Stoppage of Rivers Allocations: Gov. Fubara Wins at Appeal Court

Rivers State Governor Siminalayi Fubara has secured a major victory as the Court of Appeal in Abuja reversed a judgment that had blocked the state’s monthly allocations.

This decision comes after Fubara prayed the Appeal Court to set aside the earlier judgment, which he claimed was issued in bad faith.

The initial judgment had restrained the Central Bank of Nigeria from releasing funds to Rivers State, following a suit filed by a faction of the state’s House of Assembly.

Persecondnews recalls that on October 30, Justice Joyce Abdulmalik of the Federal High Court in Abuja stopped the Central Bank of Nigeria from further releasing monthly financial allocations to the Rivers state government.

She held that the presentation of the 2024 budget by the River State Governor, Siminalayi Fubara, before an illegitimate Rivers House of Assembly was an affront to the Constitutional provision.

“Appropriation Bill for January to December 2024, being operated by the 5th defendant (Fubara), having not been charged by the lawful House of Assembly, is illegal, unlawful and subversion of the 1999 Constitution.

“It is mandatory to present the appropriation bills before the appropriate Houses of Assembly before legitimate disbursement and withdrawal can be made,” she ruled.

But a three-member panel of the appellate court presided over by Justice Hamman Barka held that the federal high court lacked the jurisdiction to entertain the suit seeking to seize Rivers State allocation.

The court held that the mere listing of federal agencies does not confer unrestricted jurisdiction on the federal high court, and the subject matter, which is the appropriation issue of a state, should not have been entertained.

The appellate court also set aside all the orders made by Justice Abdulmalik, stating that it was unconstitutional for her to make orders restricting Rivers state government from receiving funds due to the state from its consolidated revenue fund.

It held that the lower court overreached itself and didn’t have the jurisdiction to entertain the case