HURIWA Calls For Visa Ban On Judges Over “Politically Motivated” Judgements Destabilizing Rivers State, Constitutional Democracy in Nigeria
The Human Rights Writers Association of Nigeria (HURIWA) has issued a strong condemnation of recent Federal High Court judgments, calling for visa restrictions on judges allegedly involved in issuing rulings perceived as politically motivated and destabilizing for Rivers State. The group cited recent judgments halting federal allocations to the state as alarming, calling for international embassies, including those of the United States, United Kingdom, and European Union, to impose travel restrictions on judges like Chief Judge John Tsoho, Justice Joyce Abdulmalik, Justice Peter Lifu, Justice Omotosho, Justice Okorowo, and Justice Emeka Nwite.
HURIWA’s statement follows Justice Abdulmalik’s controversial ruling to halt financial allocations to Rivers State, which HURIWA equates to a “constitutional coup” that disrupts Nigeria’s democracy. HURIWA argued that such judgements are reminiscent of previous politically charged decisions, such as the Imo State governorship verdict that led to a visa ban on Justice Kudirat Kekere-Ekun (now the Chief Justice of Nigeria).
This recent ruling, according to HURIWA, effectively disregards a longstanding Supreme Court principle affirming that statutory allocations to states cannot be withheld by federal authorities. HURIWA insisted that the judgement violates established legal precedence, putting Rivers State and Governor Siminalayi Fubara’s administration at risk of political destabilization.
The lawsuit, initiated by a faction within the Rivers State House of Assembly loyal to former Governor Nyesom Wike, claims the power to halt funds distribution within the state. HURIWA views this as a strategic attempt to undermine Governor Fubara’s administration through judicial means. According to HURIWA, such “partisan” judgements blatantly contradict principles of judicial impartiality, as the judiciary should uphold constitutional protections rather than favor specific political agendas.
HURIWA’s appeal also included reference to notable human rights lawyer Professor Chidi Odinkalu, who echoed similar sentiments in response to Justice Abdulmalik’s ruling. In his public reaction, Odinkalu stated that the ruling overturns a precedent set by the Supreme Court, describing the judgement as a form of judicial tyranny that dismisses the rule of law. “Today, a judge of @FederalHigh overruled the Supreme Court. This is not #RuleOfLaw; it is tyranny of the #Outlaw,” Odinkalu tweeted, underscoring the dangerous precedent this decision establishes.
In addition to Justice Abdulmalik, HURIWA highlighted several other recent rulings by Federal High Court judges that it considers constitutionally questionable. The group pointed to Justice Lifu’s recent decision regarding Rivers State Local Government elections, where he ruled that the Electoral Act, rather than state electoral laws, governs Local Government elections. HURIWA, alongside constitutional lawyers, expressed concern that this judgement could endanger the legality of local elections already conducted in states such as Kwara, Anambra, and Imo, which had relied on State Independent Electoral Commission (SIEC) laws. If upheld, the judgement would also challenge the authority of SIEC to conduct local elections, placing upcoming polls across multiple states in jeopardy.
HURIWA criticized Justice Lifu for repeatedly issuing judgements favoring factions loyal to political figures and for delivering contradictory rulings that create legal uncertainty. In an earlier case, Justice Lifu ruled that party decampment is a pre-election matter, thus benefiting those described as pro-Wike faction in Rivers State. HURIWA contended that this interpretation conflicts with existing party constitutions, such as the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) in sections 45, 47, which stipulates that an acting chairman must be temporarily appointed only until a substantive officer from the zone of the former occupant assumes the role. Such rulings, HURIWA argues, reflect blatant disregard for party protocols and constitutional guidelines.
Moreover, HURIWA noted that Justice Okorowo previously issued an injunction declaring that Rivers lawmakers’ seats should not be vacated, a ruling upon which Justice Lifu then based his order allowing certain lawmakers to maintain their positions. Recently, however, the lawmakers chose to withdraw the case from Justice Okorowo’s court, yet Justice Lifu’s rulings continued to rely on the withdrawn case. HURIWA called this a “disturbing misuse of the judiciary” that undermines the stability of Rivers State and allows personal or partisan interests to influence judicial outcomes.
HURIWA emphasized the potential for civil unrest if financial allocations are withheld from Rivers State, as groups within the region have reportedly issued warnings threatening to disrupt critical infrastructure, including oil pipelines, in retaliation. The group stressed that the court’s ruling aggravates existing tensions and could incite further instability in the region. “The judgement issued is like dousing the flames of political discord in Rivers State with gasoline, in what appears to be a deliberate push toward civil instability,” HURIWA stated. “Justice Abdulmalik’s decision delegitimizes the duly elected administration of Governor Fubara, and as such, is unconstitutional and akin to a plot to forcefully remove the governor without due process.”
In response, HURIWA appealed to Chief Justice Kekere-Ekun, urging her to restore integrity within Nigeria’s judicial system. HURIWA warned that the credibility of the judiciary is at stake, as these repeated instances of perceived bias in high-profile cases erode public trust in the rule of law. “The Nigerian judiciary is in jeopardy as these rulings reflect a disturbing pattern of bias in political disputes. If this persists, Nigerians may begin to question the value of seeking legal recourse, potentially leading to societal chaos,” HURIWA stated.
Concluding its statement, HURIWA warned that the judiciary must act quickly to address these incidents of alleged misconduct to prevent the erosion of Nigeria’s democratic framework. HURIWA vowed to pursue sanctions on any judge whose rulings compromise Nigeria’s democratic principles, emphasizing that Justice Abdulmalik’s order represents a dangerous encroachment on the powers vested in elected officials. “It is crucial that the CJN and the National Judicial Council take corrective measures to prevent further damage to Nigeria’s judicial image,” the group stated. *Comrade Emmanuel Onwubiko, National Coordinator, HUMAN RIGHTS WRITERS ASSOCIATION OF NIGERIA (HURIWA). October 31st, 2024.
