The Office of the Accountant-General of the Federation (OAGF) confirmed that Rivers state will continue to receive its federal allocations, despite the ongoing legal dispute over the legitimacy of Rivers State’s budget presentation.
The office’s assurance, issued on Friday, comes in response to a recent Federal High Court ruling that directed the Central Bank of Nigeria to suspend monthly disbursements to the state.
In a statement, Bawa Mokwa, the Director of Press and Public Relations for the OAGF, stressed that while the office would respect court orders, Rivers State’s federal allocations would remain unaffected during the appeals process. “We are going to obey the court order,” Mokwa said, but emphasized that the state’s appeal has effectively stayed the execution of the ruling.
The court’s October 30, 2024, decision was sparked by a legal challenge questioning the constitutionality of Governor Siminalayi Fubara’s presentation of the state’s 2024 budget. Justice Joyce Abdulmalik, in her judgment, declared the budget invalid, ruling that it had been presented to a non-constitutionally formed House of Assembly.
According to the judge, the assembly, which consisted of only four members loyal to Governor Fubara, failed to meet the constitutional requirement of a properly constituted legislative body for budget approval.
This decision raised significant constitutional questions, particularly around the legitimacy of the faction of the State House of Assembly supporting Governor Fubara.
The ruling effectively declared that the actions of this four-member faction, and any decisions made by it, were unlawful. The judgment reinforced the principle that the legislative process must be fully constitutional and in line with the provisions of the 1999 Constitution.
In response to the ruling, the Rivers State government, led by Fubara, wasted no time in filing a notice of appeal. Joseph Johnson, the state’s Commissioner for Information and Communications, expressed confidence that the appeal would overturn the lower court's judgment, asserting that the government was undeterred by the legal setback.
Meanwhile, the OAGF’s commitment to disbursing federal funds to Rivers State underscores the practical realities of governance, where the legal and political ramifications of such disputes are closely intertwined. As the appeals process unfolds, the issue brings to the fore deeper political dynamics within the state, particularly the power struggle over control of the legislature and the executive’s ability to implement policy.
While the legal challenge continues to make waves, the central government’s decision to maintain the flow of federal allocations is a reminder that the rule of law, while paramount, does not necessarily halt the day-to-day workings of governance. This ongoing dispute, with its complex mix of constitutional interpretation and political maneuvering, highlights the challenges of maintaining stable governance when competing factions clash over institutional authority.
