. . .All eyes on State’s Chief Judge over court order not to accept impeachment notice
Just when signs were high that the impeachment motion against Governor Sim Fubara of Rivers State was about to die a natural death or be withdrawn, a twist emerged Friday, January 16, 2026 morning. Tension returned to high levels as hopes of return of peace died.
By evening, a high court issued an order debarring the Rivers State Chief Justice, Simeon Amadi, from accepting the impeachment motion from the Rivers State House of Assembly.
The court order came as a result of a claim filed by Governor Fubara and his deputy, Ngozi Ordu, against Martin Amaewhule, the speaker, and 25 other lawmakers.
This has created a big twist in the impeachment saga. This is the third time since May 2023 that Governor Fubara has faced impeachment attacks from the Rivers State House of Assembly (RSHA).
A Rivers State High Court sitting in Port Harcourt has issued an interim injunction restraining the Chief Judge of Rivers State from acting on any impeachment-related request or communication from the Rivers State House of Assembly concerning Gov. Fubara and Ordu, pending further hearing.
The order, granted by the Justice, F. A. Fiberesima, on Friday, barred the Chief Judge from receiving, forwarding, or considering any resolution or documents aimed at constituting an impeachment panel for seven days.
The court also granted permission for substituted service of court processes on the lawmakers by pasting them at the Rivers State House of Assembly Quarters, while service on the Chief Judge is to be effected through staff of the State Judiciary.
The matter has been adjourned to January 23, 2026, for hearing of the motion.
The development has stirred various groups and commentators on the impeachment. Many in support of Fubara and Ordu had grown weary from inaction or silence on the governor’s side. Most of such persons seem to have given up, leaving the matter to fate, since their man (Fubara) did not seem to bother.
Many agreed with Fubara when he appealed to his supporters at the church service last Sunday to remain calm. They understood it to mean that he was up to things the eyes could not see, especially when two more lawmakers came out to appeal for withdrawal of impeachment, but the twist to press on caused a huge stir.
Next, Fubara made his move. A high court struck, debarring the Chief Judge not to touch the impeachment motion, let alone setting up an investigation panel.
The intervention of the court seems to introduce a sensitive dimension, raising debates over who is the strongest force in an impeachment battle: the constitution, the parliament, or the judiciary, though each has been given strong roles to play.
Read also: Rivers assembly says chief judge acknowledges Fubara’s impeachment notice despite court order
What actually did Fubara do?
Many have asked to know what Governor Fubara actually did wrong. He was barely five months in office when the Martin Amaewhule-led House which is fiercely loyal to Nyesom Wike, former governor now FCT Minister, struck with impeachment. Many say Fubara had barely had time to even do anything let alone commit an offence. They say what has happened since then has been recasting and updating the ‘offences’, reason why they said Fubara tried to keep clean records over finances, knowing impeachment is always hanging over his head.
Before they fool you – Citizen
A citizen, Kingsley Habemem, says it is wrong to rely on any court to save a governor. He said: “Before they fool you that a court has power to restrain a Chief Judge from performing his/her constitutional responsibility! Please note with due respect that the courts lack jurisdiction to restrain or halt the impeachment of a sitting governor while the process is ongoing.”
He thinks impeachment under the 1999 Constitution (as amended) is purely a constitutional, political, and legislative process, vested exclusively in the House of Assembly. “It is not a judicial function, and the courts cannot assume supervisory control over it without violating the doctrine of separation of powers.”
He quoted a critical section 188(10) to say no proceedings or determination of the House of Assembly or of the panel or of any matter relating thereto shall be entertained or questioned in any court. “While the Supreme Court has clarified that this clause does not oust judicial review after the fact, it does bar courts from interfering midstream with impeachment proceedings.” This means courts can only come to make jest after Fubara would have been removed from office.
Only discussion can save Fubara:
Other experts have tried to take a look at the court order, noting that the constitution says; “No proceeds or determination of the panel or of the House of Assembly or any matter relating to such proceedings or determination shall be entertained or questioned in any court.”
They warn that the Chief Judge actually risks his decades of professional practice going down the drain should he abdicate his constitutional responsibility.
“So long as the Rivers State Assembly has not contravened any of the impeachment procedure as regards two-third majority and the stipulated timeline of events, no court in Nigeria has the jurisdiction to entertain any matter relating to the impeachment process.”
They claim that Governor Fubura put himself in a very difficult and troubling situation. “Only a round table discussion can save him.”
