The Rivers State government and the state House of Assembly are currently engaged in a fierce dispute over the implementation of the Supreme Court’s judgment, particularly regarding the presentation of the 2025 budget. The Assembly accuses Governor Siminalayi Fubara of deliberately obstructing the execution of the judgment, while the state government insists that the Assembly should reconvene to facilitate the budget presentation.

Dr. Enemi Alabo George, Chairman of the House Committee on Information and spokesperson for the Assembly, voiced concerns during a press conference in Port Harcourt. He criticized the governor’s claim that he had sent a letter to the Assembly about his intention to present the 2025 appropriation bill. George pointed out that no such letter had been received by the Assembly, labeling the governor’s assertion as “astonishing.” He further claimed that the governor’s aides had attempted to send the letter via WhatsApp to some members, which he deemed unprofessional and embarrassing.

George clarified that there was no record of the governor’s letter in the Assembly, describing the governor’s public statements as a deliberate attempt to manipulate public perception. He argued that the intention behind these claims was to create a narrative of conflict between the executive and legislature, aiming to damage the Assembly’s reputation and turn public sentiment against it. According to George, if such a letter existed, it was intended for the public rather than the Assembly, and was part of a strategy to discredit the legislature.

George also accused the governor of impeding efforts to resolve the crisis that followed the Supreme Court’s ruling, particularly in relation to the budget presentation. He reminded the public that after the Court’s judgment, it became critical for the governor to present the appropriation bill to the legislature for review and passage. The House had written to the governor, urging him to present the budget promptly, with the hope of passing it by March 15, 2025. This was seen as essential to enabling the state to access federal funds that had been withheld as a result of the Supreme Court’s decision.

However, George claimed that the governor rejected the letter, and that the staff attempting to deliver it to the Government House were mistreated and turned away. Despite this, the House used a courier service to deliver the letter, but the governor still failed to respond or engage with the matter.

In response, Joseph Johnson, the Commissioner for Information and Communications, defended the government’s actions. He stated that the government had sent a letter to the Assembly on March 7, but the Assembly feigned ignorance of its receipt. Another letter was sent on March 12, prompting the Assembly to abruptly end its session and adjourn. On March 13, the government sent another letter, only to hear that the Assembly would adjourn sine die immediately after receiving it. Johnson stressed that when the Assembly adjourns sine die and an emergency arises, it is customary for the House to reconvene.

Johnson called on the Assembly members to reconvene and address the 2025 budget, as directed by the Supreme Court. He warned that failure to do so would suggest the Assembly was opposed to the Court’s ruling, potentially leading to a constitutional deadlock that would not benefit anyone. The government’s stance was clear: the Assembly was expected to act in the best interests of the state and its citizens, fulfilling its constitutional responsibilities.