The Court of Appeal, Abuja division, on Thursday, affirmed Martin Amaewhule as the recognised Speaker of the Rivers State House of Assembly.
A three-member panel of the Court of Appeal, in a unanimous judgment, dismissed the appeal filed by the Rivers State governor, Siminalayi Fubara, for lacking in merit.
The appellate court firmly upheld the January 22 judgment of the Federal High Court, delivered by Justice James Omotosho, which nullified the 2024 N800 billion Rivers State budget of renewed hope on the grounds that it was not presented before members of the State Assembly as required by law. The court admonished Governor Fubara for not adhering to the rule of law in his actions.
The court held that Governor Fubara’s decision to present the 2024 Rivers State Appropriation Bill to only four out of 31 members of the Assembly constituted a gross violation of the 1999 Constitution, as amended.
The appellate court also determined that the withdrawal of the counter-affidavit Fubara initially filed to challenge a suit instituted by the Amaewhule-led lawmakers to be recognised as valid members of the Rivers State House of Assembly indicated his agreement with the claims filed against him.
Justice Joseph Oyewole, while delivering the lead judgement held that Fubara, having withdrawn all processes filed to counter the case before the trial court, cannot claim to be dissatisfied with the judgment delivered.
Justice Oyewole said by his coming to the appellate court, he was being inconsistent, approbating and reprobating, blowing hot and cold at the same time.
He said such conduct had no basis in law as parties must be consistent in their approach to court matters.
The court held that his withdrawal from the Federal High Court case was a self-inflicted mistake that cannot be redeemed.
The court declared that his appeal has no utilitarian value as it cannot confer any advantage on him having lost his legal rights at the trial Court by accepting all the claims filed against him with his withdrawal from the suit.
Justice Oyewole said “that the person with the right to appeal is the person aggrieved by the decision that is the person to whom a decision has been pronounced against.
“Now the position of the appellant is further made obtainable by his position and trend the record of appeal shows on pages 1209 and 1210 that learned counsel for the appellant Mr Imafidon, withdrew all the processes filed by the appellant to contest the action and thereby conceded reaction.
“It is the law that a party must be consistent in the presentation of his case and cannot approbate and reprobate by chasing his disposition Willy Lilly in the course of litigation exercise.
The Court of Appeal, Abuja division, on Thursday, affirmed Martin Amaewhule as the recognised Speaker of the Rivers State House of Assembly.
A three-member panel of the Court of Appeal, in a unanimous judgment, dismissed the appeal filed by the Rivers State governor, Siminalayi Fubara, for lacking in merit.
The appellate court firmly upheld the January 22 judgment of the Federal High Court, delivered by Justice James Omotosho, which nullified the 2024 N800 million Rivers State budget of renewed hope on the grounds that it was not presented before members of the State Assembly as required by law. The court admonished Governor Fubara for not adhering to the rule of law in his actions.
The court held that Governor Fubara’s decision to present the 2024 Rivers State Appropriation Bill to only four out of 31 members of the Assembly constituted a gross violation of the 1999 Constitution, as amended.
Health 360: Antibiotic Resistance: The Looming Crisis in Healthcare0:00 / 0:00
Baby with Spina Bifida Begins Treatment After Punch Report; Mother Thanks Supporters0:00 / 0:00
The appellate court also determined that the withdrawal of the counter-affidavit Fubara initially filed to challenge a suit instituted by the Amaewhule-led lawmakers to be recognised as valid members of the Rivers State House of Assembly indicated his agreement with the claims filed against him.
Justice Joseph Oyewole, while delivering the lead judgement held that Fubara, having withdrawn all processes filed to counter the case before the trial court, cannot claim to be dissatisfied with the judgment delivered.
Justice Oyewole said by his coming to the appellate court, he was being inconsistent, approbating and reprobating, blowing hot and cold at the same time.
He said such conduct had no basis in law as parties must be consistent in their approach to court matters.
The court held that his withdrawal from the Federal High Court case was a self-inflicted mistake that cannot be redeemed.
The court declared that his appeal has no utilitarian value as it cannot confer any advantage on him having lost his legal rights at the trial Court by accepting all the claims filed against him with his withdrawal from the suit.
Justice Oyewole said “that the person with the right to appeal is the person aggrieved by the decision that is the person to whom a decision has been pronounced against.
“Now the position of the appellant is further made obtainable by his position and trend the record of appeal shows on pages 1209 and 1210 that learned counsel for the appellant Mr Imafidon, withdrew all the processes filed by the appellant to contest the action and thereby conceded reaction.
“It is the law that a party must be consistent in the presentation of his case and cannot approbate and reprobate by chasing his disposition Willy Lilly in the course of litigation exercise.
Rivers crisis: Pro-Wike lawmakers have lost their seats, Clark insists
“A party cannot approbate and reprobate at the same time, the appellant cannot seek for one thing at the lower Court and be seeking for another incongruent and parallel thing in this Court. Can the law permit him to blow hot and cold at the same time?
“The challenges faced by the appellant in this appeal are self-inflicted and try as one may, it is impossible to see the utilitarian value to be achieved by filing this appeal after withdrawing all processes contesting the action at the lower Court and thereby conceding the action. It seems to be purely academic for a party to concede to an action at the lower Court and then turn around to challenge the same action without any indication of fraud in the presentation of the earlier concession.”
The court ordered Fubara to re-present the budget of the State to the House under the recognised Speaker (Amawhuele) as contained in Justice Omotosho’s judgement.
The court also stopped him from withholding the House of Assembly fund and removing the Clerk and Deputy Clerk from the House.
Justice Oyewole proceeded to dismiss his appeal, saying, “In a constitutional democracy the foundation of every act must be located in the Constitution. Autocracy is out of place in the constitutional democracy. I therefore resolve this issue against the appellant and in favour of the 1st and 2nd respondent.
“In totality, therefore, this appeal is bereft of merit and it is accordingly dismissed. The judgement of the lower Court is hereby affirmed. N500,000 cost is awarded in favour of each of the 1st to 12th respondents respectively and against the appellant.”
Justice Okon Abang, in agreement with Justice Oyewole’s decision, held that the appellant cannot appeal the decision of the trial Court since he did not counter it and it translates to mean that he has accepted it to be true and the Court of law can act on it.
He further admonished the governor for frustrating Amaewhule from carrying out his duties adding that he is using his executive powers to act in might which is not acceptable in a democratic setting
He said, “The appellant the governor of Rivers State treated the Court order with disdain, levity and subject to the discharge of his function in an unprecedented manner. I agree with the 1st and 2nd respondent counsel that these are acts of executive lawlessness.
“The rule of might has no place in a democratic setting. Having sworn to uphold the provisions of the constitution, the appellant was and is expected to in his relationship with the 1st and 2nd respondents, apply the rule of law, not the rule of might in matters affecting the discharge of his function as the governor of Rivers State.
“The appellant’s show of force and might is heavily demonstrated in the 1st and 2nd respondents’ unchallenged deposition of paragraphs 1 to 10 of the affidavit in support of the motion on notice filed by the first and second respondents.
“Any gathering purporting to be Rivers State House of Assembly, led by any other person other than the 2nd respondent, sits in violations of the order delivered by the trial Court dated December 7, 2023 and that person acts in vain.”
Recall that Justice James Omotosho of the Federal High Court in Abuja in his judgement upheld by the appellate Court, held that the N800 billion budget presented by Fubara to the four lawmakers was invalid as it was not properly presented before the Rivers State House of Assembly as required by the law.
About Author
