Curious Role of Judiciary in Rivers Crisis

The tensions surrounding the political crisis in Rivers State may have eased albeit temporarily, the questionable role of the judiciary in escalating the situation must be addressed to safeguard the future of democracy, Davidson Iriekpen writes

The recent crisis that engulfed Rivers State following the clash between supporters of the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Mr. Nyesom Wike, and Governor Siminalayi Fubara has brought to the fore the role played by the judiciary. 

To many, the conflict between the two political gladiators, which started in October 2023 after some members of the state House of Assembly loyal to the minister attempted to impeach the governor, worsened after the judiciary was dragged into the fray.

Whether it was the crisis in the state assembly or the just concluded local government elections, it is mostly believed that the third arm of government did not douse the situation. Instead, it helped to aggravate the situation.

Last week’s confusion, which led to the setting ablaze of three local government secretariats in the state, was attributed to the conflicting decisions of courts of coordinate jurisdiction on the local government elections.

While the state High Court presided over by Justice I. Igwe on September 4, 2024, ordered the state’s Independent Electoral Commission (RSIEC) to conduct the local government elections in the state, using the 2023 voters’ register compiled by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), a Federal High Court in Abuja presided over by Justice Peter Lifu on September 30 restrained INEC from releasing the voters’ register to RSIEC, technically stopping the parties from going ahead with the polls.

In a suit instituted by the Action People’s Party (APP) against RSIEC, the state government and the governor, Justice Igwe, mandated the Nigeria Police Force as well as the Nigerian Security and Civil Defence Corps to provide necessary security during the election process.

He said the defendants were bound by Section 7, sub-section 1 of the Constitution and Section 5 (A) of the RSIEC Law Number 2 of 2018 to make provisions and conduct the local government polls, especially following the expiration of the tenure of the former elected officials on June 17.

The judge also cited, as a necessity, the recent decision of the federal government mandating states without democratically elected local government to do so within three months, following the judgment of the Supreme Court on local government autonomy. He urged all necessary arrangements to be made to ensure the conduct of the election on October 5, 2024, as announced by RSIEC.

These orders were, however, overturned by Justice Lifu of a Federal High Court in Abuja, just five days before the elections when the state had put all necessary  in logistics in place for the polls.

Justice Lifu ordered INEC not to make the certified voters’ register available to RSIEC until all relevant laws have been fully complied with.

The judge, while delivering judgment in a suit brought before him by the All Progressives Congress (APC) challenging the legality or otherwise of the processes leading to the fixing of the October 5, 2024 for the elections, also barred the Inspector General of Police (IG) and the Department of the State Services (DSS) from participating and providing security for the conduct of the elections.

Justice Lifu held that the update and revision of the voters’ register by INEC ought to have been concluded 90 days before an election date can be legally fixed in law.

The Supreme Court had on July 11, 2024, delivered a landmark judgment on the financial autonomy of Nigeria’s 774 local governments. The apex court also condemned the dissolution of elected local government councils by state governors.

Delivering the lead judgment read by Justice Emmanuel Akomaye Agim in the suit filed by the Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Mr. Lateef Fagbemi (SAN), against the state governments, a seven-member panel of the Supreme Court, chaired by Justice Mohammed Garba, disagreed with the position of the state governments and ordered that the allocations belonging to the local governments must be paid to local government councils that are democratically elected.

Withholding allocations to local governments would ground many of Nigeria’s 774 local governments. It could also bring untoward hardship to the citizens, who should enjoy the dividends of democracy at the grassroots.

This was why, shortly after the judgment, the federal and state governments, through the Nigeria Governors’ Forum (NGF), met and agreed that the judgment should be implemented after three months to give room for local government areas without elected officials to do the needful.

No doubt, the two court conflicting orders over the Rivers State local government elections led to a near breakdown of law and order in the state before and during the elections as Wike’s loyalists in both the APC and PDP embarked on protests in their efforts to stop and frustrate the conduct of the polls.

On the other hand, Fubara’s supporters queried why the judgment of the Supreme Court and the resolution of the NGF should be thwarted by Justice Lifu.

They cited Section 84, subsection 15 of the Electoral Act 2022 which bars courts from stopping the conduct of elections. 

Many legal analysts were also shocked that Justice Lifu made attempt to stop the conduct of the elections ordered by the apex court.

On many occasions, legal and political pundits had frowned at the questionable role of some Nigerian judges who have become part of the challenges facing the country’s democracy with their conflicting orders especially those by courts of coordinate jurisdiction.

They had predicted that if the trend was not stopped, it could set the country on fire, yet nobody listened.

While successive Chief Justices of Nigeria as the chairman of the National Judicial Council (NJC), refused to take drastic actions against judges who indulged in these ignoble actions, the incumbent, Justice Kudirat Kekere-Ekun after she was sworn in as substantive CJN, had vowed to restore the dignity of the judiciary.

The new CJN had noted that the issue of “forum shopping” by some lawyers was not only rampant but had often given rise to the emergence of conflicting orders by courts of coordinate jurisdiction.

However, barely a week after she stated this, Kekere-Ekun was confronted with the menace of conflicting court orders on Rivers local government elections by a court of coordinate jurisdiction.

This is why former President Goodluck Jonathan called on the NJC to take immediate and drastic actions against such behaviour. While urging all political actors in the crisis to be circumspect and patriotic in the pursuit of their political ambition and relevance, Jonathan warned: “The political situation in Rivers State, mirrors our past, the crisis of the old Western Region. I, therefore, warn that Rivers should not be used as crystals that will form the block that will collapse our democracy.”

Fubara’s supporters and some analysts believe that President Bola Tinubu should call Wike to order for peace to reign in the state. They alleged that the minister’s actions are destroying the country’s democracy.

But the minister had attributed the crisis to Fubara’s refusal to obey the judgment of Justice Lifu, insisting that refusal to obey court orders breed anarchy.