On Tuesday, a Federal High Court in Abuja dismissed a lawsuit attempting to prevent Rivers State Governor Siminalayi Fubara from resubmitting the N800 billion budget for 2024.
Read Also: BREAKING: CBN instructed by Tinubu to assume control of crude sales from NNPC
In a ruling, Justice Joyce Abdulmalik also overturned the prior temporary order from January 22 that had instructed the parties to the lawsuit to keep things as they were until the substantive suit’s hearing and decision.
According to NAN, Justice Abdulmalik declared that the day the interim order was issued, a sister court had already decided a related lawsuit in the case.
The judge further declared that by neglecting to address the court regarding the appropriateness of the current suit in light of the ruling that had previously been made in a related case, plaintiff’s attorney David Maduka forfeited the chance to be heard.
Remember that on December 13, 2023, the five-member Rivers House of Assembly, led by Edison Ehie, the factional Speaker at the time, passed the appropriations bill that Fubara had provided to them, and on December 14, 2023, the Governor signed the law.
However, in a ruling on January 22, Justice James Omotosho invalidated the N800 billion Rivers budget for 2024, which was approved by the house’s five members and signed into law by Governor Fubara on December 14, 2023.
Justice Omotosho also prevented Gov. Fubara from impeding the House of Assembly’s ability to convene or carry out its legislative and constitutional duties, which is chaired by Martin Amaewhule.
The judge further forbade any member of the state executive branch, the police, or the National Assembly from meddling in the assembly’s internal matters.
Nonetheless, the ex-parte order requested by the six state elders who were the plaintiffs in the lawsuit was granted by Justice Abdulmalik that same day.
They are Senators Bennett Birabi, Andrew Uchendu, Ann Kio Briggs, Rear Admiral O.P. Fingesi, and Emmanuel Deinma. Victor Okon Jumbo is a member of the Rivers State Assembly, serving the Bonny State Constituency.
In a ruling, the judge told the parties to hold off on taking any more action while the application to prevent Fubara from re-presenting the already-passed 2024 budget before the legislative house is considered and decided.
Along with other relief, the plaintiffs also requested an order declaring the seats of the 27 members who defected from the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) to the All Progressives Congress (APC) void through their legal representative, Kayode Ajulo, SAN.
They questioned the legitimacy of a peace deal that Governor Fubara was allegedly forced to sign by President Tinubu with Nyesom Wike, the current Minister of the Federal Capital Territory and the state’s immediate former governor.
They said that in addition to being unlawful, the aforementioned agreement, which was signed on December 18, 2023, amounted to the usurpation, nullification, and undermining of the pertinent and still-in-force provisions of the 1999 Constitution (as modified).
Therefore, the plaintiffs asked the court to decide, among other things, whether Tinubu, Fubara, and the Rivers Assembly had the right and could enter into any agreement that would have the effect of voiding or undermining the 1999 Constitution’s Section 109 (I) (g) and (2) constitutional provisions.
The defendants, which include President Bola Tinubu, the Attorney General of the Federal Government, Fubara, the Rivers Assembly, the Speaker, and the Independent National Electoral Commission, were given notice to address the accusations made by Justice Abdulmalik, who set a date of February 28 to hear the motion.
But the six plaintiffs filed a second ex-parte motion with the case number FHC/ABJ/CS/1718/2023. They requested an order allowing an accelerated hearing in the lawsuit in a motion dated January 24 and submitted on January 25.
The court scheduled today’s hearing in response to their request for an order abridging the defendants’ time to file all of their paperwork, including the plaintiffs’ reply.
Upon the call of the issue, Maduka, representing the six elders, informed the court of their ex parte motion.
The attorney begged the judge to answer their two prayers.
However, Justice Abdulmalik drew Maduka’s attention to Justice Omotosho’s ruling on January 22.
She claimed that a judgement on a subject related to the current lawsuit had been rendered at the time the interim order was given.
Maduka was then given an order by the judge to address the court regarding the ruling that had already resolved the issue that was brought before her.
In response, the attorney indicated he was not aware of the ruling.
“My lord, I have not been able to witness that verdict. I could have addressed the court if I had seen it,” he remarked.
In order for Maduka to obtain the judgement and properly address the court, he begged the court to put the matter on hold.
Justice Abdulmalik declared in her decision that the current lawsuit touched on a topic that had been resolved by a sister court regarding the Rivers Assembly.
According to her, Maduka was deprived of the chance to grant him a just trial.
“Therefore, I hold that the plaintiffs/applicants are privy to that judgement,” the speaker declared, preventing the parties from acting in a way that went against the court’s rulings.
The plaintiffs/applicants are free to review the judgement, in the judge’s opinion, to choose their best course of action.
She concluded as a result that the occurrence had superseded the motion ex parte filed on January 25.
Judge Abdulmalik dismissed the whole lawsuit and revoked the previous interim ruling.
The judge did not listen to Maduka when he stood up to clarify that he was not purposefully avoiding speaking to the court.
