More confusion was added to the complex political situation in Rivers State with a High Court on Monday supposedly affirming that the 27 members of the Rivers State House of Assembly, who had defected to the All Progressives Congress, APC, were still members of the Peoples Democratic Party, PDP.

There was news circulating earlier today that Justice Okogbule Gbasam, of the state High Court, had overturned a previous ruling in a suit filed by Wosu Amadi and three others that Martin Amaewhule and the other 26 lawmakers had defected from the PDP, thereby losing their seats as lawmakers in the state.

Today’s judgement has been interpreted in different ways by the two contending forces in the State. While the Wike supporters group sees it as a victory Governor Fubara’s group sees their jubilation as misplaced. They argued that the facts of the judgement are very clear, the courts didn’t declare Martins and others as members of the PDP, as that was not one of the reliefs being sought from the court and it lacks such powers to do so. Rather the suit of the claimants was struck out for want of locus standi and jurisdiction.

Delivering judgement in Port Harcourt earlier on Monday, Justice Okogbule Gbasam of the Rivers State High Court, held that the claimants failed to prove that Amaewhule and 26 other lawmakers, had defected to the All Progressives Congress (APC).

Justice Gbasam further held that membership of a party is only proven by being listed on the party’s register, or by membership card, adding that television ceremonies and or verbal statements, were not enough to show the same.

According to one interpretation, it is said that the Judge held that the Rivers State government is bound to obey all laws passed by the Assembly, as they are still members of the PDP hence, their names are still in the PDP’s membership register as provided by the party.

Sequel to the judgement, the public space has been left in more confusion with speculations on what could be the next move from the contending forces. In all of these, analysts believe it is governance that would suffer.

River State Government Reacts to Judgement

In a sharp reaction, Rivers State Attorney-General and Commissioner for Justice Mr Dagogo Iboroma SAN, debunked the interpretation being given to the judgement stating that the suit filed to which the judgement was “not to seek to declare the seat of Hon Amaewhule and 26 others vacant”.

The state Attorney General maintained that the judgement was dismissed for want of locus standi and jurisdiction and also for being an abuse of the court process which robbed the trial court of jurisdiction to adjudicate on the matter.
His statement partly reads “There is misleading news circulating in social media, print and electronic media that Martins Amaewhule & 26 others are members of the Peoples Democratic Party and the Rivers State House of Assembly.

As you all know, Martins Amaewhule and 26 others defected from the Peoples Democratic Party to the All Progressives Congress on the 11th Day of December 2023 and stated that much in affidavit evidence deposed to by Martins Amaewhule for himself and on behalf of 26 others in Suit No. FHC/ABJ/1681/CS/2023 before Hon. Justice Donatus Okorowo of the Federal High Court, Abuja Division. The Suit is still pending in court.

“By section 272(3) of the 1999 Constitution, as amended, it is only the Federal High Court that can determine whether Martins Amaewhule and 26 others are still members of the Peoples Democratic Party and also members of the Rivers State House of Assembly. The trial court held this much.

“However, you will recall that this is a subsisting order of interlocutory injunction in Suit No.PHC/512/CS/2024 restraining Martins Amaewhule and his co-travellers from further parading or presenting themselves as lawmakers in Rivers State pending the determination of the substantive suit, which has not been appealed against till date”.

Legal Opinions

This development has also prompted questions about the legal system, specifically whether a high court can set aside a decision made by another high court and whether the appeals court is not the appropriate forum for final decisions.

Speaking to this, Doyinmola Ogundokun, a legal practitioner at Chief Ladosu Ladapo (SAN) & Co, explained that the law does not permit the high court, whether at the federal or state levels, to overrule each other. He analysed that in the event of unsatisfactory judgements from the high court, the Appeal Court must be sought for redress.

“Both state and federal high courts have concurrent jurisdiction, which means they can operate at the same level. Although some cases are within the jurisdiction of the state and federal high court separately, both cannot overrule each other on the same matter.

“The only time a high court can upturn a judgement is when the first judgement was passed by the same high court. This means a high court can only counter-rule itself not a judgement by a court of the same jurisdiction. “Politicians always try to undermine the judiciary by trying to jump the legal process in this country”.

The political tension in Rivers State has continued to attract national attention since the beginning of the rift between Chief Nyesom Wike, former governor of the state, and his successor, Governor Fubara, a fight that led to an attempted impeachment of the latter by the members of the House Assembly loyal to Wike.
The loggerhead got to a head when the State House of Assembly complex was set ablaze by yet-to-be-identified and prosecuted persons.