There Is No Functioning Government In Rivers State - Supreme Court

'Seun Ibukun-Oni, Abuja 

DAILY COURIER – The Supreme Court of Nigeria has declared that there is effectively no functioning government in Rivers State following Governor Siminalayi Fubara’s actions that led to the collapse of the State House of Assembly. The court ruled that Fubara deliberately dismantled the legislative arm to prevent his impeachment, describing his actions as unconstitutional and a direct subversion of democratic governance.  

In the landmark judgment delivered by Justice Emmanuel Agim, the apex court found that Fubara engaged in a series of illegal maneuvers to cripple the Rivers State House of Assembly. The court cited evidence showing that the governor withheld legislative funds, removed key Assembly staff, and even orchestrated the demolition of the Assembly complex using bulldozers, rendering the legislature inoperative.  

The court, in its ruling on Cross-Appeal No. SC/CV/1175A/2024, stated that the governor’s fear of impeachment did not justify his unconstitutional actions, which amounted to a unilateral destruction of governance in the state.  

"A government cannot be said to exist without one of the three arms that make up the Government of a State under the 1999 Constitution," Justice Agim ruled. "In this case, the Head of the Executive arm of the Government has chosen to collapse the Legislature to enable him to govern without the Legislature as a despot. As it is, there is no government in Rivers State."  

The Supreme Court highlighted that the Rivers State House of Assembly, before the defection controversy surrounding Speaker Martin Amaewhule and 26 lawmakers, had already been incapacitated by Fubara’s actions.  

Justice Agim further ruled that:  

- Preventing the Assembly from Sitting: Fubara obstructed the legislative arm from meeting with its constitutionally required quorum of at least one-third of its members.  

- Demolition of the Assembly Complex: The governor used heavy machinery to destroy the Assembly building, ensuring that lawmakers could not convene.  

- Withholding Assembly Funds: The financial stranglehold on the Assembly rendered it powerless and unable to function.  

- Defiance of Court Orders: Fubara disregarded multiple restraining orders obtained by the 27 affected lawmakers, barring him from interfering in Assembly affairs.  

The ruling stressed that these actions were taken long before the issue of defection arose, making Fubara’s reliance on Sections 102 and 109 of the 1999 Constitution and the doctrine of necessity baseless.  

The Supreme Court rejected Fubara’s argument that the 27 lawmakers had lost their seats due to defection, ruling that only a functioning House of Assembly—not the governor or even the judiciary—could declare a seat vacant.  

"It is not shown or suggested that their names are now in the register of members of another political party or that they have obtained membership cards of that other party," the court held. "Membership register and membership card constitute the only proof of membership of a political party."  

This means that the lawmakers remain valid members of the Rivers State House of Assembly and cannot be excluded from legislative functions by the governor or a minority faction of four lawmakers.  

The Supreme Court’s ruling aligns with past judgments reinforcing the independence of the legislature. In Inakoju v. Adeleke (2007) 4 NWLR (Pt. 1025) 423, the court held that executive interference in legislative affairs is unconstitutional and renders all actions taken under such interference null and void. Similarly, in A-G Federation v. A-G Abia State (2002) 6 NWLR (Pt. 763) 264, the Supreme Court affirmed that the separation of powers doctrine must be upheld to prevent tyranny.  

The Supreme Court’s verdict leaves Rivers State in a constitutional crisis, as the absence of a functioning legislature means the state government lacks legitimacy. Without an active Assembly, laws cannot be passed, budgets cannot be approved, and governance grinds to a halt.  

Legal experts suggest that the federal government may need to intervene, possibly invoking Section 11(4) of the 1999 Constitution, which allows the National Assembly to take over legislative functions in a state where the Assembly is unable to operate.  

This ruling also sets a strong precedent against executive overreach, reinforcing the principle that no governor can unilaterally suppress the legislative arm to consolidate power.  

With the Supreme Court’s declaration that the legislative arm has been effectively destroyed, Governor Fubara faces a legitimacy crisis. Political analysts predict that the ruling may embolden the 27 lawmakers to push for his impeachment once the Assembly is restored.  

Meanwhile, the federal government and the ruling People’s Democratic Party (PDP) are expected to weigh in on the next steps to resolve the impasse.  

As it stands, Rivers State remains in a state of constitutional limbo—governed, as the Supreme Court bluntly put it, by a collapsed system, not a legitimate government.