties despite the order my lord made ex-parte,” he said.

He said they ignored the order even after it was extended.

“In this situation, you have the power to discipline all the parties,” he said.

When Justice Omotosho drew the attention of the senior lawyer to an online publication that the issue had been settled, Njemanze however claimed that “As at the time we came, the House of Assembly was performing its work, but now, they are being interfered with.”

The lawyer, who informed the court that only about four members passed the state’s budget, urged the court to grant their all the reliefs being sought from the court.

On his part, counsel for the 1st to 10th defendants (NASS), Dr Joshua Musa, SAN, who informed the court of a counter affidavit filed on December 14, 2023, argued that the circumstances for the invitation of National Assembly to take over the state assembly has not arisen.

“We are not opposing the originating summons having regards to the documents presented.

“An invitation to take over at this stage is an invitation for constitutional mischief, which we will not support,” he said.

Responding, Governor Fubara’s lawyer, K. A. Imafidon, informed the court that his client instructed them to withdraw all that they filed in the suit.

“We have a motion on notice seeking to dismiss the plaintiffs’ suit dated on 11 and filed December 12, 2023. We also filed a motion on notice dated and filed on December 11 to set aside the interim orders made in this suit on the November 30, 2023.

“We have a counter affidavit in opposition to the plaintiffs’ motion on notice for interlocutory injunction dated December 12 and filed same day, etc

“We sought to withdraw them and urge the court to grant our prayer,” he said.

M. O. Ojo, who appeared for Ehie (17th defendant), however prayed the court to stand down the matter on the grounds that the information he had was that the parties had settled their differences.

He pleaded with the court to grant his request to allow his senior take over the matter.

The judge, however, cautioned counsel against drawing conclusion based on what is read or seeing on social media.

“it is the fact before the court that the court will place its decision on. It is the way parties conduct their matter that will determine the position of the court.

“This is a court of record. It is this record that will be transmitted to Appeal Court and Supreme Court. I.must based my decision on what you are doing here,” he warned. 

Omotosho, who said he had  gone through the court file and I had not seen any notice of discontinuance of the case, however granted Ojo’s plea. 

Upon resumed hearing, Oluwole Aladedoye, SAN:, who now announced appearance for Ehie, said he did not come earlier because of the information that the matter was to be withdrawn since President Bola Tinubu had intervened.

 “I owe my lord that duty to inform my lord that the understanding they have is that the 2nd plaintiff, in particular, is to withdraw the action,” he said.

Aladedoye notified that the 2nd plaintiff even attended the meeting convened by the president where the decision was taken.

The judge then asked whether there was a term of settlement before the court.

However, after listening to all parties, the judge subsequently fixed January 22, for judgment.