The Federal High Court in Abuja on Wednesday, fixed July 18 for ruling on a motion seeking to restrain the National Assembly from approving budgets or appointments of the Rivers State Government under the current Sole Administrator, Vice Admiral Ibok-Ete Ibas (rtd).

Ibas was appointed as Rivers’ Sole Administrator by President Bola Tinubu following the six-month suspension of Gov. Siminalayi Fubara.

Justice James Omotosho fixed the date after counsel for the applicants, Ambrose Owuru, and the defence lawyer, Mohammed Galadima, presented their arguments for and against the motion for interlocutory injunction.

The News Agency of Nigeria reports that the suit, marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/1190/2025, was instituted by some indigenes of Rivers and a group, the Registered Trustees of Hope Africa Foundation.

Other plaintiffs are King Oziwe Amba, Chief Julius Bulous, Chief George Ikeme, Chief Amachelu Orlu and Prince Odioha Wembe.

They had dragged the National Assembly and the Clerk of the National Assembly to court as 1st and 2nd defendants.

The applicants sought “an order of interlocutory injunction restraining the defendants “from further interference, approving, supporting and engaging in any legislative activities, including approving, appointing or budgets of Rivers State Government.”

They argued that this was in furtherance of the alleged illegalities and unconstitutionally forwarded proposed state budget by Ibas, “arising from the unconstitutionally prohibited ‘voice vote’ not provided for under the constitution pending the hearing and determination of the substantive suit by this honourable court.”

NAN observes that while the main suit was filed on June 19, the motion for interlocutory injunction was filed on June 24.

The plaintiffs’ lawyer, Owuru, while arguing the motion, prayed the court to restrain the defendants from further acting on any requests from the emergency government in the state pending the determination of the substantive suit.

Owuru contended that the declaration of a state of emergency in Rivers was without the required legislative approval because the voice votes adopted by the National Assembly in approving the emergency rule were unconstitutional.

The plaintiffs stated, in a supporting affidavit, that since they filed the suit, the activities of the defendants “have centred on approvals of illegal appointments and budget made and forwarded by the illegal administrator foisted on the applicants’ Rivers State in the midst of protests and rising restiveness in the state.“

The respondents, in spite of all the illegality and unconstitutionality of the foisted state of emergency on Rivers outside the clear provisions of the 1999 Constitution prohibiting state of emergency in any part of the federation, failed to invite or request such within a reasonable time.

”The respondents have engaged in constituting committees to run and spend funds of the applicants’ Rivers.”

They said, unless the court grants their application, the defendants would continue in “the illegalities and unconstitutionality of their invented ‘voice votes’ in place of the actual constitutionally approved two third votes to support the state of emergency in Rivers State.”

According to them, the grant of this application will protect and preserve the applicants’ legal rights to be governed by an elected government of their choice in the present democratic setting in Nigeria.

In his counterargument, lawyer to the National Assembly and its clerk, Galadima, urged the court to reject the motion for interlocutory injunction, arguing that it was without merit.

In the affidavit filed by the defendants, they argued that the facts deposed to in the plaintiffs’ supporting affidavit to the motion “are contrived falsehood and calculated misrepresentation of the facts as they occurred.”

They argued that there had never been any illegality in their actions and that there is no breach of the constitution as alleged by the applicants.

The defendants also faulted the plaintiffs’ claim that the emergency rule was a violation of their fundamental rights to be governed by a democratically elected government.

The National Assembly and its Clerk said they would be seriously prejudiced by the grant of the motion as it would create pandemonium and confusion in governance in Rivers.

They added that the grant of the motion would not be in the interest of justice.Justice Omotosho fixed July 18 for the ruling.

NAN reports that the Senate had, on June 25, passed the 2025 budget of Rivers, totaling ₦1.485 trillion, following the third reading of the appropriation bill on the floor.

NAN