In a recent development, the Court of Appeal has overturned a restraining order issued by a Port Harcourt Court against Martin Amaewhule and his group of 24 legislators in Rivers State, as reported by Nigerian Tribune. This judgment has sparked various reactions, reflecting differing political interests. Prof. Richard Wokocha, a constitutional lawyer and lecturer at the Department of Public Law, Rivers State University, provided his perspective on the ruling. He stated that the judgment does not legitimize the position of Martin Amaewhule and his group as members of the Rivers State House of Assembly. Prof. Wokocha explained that the appellate court affirmed that the High Court, presided over by Justice Charles Wali, lacked the jurisdiction to entertain the matter or restrain the appellants from sitting. He emphasized that the judgment did not validate the legislators’ defections....CONTINUE READING
He pointed out that despite the Appeal Court ruling, the validity of the meetings held by Amaewhule and the 24 others remains in question until the Federal High Court decides on the matter. He concluded that it is the assembly, not the court, that declares membership. Prof. Wokocha clarified that the Court of Appeal acted based on the jurisdictional issue, not on the legitimacy of the lawmakers as members of the House. He stressed that the court did not address the issue of decamping and its consequences, but simply ruled that the High Court of Rivers State, presided over by Justice Wali, was wrong to handle the case due to its lack of jurisdiction. The appellate court did not validate the decamping of the legislators or declare them lawful members of the assembly despite their defections. View pictures in App save up to 80% data.
As per The Nigerian Tribune, He remarked, The Court of Appeal has acted on the position of the party, it has not declared that they are lawful members of the house assembly despite decamping. It did not deal with the issue of decamping and its effect. It simply holds that the High Court of Rivers State presided over by Justice Wali was wrong to handle the case because it has no jurisdiction and ought not to have entertained the matter. It did not go to validate anything, the court of appeal did not say that their decamping was legitimate and that they can proceed as members, notwithstanding the issue of their having decamped.
