Fubara Triumphs Over Wike in Rivers Allocation Dispute at Appeal Court

By Amaechi Okoro

The political crisis in Rivers State has taken a new turn as the Court of Appeal ruled in favor of Governor Siminalayi Fubara, halting an attempt by a faction of the state’s House of Assembly, reportedly loyal to former Governor Nyesom Wike, to seize the state’s federal allocation. This landmark decision underscores the ongoing power tussle between Fubara and Wike, two influential figures in Rivers State politics.

Diaspora Digital Media, through detailed investigations and credible sources close to the legal proceedings, gathered that the case was spearheaded by Martin Amaewhule and his group of legislators aligned with Wike. Their objective was to assert control over the state’s statutory allocation using controversial legal maneuvers. However, Justice Barka of the Court of Appeal firmly quashed this attempt, condemning the Federal High Court for overreaching its jurisdiction. According to Justice Barka, the Federal High Court acted beyond its legal authority by entertaining a matter that should have been addressed within the state’s legal framework. The court’s decision declared the case filed by Amaewhule and his allies a blatant abuse of judicial processes, signaling a clear warning against manipulative legal tactics.

This judgment has deepened the ongoing rift between Governor Fubara and his predecessor, Wike. Since assuming office, Fubara has faced growing opposition from a faction loyal to Wike, a powerful figure who once dominated Rivers State’s political landscape. Analysts have suggested that the conflict between the two leaders is rooted in control over the state’s resources and political influence, with the federal allocation dispute serving as the latest flashpoint.

Governor Fubara has maintained a resolute stance against interference from Amaewhule’s group, which some have described as a proxy for Wike’s interests. By refusing to engage with the faction’s demands, Fubara has sought to consolidate his administration’s authority and assert his independence. His approach has gained support from legal experts and political observers who view the Court of Appeal’s ruling as a victory for democratic governance and the rule of law.

The Court of Appeal’s decision emphasized that matters concerning state funds fall strictly within state jurisdiction and cannot be manipulated under the pretext of federal oversight. Justice Barka criticized the inappropriate listing of federal agencies in the case, describing it as a legal shortcut designed to exploit federal jurisdiction. The court’s rejection of this tactic sets a significant precedent, reaffirming the boundaries of legal authority and warning against the misuse of judicial processes for political gain.

For many, this judgment represents a pivotal moment in the unfolding saga between Fubara and Wike. It not only safeguards Rivers State’s financial autonomy but also reinforces the principle that political disputes must be resolved within the framework of the law. The ruling serves as a stark reminder that judicial institutions should not be weaponized for partisan battles, and it bolsters Fubara’s position as he navigates the challenges of governance in a politically charged environment.

As Rivers State moves forward, the ramifications of this decision are likely to resonate across its political landscape. While the ruling marks a significant victory for Fubara, it also highlights the enduring influence of Wike and the complexities of navigating power dynamics in one of Nigeria’s most politically active states. Whether this marks the beginning of a resolution to the conflict or a new chapter in their rivalry remains to be seen.

For Diaspora Digital Media Updates click on Whatsapp, or Telegram. For eyewitness accounts/ reports/ articles, write to: citizenreports@diasporadigitalmedia.com. Follow us on X (Fomerly Twitter) or Facebook