In a recent development reported by DAILY POST, Justice Osai Ahiakwo responded to the appellate court's decision to reinstate 25 lawmakers in the Rivers State House of Assembly. The ruling came after these lawmakers had been previously sacked, and Justice Ahiakwo has clarified the implications of this decision.
Justice Ahiakwo issued a statement on Thursday night, emphasizing that the appellate court's ruling does not grant the reinstated lawmakers the legitimacy to perform legislative duties. He specifically mentioned that the ruling does not authorize these lawmakers to initiate impeachment proceedings against the Governor of Rivers State.
This situation arose after a High Court in Port Harcourt had initially restrained the 25 lawmakers from acting as legislators due to their defection from the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) to the All Progressives Congress (APC). Seeking to overturn this decision, the Martin Amaewhule-led Assembly members approached the Appeal Court, which subsequently ruled in their favor.
While expressing his concern over the appellate court's ruling, Justice Ahiakwo stated that the matter might need to be resolved by the Supreme Court. He believes that the Supreme Court will provide a definitive interpretation of Sections 251 and 272 of the Constitution to address the jurisdictional issues between the Federal and State High Courts.
Justice Ahiakwo criticized the Appeal Court for introducing new terms into the legal system and misinterpreting Section 251 of the 1999 Constitution. He argued that this section confers original jurisdiction on the Federal High Court, which the Appeal Court failed to acknowledge, instead relying on Section 272 to overturn the High Court's ruling. Justice Ahiakwo stressed the need for conscientious efforts to approach the Supreme Court to correct the perceived error made by the Court of Appeal. He highlighted the importance of adhering to established legal norms and standards.
Hear him: “There is indeed no course for alarm as considerable and conscientious efforts must be put in place by the respondents in approaching the Supreme Court, aimed at correcting the error of the Court of Appeal. This calls for grave concern as nothing seems to suggest a departure from the known norms and standards; hence, the Supreme Court should be the last resort."