Rivers crisis: Confusion in Rivers over conflicting interpretation of Appeal Court ruling
From Chris Eze, Port Harcourt
The Appeal Court ruling on Thursday on the impasse in the Rivers State House of Assembly with regards to the defection of the 27 pro- Wike lawmakers has further divided opinion leaders and commentators in the state.
Recall that Justice Charles N. Wali of Rivers State High Court had ruled in favor of the current Speaker, Rt. Hon.Victor Oko-Jumbo in a suit that restrained Martins Amaewhule and twenty-four others from performing any legislative function and further declared their seats vacant, following their defection from the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) to the All Progressives Congress (APC).
An interlocutory injunction was also granted against Amaewhule & 24 Ors.
But the ousted former Speaker, Amaewhule had appealed the High Court ruling by approaching the Appeal Court challenging the decision of the Rivers State High Court, which favored Victor Oko-Jumbo, the Speaker of the State House of Assembly.
Delivering judgment on the appeal on Thursday, the three-man panel of the Appeal Court,: Jimi Olukayode Bada, Hamma Akawu Barka and Balkisu Bello Aliyu JCA, in suit No: CA/PH/198/2024, held that:
i. the plaintiffs, (Amaewhule & Co) had the rights to institute the appeal.
ii. That the plaintiff’s record of Appeal is not invalidated and thus has life.
iii. That the Appeal Court has jurisdiction to hear the meat of the matter.
That “The Court vested with Jurisdiction to entertain the suit of Hon. Oko Jumbo and others is the Federal High Court and not the State High Court”.
The trial court lacked the jurisdiction to hear the suit filed by the Respondent “
“That consequent upon the foregoing, the order of the trial court having been made without Jurisdiction is of no effect and is hereby declared null and void”
The Court held that only the Federal High Court and no other court has the jurisdiction to determine cases of tenures and vacancies of House of Assembly, Governors and President and not the State High Courts (Rivers State High Court Inclusive).
However, following the reaction of Hon. Ikenga Imo Ugochinyere, Spokesperson, G60 Federal Opposition Lawmakers Coalition where he insisted that the ruling of the Appeal Court did not restore the former lawmakers to their positions, discordant tunes are now trailing the Appeal Court ruling in Port Harcourt.
According to Ugochinyere: “Pro Wike 27 sacked Rivers lawmakers remains sacked, their seat remains vacant as Appeal court didn’t decide on the validity of their illegal decampment nor the declaration of their seat vacant. The Appeal Court focused on declaring that the Federal High Court is the only court with Jurisdiction to decide on the legality or illegality of decampment thereby ruling against Rivers High Court proceedings. The legal fire- works continues.
The former Speaker, Edison Ehie led House votes and proceedings that declared the seats of the 27 lawmakers vacant is still valid and subject of pending litigation and the vacant seats of the 27 lawmakers remains vacant and the actions of the House led by Ehie in declaring the seat vacant have not been declared null and void by any court.
“The local govt Chairmen whose tenure have since expired remains expired and can’t be extended and was never extended”
As people gathered in groups exchanging views on the Appeal Court ruling, it was obvious on which divide the analysts belong in the festering political crisis as they argued for and against the pro Wike and pro Fubara lawmakers following the outcome of the appeal.
However, other discerning analysts opined that whoever carried the day today would have it temporary as the final arbiter on the matter according to them would the Supreme Court.
Whichever way, the tension in the Treasure Base of the nation has just increased.
