You will recall that Lawyers for Civil Liberties filed a constitutional suit to challenge the unfolding situation in Rivers State.
The matter came up today, 4th June 2025, before the Federal High Court.
While Opatola Victor Esq and Peter Ajadobi Esq are counsel for Lawyers for Civil Liberties and the two other Plaintiffs; the 9 Senior counsel of record representing the President, AGF, Rivers State Sole Administrator are: Chief Akin Olujimi SAN, Kanyinsola Ajayi SAN, Owonikoko SAN, Kehinde Ogunwumiju SAN, Olumide Olujimi SAN, and Akinyemi Olujinmi SAN etc. After preliminary adumbrations, the Court adjourned the case for hearing.
We are suing seven defendants: the Central Bank of Nigeria, the Accountant General of the Federation, the President, the National Assembly, the Attorney General of the Federation, and two persons purporting to act as Administrators of Rivers State, including Mr. Ibok-Ete Ekwe Ibas.
We are asking the Court to determine whether it is lawful for Rivers State’s funds, including statutory allocations and internally generated revenue, to be released in the absence of a valid budget and whether such funds can lawfully be spent or controlled by persons occupying positions unknown to the Constitution.
We are questioning the power of the President to order the release of public funds to a state where the conditions set by the Supreme Court, in River State House of Assembly v. Govt of Rivers State & Ors, have not been met, and whether the Central Bank and the Accountant General can lawfully act on such directives. We are also asking the Court to determine whether the National Assembly’s voice vote ratifying a state of emergency meets constitutional requirements, and whether, in the absence of a sitting Governor or Deputy Governor, the National Assembly can lawfully make laws for Rivers state in section 11(4) of the Constitution.
At the heart of the suit is a broader question: can the federal government, under the guise of emergency powers, override constitutional structures, displace elected officials, and transfer control of an entire state to unelected individuals acting under no recognisable Constitutional framework defining the extent and limits of its powers.
We are asking the Court to pronounce on the legality of the office of “Administrator of Rivers State,” and whether the holder of that title can validly perform executive functions, administer state funds, appoint local government administrators or suspend statutory appointees whose tenure is protected by law.
Beyond declaratory reliefs and other prayers, we seek orders compelling the President and Sole administrator to jointly or severally refund from their personal pocket all sums, monies or financial resources whatsoever belonging to River State from which was disbursed , paid, allocated directly or indirectly for the benefit, use, sustainance, remuneration, maintenance, entitlement, personal welfare, allowances, privilege, convenience or upkeep of the sole administrator , his person, office or official capacities however described or incurred.
While other pending cases before the Supreme Court and other courts focus on the lawfulness of the Sole Administrator’s appointment or the validity of the emergency declaration and National Assembly voice vote, our suit goes further.
Our suit challenges the release and control of Rivers State funds without proper legal authority and in case the Court holds that the appointment of the Sole Administrator is legal, our suit test the extent of the powers of the Sole Administrat and the constitutional validity of appointments and administrative actions taken by the sole administrator.
We will continue to keep the public informed as the matter progresses.
Opatola Victor Esq.
National Coordinator
Lawyers for Civil Liberties
