NOT a few persons were shocked when the news broke on Monday, that the Supreme Court had dismissed the appeal by the Rivers State Governor, Sir Siminalayi Fubara against the judgment both at the High and Appeal Court directing the Governor to represent the 2024 appropriation law to the Amaewhula-led Assembly.

The news had it that the dismissal followed the withdrawal of the appeal by the Governor’s counsel because the appeal had been overtaken by event since the 2024 budget expired December 31, 2024. As people were still waiting to process the story and fully understand its implications to both parties in the case, diverse interpretations (as has now been the situation in plethora of the cases at different courts on the persisting political crisis in the state) started flying through the traditional and social media platforms.

The most rampant interpretation and reaction coming from supporters of the Amaewhula-led assembly and by extension, the camp of the immediate past governor of the state and Minister of the Federal Cap[ital Territory (FCT), Nyesom Wike with many of them celebrating it as a victory to the Amaewhula camp. Speaking on a radio programme, Williams Wobodo, a political analyst said that if Governor Fubara has withdrawn his appeal, it meant that “he is saying that the subsisting judgment is the Court of Appeal judgment. It means that he has committed a constitutional breach, it means that throughout 2024, he governed Rivers State without appropriation. If he pleads immunity, it means that all that commissioners and permanent secretaries who do not have immunity, who spent state money without appropriation have all committed criminal offence”.

Wobodo said that the case before the Supreme Court is a constitutional matter and could not merely be dismissed as an academic exercise. He said: “There is no aspect of the constitution that is academic. The authorities are clearly there by the Supreme Court. You cannot say the interpretation of the constitution, that constitutional provision has become academic; no, particularly when this is a novel issue, whether a governor can spend money without appropriation.

“You will say well, the normal practice is that when you withdraw an appeal before the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court will naturally dismiss it. But if the Supreme Court has dismissed it, it also means that the Supreme Court has foreclosed his rights of raising the issue again. So he has to accept the judgment of the Court of Appeal, which is subsisting”.

Also reacting to the dismissal of the case by the Supreme Court, a constitutional lawyer in Port Harcourt, Dr. Felix Beragbara said the dismissal of the appeal affirmed that Martin Amaewhula and 24 others were still members of the state assembly. He said the judgment also affirmed that the state Governor ought to have presented the 2024 budget to them.

He said: “The judgment of the Court of Appeal judgment affirmed the judgment of Omotoso. What does the judgment of the Court of Appeal say? Number one; that Martin Amaewhula and his colleagues who defected are the authentic speaker and relevant leaders of the Rivers State House of Assembly and that being the case they are the ones that Governor Fubara ought to have presented the 2024 budget of Rivers State to.

“Two; that the Governor of Rivers State, Fubara should not interfere in the legislative activities of Martin Amaewhula and his colleagues. Three; that all payments due to Amaewhula and his colleagues should be paid to them.”

Beragbara said he expected the Martin Amaewhula-led Assembly to institute a fresh case against the passage of 2025 budget. Beragbara stated; “We are now dealing with the 2025 budget so that means that on the basis of that judgment they might want to do a fresh suit to challenge the competence of the House of Assembly not presided over by Martin Amaewhula to approve the 2025 budget. I think that can be a current issue for any court to determine and maybe to enforce”.

On his part, a Lagos-based political analyst and lawyer, Lebros Ochima argued that Governor Fubara’s decision to withdraw the case did not equate to recognising an illegality but a fall out of the recent meeting with the President, he attended alongside with FCT Minister, Nyesom Wike and Ogoni leaders. He urged the other parties in the suit to also show sign of readiness to resolve the political crisis because the governor has started another peace process.

“I hope that the other party will also show good faith this way and then also learn to give up on some of their strong demands. And I commend the governor for taking the first step to resolving the crisis. I just believe that in a few days we also see the other party take similar steps at ensuring that all parties sheath their sword. It’s a way of resolving all the crisis. I told you the court ordinarily will not resolve the matter, it is the parties that will sit back and say let us put all these behind us”.

The Rivers government, through the State Attorney General and Commissioner for Justice, Dagogo Israel Iboroma, later held a press conference to declare that the Supreme Court did not reinstate Amaewhula and his other 26 colleagues. Addressing a press in Port Harcourt on Monday night, the Attorney General clarified, “The Supreme Court made no order whatsoever reinstating Martin Chike Amaewhule and 26 others as members of Rivers State House of Assembly, neither did the Supreme Court make any finding on their status as members of Rivers State House of Assembly.”

He called on members of the public to ignore the “false narrative and propaganda being spread by Martin Chike Amaewhule and his lawyers on what transpired in the Supreme Court” on Monday. He explained; “I was in court today (Monday), and witnessed all that transpired in SC/CV/1701/2024, Governor of Rivers State V Rivers State House of Assembly and 15 others.

“Regrettably, after the court’s proceedings today, there has been serial misrepresentation in social and electronic media grossly misrepresenting what transpired in court. It is important to trace the facts leading to SC/CV/1701/2024.

He stated that the government would have ignored the false narrative being spread by Amaewhule, his committee of friends and their lawyers, but had to put the record straight so as to correct the wrong impression and negative propaganda deliberately being fed to unsuspecting members of the public on the matter and the actions of the Apex Court. He said: “On the 29th day of November, 2023, Martin Chike Amaewhule & Anor instituted Suit No: FHC/ABJ/CS/1613/2023 at the Federal High Court, Abuja,” wherein in their originating summons, they prayed for 11 reliefs.

Iboroma further explained that, “On the 11th day of December, 2023, while Suit No: FHC/ABJ/CS/1613/2023 was pending at the Federal High Court, Abuja, Martin Chike Amaewhule & 26 others defected from the Peoples Democratic Party to the All Progressives Congress, and automatically lost their seats as members of the Rivers State House of Assembly.

“In Suit Number FHC/ABJ/CS/1613/2023, the defection of Martin Amaewhule and 26 others was not an issue. Thus, it was not a question for determination. It was also not an issue for determination in the resultant appeals. Furthermore, before judgment was delivered in Suit No: FHC/ABJ/CS/1613/2023, Martin Chike Amaewhule and 26 others did not inform the court that they had defected from the Peoples Democratic Party to the All Progressives Congress.”

According to the Attorney General, “Suit No: FHC/ABJ/CS/1613/2023, amongst others, was principally about the Appropriation Law 2024, (a.k.a 2024 budget). He then explained the reason for the State Governor’s withdrawal of the appeal at the Supreme Court, saying, “We are in the year 2025 with a 2025 Appropriation Bill already passed and signed into law and in operation.The Appropriation Law 2024 is now totally spent and cannot be brought back into operation. The monies in the Appropriation Law 2024, having been spent, cannot be recalled and spent again. The Appropriation Law 2024 being spent by reason of its expiration, SC/CV/1701/2024 became merely academic and of no utilitarian value.”

He added; “The appellant, in keeping with the time-honoured practice of not wasting precious judicial time, filed a notice of withdrawal of his appeal and freely urged the Honourable Court to dismiss his appeal. Accordingly, the Honourable Court granted the prayer sought and dismissed the appeal. This is all that transpired.”

Iboroma emphasised that, “The Supreme Court made no order whatsoever reinstating Martin Chike Amaewhule and 26 others as members of Rivers State House of Assembly, neither did the Supreme Court make any finding on their status as members of Rivers State House of Assembly. We call on members of the public to ignore the false narrative and propaganda being spread by Martin Chike Amaewhule and his lawyers on what transpired in the Supreme Court today (Monday),” he added.