Appeal Court dismisses Governor Fubara’s request to restore N800 billion budget passed by four lawmakers

The Court of Appeal in Abuja has dismissed the appeal by Rivers State Governor Siminalayi Fubara against the Federal High Court judgment, which nullified the N800 billion budget passed by the Edison Ehie-led group of the Rivers State House of Assembly and signed into law by him.

A three-member panel of the Appeal Court dismissed the appeal on Thursday, October 10, 2024.

CityNews Nigeria previously reported that the trial court, in January 2024, upheld the suit filed by the Assembly and Speaker Martin Amaewhule against Fubara, which sought an order of injunction restraining the governor from frustrating the Assembly under his leadership as speaker, among other issues.

What Transpired at the Trial Court 

In January, the trial judge, James Omotosho, held that everything done by the four lawmakers led by Edison Ehie was null and void.

The court also recognized Amaewhule as the speaker of the state assembly.

The counsel for Amaewhule, Ken Njemanze, accused Governor Fubara of interfering with the performance and functions of the state lawmakers, contrary to the doctrine of the separation of powers.

He, therefore, sought an “order of injunction restraining the 1st to 10th defendants (NASS) from entertaining any request from the 11th defendant (Fubara) to take over the performance of the functions of the Rivers Assembly, including its role in making laws for the peace, order, and good government of Rivers regarding matters that fall within its constitutional and legislative competence.” 

He also sought “an order restraining Fubara, along with the 12th, 13th, and 14th defendants, from withholding any amount standing to the credit of the Rivers Assembly in the state’s Consolidated Revenue Fund, including salaries and emoluments due and payable to the speaker, deputy speaker, and other members of the house, as well as to the clerk, deputy clerk, and other staff of the assembly.” 

The judge observed that the governor’s legal team had withdrawn all his processes in the matter, indicating that he admitted all the facts stated by the plaintiffs.

The judge ruled that based on the facts before the court, Amaewhule remained the valid Speaker of the Rivers State Assembly.

The judge stated that the purported sitting of Ehie and the four other lawmakers who passed the state budget is null and void.

Omotosho expressed it was strange that the governor would destroy the Rivers State Assembly building and present an appropriation bill to five lawmakers.

He declared the presentation of the bill to the five lawmakers void.

The judge granted the order setting aside the purported Appropriation Bill signed, despite the interim order of the court restraining him.

The judge declared that the governor of Rivers State, either by himself or through members of the staff of the Rivers State Public Service, is not entitled to take steps aimed at interfering with the affairs of the Rivers State House of Assembly and the Speaker in the performance of their duties.

The judge noted that the governor cannot withhold the due funds of the lawmakers in the state’s Consolidated Revenue Fund.

The judge subsequently restrained the National Assembly from accepting any requests from the governor.

What the Appeal Court Said 

Following the trial court’s judgment, the parties appealed.

The governor’s legal team argued that the grounds of appeal challenged the jurisdiction of the trial court, asserting that any aggrieved party can still appeal a trial court judgment.

However, Amaewhule’s legal team contended that an appeal cannot be initiated by any party that is not affected by the proceedings, especially one that had withdrawn its contention at the lower court.

Ruling on their submissions, the appeal court held that records of appeal show that the governor withdrew all processes filed at the trial court, stating, “A party cannot approbate and reprobate.”

The appeal court held that the lack of contention in the court action at the trial court makes his case meritless.

“What the trial judge did was to give life by preserving the sanctity of the judicial process,” the appeal court stated, noting that the governor’s failure to contest at the trial court indicates an admission of its judgment.

Furthermore, the appeal court ruled that by encouraging four members of the Assembly to pass a budget, the governor violated the 1999 Constitution, which barred very few legislators from passing a budget.

“The challenges of the appeal by the appellant are self-inflicted,” the appeal court remarked, saying it is an act of indiscipline for the governor to sign the purported bill.  

“This appeal is bereft of merit and is accordingly dismissed. The judgment of the trial court is hereby affirmed,” the appeal court concluded, ordering Fubara to pay over ten respondents N500,000 each as costs.