By Innocent Anaba

A member of the House of Representatives and lawyer, Mr. Solomon Bob, has stated that with the Supreme Court dismissing the appeal by Governor Siminilayi Fubara of Rivers State, the judgment of the Court of Appeal, which affirmed the High Court’s decision on the presentation of the Rivers State budget, stands.

The Supreme Court had dismissed Fubara’s appeal challenging the Appeal Court’s decision, which upheld the judgment of a Federal High Court. The High Court ruled that the governor was duty-bound to present the state’s 2024 budget to the Martin Amaewhule-led State House of Assembly.

Bob, who represents Abua/Odual and Ahoada East Federal Constituency of Rivers State in the National Assembly, argued that with the Supreme Court’s dismissal of the appeal, the order remains valid and will also impact the 2025 state budget.

Speaking over the weekend, he stated: “On January 10, 2025, the Supreme Court dismissed an appeal by Governor Fubara against the judgment of the Court of Appeal, which had earlier upheld the judgment of Justice Joseph Omotosho of the Federal High Court in Suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/1613/2023.”
Justice Omotosho’s judgment, delivered on January 22, 2024, addressed the key issues at the center of the crisis, including the leadership and membership of the Rivers State House of Assembly and the presentation of the 2024 appropriation law. One of the court’s orders explicitly restrains the governor from making any request, presentation, or nomination except to the House under Speaker Martin Amaewhule.
Bob emphasized that the ruling is not limited to the 2024 budget but extends to all future presentations, including that of 2025. However, he criticized Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Mr. Femi Falana, for allegedly misrepresenting the court’s decision on a television program.

According to Bob, Falana incorrectly claimed that the dismissed appeal pertained only to the 2024 appropriation law and was therefore academic. Bob argued that Falana downplayed the severe implications of spending without an appropriation law and wrongly suggested that the appeal did not touch on the membership status of the Rivers State House of Assembly.

Bob further noted that the reliefs sought and granted by the Federal High Court, as affirmed by the Court of Appeal, uphold the membership of the 27 legislators. He pointed out that, under Section 272(3) of the Constitution, only the Federal High Court has jurisdiction over questions regarding the vacancy of Assembly seats. Justice Omotosho’s judgment remains the only valid legal pronouncement on the matter.

He also criticized Falana’s interpretation of Section 109(1)(g) of the Constitution, arguing that no law is self-executory under a constitutional democracy. Judicial review is essential, and Falana’s stance disregards this fundamental principle. Bob accused Falana of misleading the public and justifying constitutional abuses in Rivers State that he would not tolerate in his native Ekiti State.

Bob concluded by stating that as Rivers State struggles under Fubara’s governance and as the courts work to rectify his alleged misdeeds, a lawyer of Falana’s stature should respect judicial decisions rather than mislead the public. He urged Falana to separate personal bias from legal analysis, emphasizing that no individual’s opinion equates to the law.