Confusion As Court Adjourns Appeals in Rivers State Political Dispute, Directs PDP to Resolve Legal Representation Discrepancy

A recent court hearing on the Rivers State political dispute led to unexpected legal debates, with the Court of Appeal instructing the PDP to settle conflicting claims over legal representation

In a turn of events during a recent hearing on the Rivers State political dispute, the Abuja Division of the Court of Appeal adjourned multiple appeals related to the state’s ongoing political tensions, instructing the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) to clarify issues surrounding its legal representation. This session, intended to address 11 appeals connected to the political crisis in Rivers State, witnessed an intense exchange between two prominent lawyers, both claiming to represent the PDP in the proceedings.

The Rivers State political dispute has created division among various factions, with one case targeting the positions of 27 members of the Rivers State House of Assembly aligned with the Federal Capital Territory Minister, Nyesom Wike. The special appellate panel, tasked with addressing these complex matters, found itself entangled in a debate over which attorney held legitimate authority to act on behalf of the PDP.

The Rivers State political dispute appeals, originally scheduled for resolution, included a significant case filed by the Rivers State Government. This appeal seeks to delay enforcement of a ruling requiring Governor Siminalaye Fubara to resubmit his budget proposal to the Assembly’s pro-Wike faction. Another key appeal was submitted by the Action Peoples Party (APP), which seeks to vacate seats held by certain lawmakers accused of defecting to the All Progressives Congress (APC).

Controversy over legal representation for the PDP arose when Mr. B. F. Folurunsho and Mr. J. Y. Musa, two lawyers with differing instructions, each claimed authority to represent the party in the Rivers State political dispute cases. Mr. Musa asserted he was mandated to withdraw an appeal, while Mr. Folurunsho argued no such instruction had been issued by the PDP.

The three-member appellate panel, led by Justice Onyekachi Otisi, confirmed that the PDP had previously communicated its disapproval of the appeal via a letter from the party’s Acting National Chairman and Secretary. However, with conflicting accounts from the attorneys involved, the court ordered both parties to consult with the PDP and resolve the representation matter.

Following this dispute, Justice Otisi deferred specific appeals to January 23, 2025, while scheduling further appeals for November 22. Additionally, the Rivers State Government’s representative, Goddy Uche, SAN, highlighted four additional appeals filed in relation to the Rivers State political dispute, which he requested to consolidate with the current cases.

Beyond the primary appeals, the Court of Appeal also reviewed five connected appeals concerning recent local government elections in Rivers State. These appeals were brought forward by the Attorney General of Rivers State, the Social Democratic Party (SDP), and the Boot Party, with cross-appeals by the APC. In a previous ruling on September 30, Justice Peter Lifu of the Federal High Court in Abuja had barred the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) from releasing voter registers to the Rivers State Independent Electoral Commission (RSIEC) and prohibited police and state security involvement in the elections. The Rivers State Government, however, argued that the ruling overstepped the Federal High Court’s jurisdiction, asserting that local government election matters are beyond its purview.

This ongoing Rivers State political dispute underscores the complexity of legal, political, and jurisdictional issues facing the state and the PDP, whose internal divisions have added further layers to an already convoluted legal battle.