RIVERS CJ BREAKS SILENCE ON REFUSAL TO CONSTITUTE PANEL ON FUBARA
Read Time:2 Minute, 5 Second
By: Fasasi Hammad
The Chief Judge of Rivers State, Justice Simeon Amadi, has clarified why he declined to set up a seven-member panel to investigate Governor Siminalayi Fubara and his deputy, Prof. Ngozi Nma Odu, amid ongoing impeachment proceedings.
In a letter addressed to the Speaker of the Rivers State House of Assembly, Rt. Hon. Martin Amaewhule, Justice Amadi cited existing court orders as the basis for his decision, urging lawmakers and other stakeholders to respect the rule of law.
The Assembly had on January 16 requested the Chief Judge to constitute a panel to probe alleged gross misconduct by the Governor and his deputy, invoking Section 188 of the Nigerian Constitution. This followed the commencement of impeachment proceedings against the duo.
However, both Fubara and Odu separately approached the Oyibo branch of the State High Court in Port Harcourt, securing interim injunctions restraining the Chief Judge from receiving, considering, or acting on any request or resolution from the Assembly regarding the panel.
Justice Amadi, in a letter dated January 20, confirmed receipt of both the Assembly’s request and the court orders, stating:
“My office is also in receipt of two separate court orders of interim injunction issued on 16th January, 2026 in two suits… restraining the 32nd Defendant, i.e., the Hon. Chief Judge of Rivers State, from receiving, forwarding, considering or howsoever acting on any request, resolution, articles of impeachment or other documents from the Assembly for the purpose of constituting a panel to investigate the purported allegations of misconduct.”
READ MORE…
RIVERS GOVERNOR’S SON GRADUATES WITH MSC FROM KING’S COLLEGE LONDON
He emphasized the importance of constitutional compliance, noting that the lawmakers had appealed the interim orders. Under the doctrine of lis pendens, all parties must await the outcome of the appeals before any further action can be taken.
“Given the above scenario, our legal jurisprudence enjoins the parties to obey the order of interim injunction until it is set aside or the suit is finally determined… In view of the foregoing, my hand is fettered, as there are subsisting interim orders of injunction and appeal against the said orders. I am therefore legally disabled at this point from exercising my duties under Section 188(5) of the Constitution in this instance,” he stated.
Justice Amadi’s decision underscores the judiciary’s role in upholding constitutional processes and serves as a reminder that all stakeholders must comply with court directives, regardless of political pressure.
Happy
0 %
Sad
0 %
Excited
0 %
Sleepy
0 %
Angry
0 %
Surprise
0 %
0
0