• Says he’s restrained by interim orders of state high court and appeal process by the legislators
Blessing Ibunge in Port Harcourt
Political disagreements between the executive and legislature in Rivers State assumed a new twist yes-terday, as Chief Judge of the state, Justice Simeon Chibuzor-Amadi, declined a request by the House of Assembly to constitute a seven-man impeachment panel to investigate alleged gross misconduct levelled against Governor Siminalayi Fubara and his deputy, Professor Ngozi Odu.
In a letter personally signed by Chibuzor-Amadi, dated January 20, 2026, and addressed to Speaker of the Assembly, Martins Amaehwule, the CJ stated that he was a defendant in the suits separately filed by Fubara and his deputy before a High Court in the state.
The chief judge acknowledged receiving the Assembly’s resolution to set up the seven-man impeach-ment panel to probe the governor, but said he was restrained by a subsisting High Court order from taking any further action.
The Amaehwule-led Assembly had on January 16 asked the chief judge to set up a seven-man panel to investigate allegations against Fubara and Odu.
The lawmakers insisted that they were not going back on the impeachment process against Fubara and his deputy, even after four of their colleagues backed down and pleaded understanding in the collective interest.
In the letter addressed to the chief judge, signed by the speaker, the lawmakers stated that their action was in compliance with Section 188(4) of the 1999 Constitution.
Amaehwule stated in the letter, “I write to request that you (CJ) appoint a panel of seven (7) persons to investigate the allegations of gross misconduct against His Excellency, Sir Siminalayi Fubara, the Gover-nor of Rivers State pursuant to section 188(5) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended).
“At the 60th Legislative day of the Third Session of the 10th Assembly, the House resolved in compli-ance with section 188(4) of the Constitution that these allegations be investigated.
“In this regard, the acknowledged copy of the forwarding letter of the Notice of Allegations of Gross Mis-conduct; the acknowledged copy of the Notice of Allegations of Gross Misconduct; copies of the Rivers State Impeachment Panel (Conduct of Investigations) Procedure, 2025; photocopies of newspaper pub-lications of Guardian, Saturday Sun, Nation and other relevant documents are hereby attached for the use of the panel.”
At a press briefing in Port Harcourt, members of the Assembly reaffirmed their resolve to continue with the impeachment, stressing that the process is the most viable constitutional option to resolve the lin-gering political impasse in the state.
While the lawmakers waited for the chief judge to set up the probe panel, the governor and his deputy separately filed suits at a Rivers State High Court in Oyigbo Local Government Area seeking Interim Or-der of Injunction barring the speaker and other lawmakers, Clerk of the Assembly, and Chief Judge of Rivers State from going further with the impeachment process.
The presiding judge, Justice F. A. Fiberesima, in the two separate suits by Fubara and Odu, granted leave to the claimant-applicants to serve the interim order, the originating processes in the suits, and all other subsequent processes meant for the defendants at the gate of the Rivers State Assembly quarters.
The court restrained the speaker and other lawmakers, who were defendants in the suit, from sending any request, resolution, articles of impeachment, or other documents or communication to the chief judge.
The court also restrained the chief judge from receiving, forwarding, considering and/or however acting on any request, resolution, articles of impeachment or other documents or communication from one to 27th defendants for the purposes of constituting a panel to investigate the purported allegations of mis-conduct against the governor and his deputy for seven days.
The court further directed that the interim order, the originating processes in the suits, be served on the 32 defendants, as well as the chief judge through any staff of the judiciary at the Chief Judge’s Chambers within the High Court premises, and adjourned the case to January 23, 2026.
Thus, in his response, Chibuzor-Amadi told the speaker that he was legally restrained from acting on his request due to interim orders issued by the state high court.
He further disclosed that the speaker had lodged an appeal against the interim orders at the Court of Appeal, Port Harcourt Division, adding that notices of appeal were served on his office on January 19 and 20.
Referencing the letter with number RS/JUD/CJ/RSHAS/VOL.2/26 by the Speaker, the CJ said, “Refer-ence is made to your two letters to my office, both dated 16th January, 2026 and received same date.
“To both letters, are attached voluminous documents on the subject-matters to wit: Request for the Chief Judge, my humble self, to appoint seven (7) persons to investigate the allegations of gross mis-conduct against His Excellency, Sir Siminalayi Fubara, GSSRS, the Governor of Rivers State, pursuant to Section 188(5) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended); based on the resolution of the House of Assembly vide Section 188(4) of the Constitution.
“Attached herewith, are certified true copies of the said orders. Constitutionalism and the Rule of Law are the bedrock of democracy and all persons and authorities are expected to obey subsisting orders of court of competent jurisdiction, irrespective of perception of its regularity or otherwise.
“Given the above scenario, our legal jurisprudence enjoins the parties to obey the order of interim in-junction until it is set aside or the suit is finally determined. Case laws vindicate this position:
“In the case of HON. DELE ABIODUN Vs. THE HON, CHIEF JUDGE OF KWARA STATE &3 ORS. (2007) 18 NWLR, 109-169 is apposite. In that case, the Chief Judge of Kwara State who proceeded to set up 5-man panel to investigate the allegations levelled against the Appellant despite a subsisting restraining order of court and pending suit was roundly condemned in strong language and voided the entire pro-ceedings. At page 165, the Court of Appeal in its judgement, descended on the Chief Judge as follows:-
“I liken the scenario created by the Chief Judge to the position of a chief priest and custodian of an ora-cle turning round to desecrate the oracle. The Chief Judge of the state who is the custodian and head of the judicial arm of the State, ought to abide by the Laws of the State, nay the land.
“Speaker, the law envisions a three-pronged restraint virtue of the subsisting interim orders of injunc-tion, the pending motion on notice for interlocutory injunction and pending suits.”
Chibuzor-Amadi added, “Furthermore, you have lodged appeal against the said interim orders at the Court of Appeal, Port Harcourt Division. I was served with the Notices of Appeal on 19th and 20th in-stant. Attached herewith, are the said Notices of Appeal. By the doctrine of lis pendens’, parties and the court have to await the outcome of the appeal.
“In view of the foregoing, my hand is fettered, as there are subsisting interim orders of injunction and appeal against the said orders. I am therefore legally disabled at this point, from exercising my duties under Section 188(5) of the Constitution in the instant.
“It is hoped that the Rt. Hon. Speaker and the Honourable Members of the Rivers State House of As-sembly will be magnanimous enough to appreciate the legal position of the matter.”
