According to report from Arise TV on Prime Time programme. Festus Ogwuche a legal practitioner has shed light on the recent court ruling in the Rivers State House of Assembly case, stating that the issue at hand is narrow and specific. According to Ogwuche, the High Court of Rivers State had previously issued a restraining order against the Amaewhule-led House of Assembly, prohibiting them from parading themselves as members.
Despite not being served notice, the affected parties appealed to the Court of Appeal for interpretation, seeking to determine if the Lower Court had jurisdiction to entertain the matter. The Court of Appeal's decision solely addressed this question, clarifying the jurisdiction issue.
Ogwuche emphasized that the ruling does not grant anyone unilateral powers or rights to alter the status quo, which remains unchanged since the onset. The legal battle continues, with the court's decision providing clarity on the jurisdictional aspect of the case.
In his words, "I was not expecting that because the issue as you said is very narrow, the High Court of Rivers State by Justice Wali had given an order restraining the Amaewhule-led House of Assembly from parading themselves as Members of the House of Assembly, and all the sundry orders that he made, and these gentlemen were yet to even be put on notice, but when they got wind of the proceedings, they went straight forward to the Court of Appeal for the interpretation of that decision regarding the jurisdiction of the Court to determine that issue; and that's all the Court did today, to determine whether the Lower Court – the High Court of Rivers State has jurisdiction to entertain that matter in the first place; and that is where the issue is. The decision of the Court does not give anybody any unilateral powers or rights to restoration or to change the status quo as it exists right from the onset."
According to a video on Arise Television's YouTube Channel – https://youtu.be/YBDYMCOt3VU?si=cL6zYdIxTxfACAd0
Forward video to 5:22