Supreme Court Overrules Appeal Court, Affirms Federal High Court’s Jurisdiction in Rivers State Revenue Case
The Supreme Court has overturned a ruling by the Court of Appeal, asserting that the Federal High Court has the authority to hear and decide on Suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/984/2024, which seeks to halt the allocation of revenue to Rivers State. This decision marks a significant judicial intervention in the ongoing political and legal crisis in the state.
Appeal Court’s Decision Faulted
The apex court ruled that the Court of Appeal erred in holding that the matter pertained solely to the Consolidated Revenue Fund of Rivers State. It clarified that the core issue in the case was the enforcement of previous judicial decisions, specifically RSHA1 and RSHA2, which mandated the Rivers State House of Assembly to enact an appropriation law in compliance with the 1999 Constitution.
The Supreme Court further stressed that the Federal High Court retains jurisdiction to ensure compliance with its orders, even if this involves enforcing judgments against individuals or institutions not originally listed as parties to the case.
Implications for Rivers State Governance
This ruling comes amid a deepening political crisis in Rivers State, exacerbated by the power struggle between Governor Siminalayi Fubara and the Rivers State House of Assembly, led by Speaker Martin Amaewhule. The legal battle revolves around Fubara’s contentious submission of the state budget to an assembly consisting of only four members, sidelining 28 lawmakers. The Supreme Court condemned this move as a violation of its earlier directive, which required the governor to re-submit the 2024 budget to a legally constituted legislature under Amaewhule’s leadership.
In its judgment, the court also criticized the alleged defection of the 28 lawmakers, rejecting claims that their seats were vacant. It described Fubara’s actions as an attempt to undermine the legislative process through executive overreach.
Assembly Demolition and Local Government Elections Declared Unlawful
One of the most controversial aspects of the crisis has been the demolition of the Rivers State House of Assembly complex. The Supreme Court denounced this act as an outright abuse of executive power, labeling it a deliberate attempt to cripple legislative activities and suppress opposition.
Additionally, the court nullified the local government elections conducted on October 5, 2024, citing gross violations of the Electoral Act. Justice Jamilu Tukur ruled that the Rivers State Independent Electoral Commission failed to adhere to fundamental electoral guidelines, including unlawfully extending voter registration beyond the official timeline. Consequently, the entire election process was declared void.
Judicial Precedent and Future Implications
The Supreme Court’s verdict sets a crucial precedent for governance and judicial oversight in Nigeria. By reaffirming the Federal High Court’s jurisdiction in enforcing compliance with judicial decisions, it reinforces the principle that no political officeholder, including a state governor, is above the law.
This ruling is expected to reshape the political landscape in Rivers State, with far-reaching consequences for the balance of power between the executive and legislative branches. As tensions continue to rise, the implementation of the court’s decision will be pivotal in determining the state’s political stability in the coming months.
Reference