The Chief Judge of Rivers State, Justice Chibuzor Simeon Amadi, has formally declined a request by the State House of Assembly to constitute a seven-member panel to investigate allegations of gross misconduct against Governor Siminalayi Fubara and his Deputy, Prof. Ngozi Nma Odu. The request, part of ongoing impeachment proceedings based on resolutions passed under Section 188(4) of the Constitution, was made by the Speaker, Rt. Hon. Martin Chike Amaewhule. In a letter dated January 20, 2026, addressed to the Speaker, Justice Amadi cited subsisting court orders that legally restrain him from acting on such a request.

Justice Amadi explained that his office was served with two separate interim court orders of injunction on January 16, 2026. These orders stemmed from two suits filed by the Governor and Deputy Governor respectively: Suit No. OYHC/7/CS/2026 (His Excellency, Sir Siminalayi Fubara, GSSRS Vs. The Rt. Hon. Martin Chike Amaewhule, DSSRS (Speaker, Rivers State House of Assembly) & 32 Ors) and Suit No. OYHC/6/CS/2026 (Her Excellency, Prof. (Ms.) Ngozi Nma Odu, DSSRS Vs. The Rt. Hon. Martin Amaewhule, DSSRS (Speaker, Rivers State House of Assembly) & 32 Ors). The Chief Judge is listed as the 32nd Defendant/Respondent in both cases. The interim injunctions expressly prohibit the Chief Judge from receiving, forwarding, considering, or otherwise acting on any request, resolution, or documents related to forming an impeachment panel for either official for a period of seven days.

Emphasizing the principles of constitutionalism and the rule of law, Justice Amadi underscored that all authorities are mandated to obey subsisting court orders from a competent jurisdiction, regardless of any perception regarding their validity. To reinforce his position, he referenced legal precedents, including the case of Hon. Dele Abiodun vs. The Hon. Chief Judge of Kwara State & 3 Ors. (2007) 18 NWLR. In this landmark case, the Court of Appeal severely condemned a Chief Judge for disregarding a restraining court order when establishing an investigative panel, a decision that was subsequently nullified by the appellate court. Justice Amadi likened such an act to a custodian of an oracle desecrating it, stressing that the Chief Judge, as the head of the judicial arm, must adhere to the laws of the land.

Adding another layer of complexity to the legal landscape, Justice Amadi noted that the Speaker of the Rivers State House of Assembly has already filed an appeal against these interim orders at the Court of Appeal in Port Harcourt, with notices of appeal served on his office on January 19 and 20. Citing the legal doctrine of ‘lis pendens,’ the Chief Judge stated that parties and the court must now await the outcome of this appeal. Consequently, due to the combination of subsisting interim injunctions and the pending appeal, Justice Amadi concluded that his “hand is fettered” and he is “legally disabled” from exercising his duties under Section 188(5) of the Constitution in this particular instance.

The Chief Judge concluded his communication by appealing to the Rivers State House of Assembly to appreciate the intricate legal position of the matter, urging them to be “magnanimous enough to appreciate the legal position of the matter.”