The Federal High Court, Abuja Division, on Friday, dismissed a motion seeking to restrain the National Assembly from approving budgets or appointments of the Rivers State Government under the current sole administrator.

Vice Admiral Ibok-Ete Ibas (retd.) was appointed as Rivers’ sole administrator by President Bola Tinubu following the six-month suspension of Governor Siminalayi Fubara.

Justice James Omotosho, in a ruling on Friday, held that the court could not grant the relief sought because what the applicants intended to stop had been completed.

Mr Omotosho held that the court was aware that the Senate, on June 25, passed the budget of Rivers State submitted by the administrator.

The judge further held that the implication was that the act sought to be restrained was a completed one and proceeded to dismiss it.

He also held that some of the issues raised in the motion on notice are contained in the substantive suit, which would be better determined when the main suit is being decided.

The judge adjourned until October 20 for the hearing of the substantive suit.

The suit, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/1190/2025, was instituted by some indigenes of Rivers State and a group, the Registered Trustees of Hope Africa Foundation.

Other plaintiffs are Oziwe Amba, Julius Bulous, George Ikeme, Amachelu Orlu and Odioha Wembe.

They dragged the National Assembly and the clerk of the National Assembly to court as 1st and 2nd defendants.

The applicants sought “an order of interlocutory injunction restraining the defendants “from further interference, approving, supporting and engaging in any legislative activities, including approving appointments or budgets of the Rivers State Government.”

They argued that this was in furtherance of the alleged illegalities and unconstitutionally forwarded proposed state budget by Ibas, “arising from the unconstitutionally prohibited ‘voice vote’ not provided for under the constitution pending the hearing and determination of the substantive suit by this honourable court.”

While the main suit was filed on June 19, the motion for an interlocutory injunction was filed on June 24.

The plaintiffs prayed the court to restrain the defendants from further acting on any requests from the emergency government in the state pending the determination of the substantive suit.

They contended that the declaration of a state of emergency in Rivers State was without the required legislative approval because the voice votes adopted by the National Assembly in approving the emergency rule were unconstitutional.

In his counterargument, lawyer to the National Assembly and its clerk, Mohammed Galadima, urged the court to reject the motion for interlocutory injunction, arguing that it was without merit.

In the affidavit filed by the defendants, they argued that the facts deposed to in the plaintiffs’ supporting affidavit to the motion “are contrived falsehoods and calculated misrepresentation of the facts as they occurred.”

They argued that there had never been any illegality in their actions and that there was no breach of the constitution as alleged by the applicants.

The defendants also faulted the plaintiffs’ claim that the emergency rule was a violation of their fundamental rights to be governed by a democratically elected government.

The National Assembly and its clerk said they would be seriously prejudiced by the grant of the motion, as it would create pandemonium and confusion in governance in Rivers.

They added that the grant of the motion would not be in the interest of justice. Mr Omotosho fixed July 18 for the ruling.

The Senate had on June 25 passed the 2025 budget of Rivers State, totalling ₦1.485 trillion, following the third reading of the appropriation bill on the floor.

(NAN)