Impeachment: Pro-Democracy Group Backs Rivers Chief Judge

A pro-democracy advocacy group has defended the decision of the Chief Judge of Rivers State, Justice Simeon Amadi, to decline the constitution of a judicial panel to probe Governor Siminalayi Fubara and his deputy, Prof. Ngozi Odu, describing the action as lawful and consistent with constitutional provisions.

In a statement issued on Friday, the Coalition for Democratic Accountability and Rule of Law (CDARL) said the chief judge acted within the bounds of the law by refusing the request of the Rivers State House of Assembly, citing subsisting court orders and a pending appeal before the Court of Appeal.

The group’s national president, Barrister Ibrahim Lawal Abdulkareem, said Justice Amadi’s position that his hands were “fettered” by interim injunctions restraining him from taking steps related to impeachment proceedings reflected adherence to the rule of law rather than political considerations.

According to him, once a court of competent jurisdiction issues an order, all individuals and institutions, including the legislature and the chief judge, are bound to comply.

Abdulkareem said the interim orders restraining the chief judge from receiving, considering or acting on impeachment-related requests left him with no lawful discretion under Section 188(5) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), adding that any contrary action would have amounted to a breach of judicial ethics.

He noted that the doctrine of lis pendens, referenced by the chief judge in his communication to the Speaker of the House of Assembly, is a well-established legal principle meant to preserve the integrity of judicial proceedings and prevent actions that could prejudice matters pending before a higher court.

“When a matter is before an appellate court, all parties are required to maintain the status quo. Refusing to act while an appeal is pending is not obstruction but constitutional discipline,” Abdulkareem said.

CDARL warned that any attempt by the Rivers State House of Assembly to proceed with impeachment steps despite existing court orders could amount to a challenge to judicial authority and potentially trigger a constitutional crisis.

The group stressed that impeachment remains one of the most serious powers vested in a legislature and must be exercised strictly in line with constitutional and judicial safeguards.

It said the current political tension in Rivers State could only be addressed through respect for court orders, noting that the judiciary plays a stabilising role when disputes arise between arms of government.

CDARL urged lawmakers to exercise restraint and await the outcome of the appeal before the Court of Appeal, warning that disregard for interim court orders often leads to institutional instability and erosion of public trust.

The group clarified that its position was not in defence of any political office holder but a principled stand in support of judicial independence and constitutional order.

It also called on political actors and stakeholders to avoid actions or statements capable of undermining the authority of the courts, stressing that democracy thrives only when the rule of law is respected, even in difficult circumstances.