Rivers Crisis: Group Backs Chief Judge for Refusing to Probe Fubara

Spread the love

A pro-democracy advocacy group, the Coalition for Democratic Accountability and Rule of Law (CDARL), has endorsed the decision of the Chief Judge of Rivers State, Justice Simeon Amadi, to decline constituting a judicial panel to investigate Governor Siminalayi Fubara and his deputy, Ngozi Odu.

The coalition described Justice Amadi’s action as lawful and constitutionally sound, noting that it was compelled by existing interim court orders and a pending appeal before the Court of Appeal.

In a statement issued on Friday and signed by its National President, Barrister Ibrahim Lawal Abdulkareem, the group said the chief judge acted strictly in line with the rule of law when he explained that his hands were “fettered” by judicial directives restraining him from taking any step related to impeachment proceedings.

“Justice Amadi did exactly what the Constitution and judicial ethics demand. Once a court of competent jurisdiction issues an order, every individual and institution, including the legislature and the chief judge himself, is bound by it,” Abdulkareem said.

Interim Orders Leave Chief Judge No Discretion

CDARL noted that the interim injunctions restraining the chief judge from receiving, considering, or acting on impeachment-related requests left him with no lawful discretion under Section 188(5) of the 1999 Constitution.

According to the group, any attempt to proceed despite the court orders would have constituted judicial recklessness and a violation of constitutional discipline.

The coalition also defended Justice Amadi’s reliance on the doctrine of lis pendens, which bars actions that could prejudice matters pending before a higher court.

“When a matter is before a higher court, all parties are required to maintain the status quo. The chief judge’s refusal to act while an appeal is pending is not obstruction; it is constitutional discipline,” Abdulkareem said.

Warning to Rivers Assembly

CDARL cautioned that any attempt by the Rivers State House of Assembly to proceed with impeachment in defiance of interim injunctions could amount to an assault on judicial authority and trigger a constitutional crisis.

“The impeachment of a sitting governor is one of the gravest powers entrusted to a legislature. It is not a political shortcut and cannot be pursued in defiance of court orders,” the group said.

The coalition stressed that the political tension in Rivers State can only be resolved through strict adherence to judicial directives.

“Lawmakers weaken democracy when they treat court orders as inconveniences to bypass. The judiciary is not an obstacle to governance; it is the stabilising referee in moments of institutional conflict,” Abdulkareem added.

Obedience to Court Orders Key to Stability

CDARL warned that constitutional breakdowns often begin with casual disregard of court orders.

“When elected officials start picking and choosing which court orders to obey, the rule of law collapses. This leads to institutional paralysis, loss of public confidence, and prolonged instability,” the statement said.

The coalition urged the Rivers Assembly to heed the chief judge’s call for restraint and await the outcome of the appeal at the Court of Appeal before taking further action.

“The chief judge’s request for understanding was not a plea; it was a reminder that no arm of government is above the law. Constitutional patience is not weakness; it is the price of democratic survival,” Abdulkareem said.

Not About Fubara, But Institutional Integrity

CDARL emphasised that its intervention is not aimed at defending any individual, including Governor Fubara, but at protecting judicial independence and constitutional order.

“This is not about Governor Fubara or any individual. It is about protecting the integrity of institutions. Today it is the judiciary being pressured; tomorrow it could be the legislature itself,” the group said.

The coalition also called on political parties, national leaders, and influential actors to refrain from encouraging actions that could undermine the courts’ authority.

“The true test of democracy is obedience to the law when it is inconvenient. Rivers State must choose legality over expediency,” the group concluded.