In an earlier piece, I argued that Rivers State Governor Siminalayi Fubara is playing a dangerous game by not doing enough to inspire support from some members of the House of Assembly to prevent Minister Nyesome 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.
Under Section 188(5) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended), 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, NJC.
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 judgement indicting the Governor from the apex court. Supreme Court ruling in 2025 have 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.
However, 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 maintain formidable political machinery during from ward to local government and to federal? Only time will tell.
By Inyali Peter