‘Supreme Court Verdict On Rivers Affirmed Lower Courts Decisions’

A member of the House of Representatives, Solomon Bob, has stated that with the Supreme Court dismissing Governor Siminilayi Fubara’s appeal, the Court of Appeal’s judgment affirming the High Court’s decision on the presentation of Rivers State’s budget remains in effect.

The lawmakers, who spoke to journalists in Lagos, claimed that the apex court judgment does not solely concern the 2024 budget presentation but includes all subsequent presentations, such as that of 2025, requests, or nominations before the Rivers State House of Assembly.

Bob, who represents the Abua/Odual and Ahoada East Federal Constituency in the National Assembly, also described the opinion of human rights lawyer Femi Falana, SAN, that the dismissed appeal only pertained to the 2024 appropriation law and was, therefore, merely academic as a misleading interpretation.

He insisted that Justice Omotosho’s judgment addressed critical issues central to the crisis, including the leadership and membership of the Rivers State House of Assembly and the presentation of the 2024 appropriation law or any material presentations to the House of Assembly.

The lawmaker, who is also a lawyer, cited one of the orders in the judgment to back up his claim, saying, “An order is hereby made restraining the 11th defendant (Governor Fubara) from making any request, presentation, or nomination in the Rivers State House of Assembly except to the House under the leadership of the second plaintiff” (Speaker Martin Amaewhule).

Bob said, “As the order above illustrates, Mr Falana is mistaken. He downplays the severe implications of operating without an appropriation law. Additionally, he stated that the dismissed appeal did not concern the Rivers State House of Assembly membership.

“Nearly all the reliefs sought and granted by the Federal High Court and affirmed by the Court of Appeal support the ongoing membership of the House of Assembly by the 27 legislators. According to Section 272(3) of the Constitution, only the Federal High Court has jurisdiction over questions of vacancy in the seats of a House of Assembly.

“Justice Omotosho’s ruling and the affirming appeals remain the sole judicial decision with the authority to determine the status of the 27 members of the Rivers State House of Assembly. Mr Falana’s claim that they have lost their seats is unfounded and lacks legal basis.

“Contrary to his opinion, Section 109(1) (g) of the Constitution is not self-executing. In a constitutional democracy, no law operates in isolation, as every constitutional provision requires judicial interpretation. To imply otherwise is to ignore the necessity of judicial review.