Yet, many ask, what offence did Fubara commit? They say he is spending illegally but it is the budget NASS passed and President Bola Tinubu signed that he is spending. That the lawmakers are angry that their ‘interest’ has not been captured cannot be said to be Fubara’s fault. They wanted him to submit a supplementary budget but he said he wanted any alteration to be after the life of the present budget.
Read also: Rivers Assembly votes to continue Fubara impeachment as four lawmakers reverse withdrawal
Court order clever by half – Dike
Princewill Dike, who introduced himself as Citizens Journalist, and who is fiercely inclined to Wike, said the order was clever by half. Rivers State judiciary is known as centre of intrigues for both buyers and sellers of court orders. Dike said the case was ‘heard’ before it was filed. He gave timelines of the case: “Case was filed 11:06am January 16, 2026; assigned to a judge 12:06pm January 16, 2026; heard 9am, January 16, 2026.”
Many say they find it difficult to see how the case could have been heard by 9am of that day, as claimed by Dike. What is clear is that Igwe John Promise, an assistant chief registrar, signed the order which is available to the media. No time was indicated but the news came in the late hours of the day.
Other schools of thought found mostly around the University of Port Harcourt have tried to show why the chief judge may not save Fubara. They say Gov Fubara is playing a dangerous game by not doing enough to inspire support from some members of the House of Assembly to prevent Wike group in the House from having the required two-third majority to impeach him.
“Some people have rightly argued that the process doesn’t end with the Assembly, but with an insinuation that the Chief Judge of Rivers State, Justice Simeon Chibuzor Amadi, might refuse to constitute the mandatory seven-member investigative panel, or could appoint members inclined to exonerate the governor. This view, however, stems more from partisan hope than legal reality.
“The Chief Judge’s role is mandatory and not optional. Once the Speaker requests it following a motion supported by at least two-thirds of all Assembly members, the Chief Judge shall, within seven days, appoint a seven-member panel of persons with unquestionable integrity to investigate the allegations. Refusal to comply could invite disciplinary action from the National Judicial Council.”
The group noted that the Rivers State House of Assembly has 32 members, so two-thirds equates to 21. “Reports indicate that around 26 members are in favour of the impeachment process. With the required majority achieved, if the Speaker makes the formal request, the Chief Judge is constitutionally mandated to act.
“On the argument of loyalty, it must be noted that Justice Amadi was appointed Chief Judge in May 2021 during Minister Wike’s tenure as governor, amid controversy over his elevation despite not being the most senior judge at the time. If personal or perceived allegiance plays any role, it would likely favour Wike, the architect of his appointment over Fubara, whose administration has struggled to retain even core supporters.
“Moreover, the Wike’s faction has masterfully played a smart one on the Governor by securing a favourable judgment indicting the governor from the apex court. Supreme Court ruling in 2025 has indicated a constitutional infringements by the governor, creating a formidable precedent. Any seven-member panel would find it extremely difficult to contradict or ignore such apex court findings.
“This leaves Governor Fubara in a vulnerable spot. This goes without saying that his inability to build and sustain a solid bloc in the Assembly within his nearly three years as governor has allowed his opponents control the key structures for his impeachment.”
The think-tank thinks only presidential intervention remains Fubara’s most realistic lifeline, “But it’s looking like a tall order now. Would the President side with a governor lacking grassroots control from ward to state level against a minister whom he helped to build and has maintained formidable political machinery from ward to local government and to federal? Only time will tell.”
Many are watching to see why Fubara is confident and silent; why he met the president, and what President Tinubu actually wants in the Rivers’ crisis.
The next puzzle is the role N600bn found in Rivers’ treasury has played in the renewed crisis. It was Amaewhule that first raised alarm that there was such money cooling off in the treasury. Many wondered if it was an offence. Next, Fubara confirmed the amount but explained that he too left over N300bn before proceeding on suspension.
With the amount ascertained, Wike entered the scene, accusing some national officers and ministers of hovering around Rivers State and Fubara because of such huge sum in the treasury. He tried to show that when such amounts are found in one place, political intrigues usually explode, all aimed at collecting some amounts.
It did not take long before this new crisis exploded. Some experts say it must be to claw into the treasury that the impeachment plate insists that both Fubara and deputy must leave, even when nobody has said what the deputy did wrong. It is believed that the clean slate eviction is to make room for the speaker to become acting governor and inherit the N600bn and also organise an election that would bring another person from the “correct” camp to be next governor, by then the N600bn would have done its duty.
