A fresh legal and political battle has erupted in Rivers State following an interim court order halting key steps in the impeachment process against Governor Siminalayi Fubara and his deputy, Professor Ngozi Odu. The All Progressives Congress, APC, has now publicly urged the state’s Chief Judge, Justice Simeon Amadi, to comply strictly with the order, warning that ignoring it could deepen an already volatile crisis within the state and the ruling party itself.

Court Order Halts Impeachment Steps

The dispute centres on an interim injunction issued last Friday by a Rivers State High Court sitting in Oyigbo Local Government Area. According to court documents, the order restrains the Chief Judge from receiving, forwarding, considering or acting on any request, resolution, articles of impeachment or related communication from the Rivers State House of Assembly concerning the governor and his deputy.

The case, Suit No. OYHC/7/CS/2026, effectively pauses the procedural role of the Chief Judge in the impeachment process, which under Nigeria’s constitution is a critical step once allegations are forwarded by the legislature.

The development has added a judicial dimension to a political confrontation that has been building for weeks within the state.

APC Calls for Compliance

Reacting to the ruling, the APC in Rivers State said the Chief Judge was legally bound to respect the interim injunction. In a statement issued over the weekend in Port Harcourt, the party’s spokesman, Darlington Nwauju, called on Justice Amadi to refrain from any action that could be interpreted as defiance of the court.

“We call on the Honourable Chief Judge of Rivers State to respect yesterday’s interim injunction in Suit No. OYHC/7/CS/2026 that restrained him from receiving or acting on the resolutions of the Rivers State House of Assembly,” Nwauju said.

The APC’s intervention is notable because it comes at a time when internal party divisions are increasingly shaping the political landscape in Rivers State.

Allegations of Legislative Overreach

Beyond the legal argument, the party framed the impeachment move as an abuse of legislative power. Nwauju described the action by lawmakers as a “choreographed legislative coup d’etat,” arguing that it runs counter to the broader interests of the APC in the state.

According to the statement, party leaders had reviewed the sequence of events leading up to the House of Assembly’s decision to advance impeachment proceedings. The conclusion, the APC said, was that the move reflected internal recalcitrance, including among lawmakers who publicly claim loyalty to the party and to President Bola Tinubu.

The party warned that pressing ahead with impeachment under the current circumstances amounts to what it called a needless legislative overreach.

Constitutional Backdrop and Legal Gray Areas

Under Nigeria’s 1999 Constitution, as amended, state legislatures have the authority to initiate impeachment proceedings against a governor and deputy governor. Sections 129 and 188 outline the process, including the role of the Chief Judge in setting up an investigative panel once allegations are formally presented.

However, the APC pointed to what it described as ambiguities within the constitution, particularly Paragraph 11 of Section 188. According to the party, the provision gives the legislature wide discretion to define what constitutes “gross misconduct,” making the process inherently political rather than purely legal.

The statement argued that regardless of how detailed or carefully written the allegations may be, they remain subjective in the court of public opinion.

This interpretation reflects a long-standing national debate over impeachment standards in Nigeria, where similar disputes have played out in several states over the past two decades.

Why the Development Matters Now

The timing of the Rivers dispute is significant. The state has been grappling with intense political realignments, and the relationship between the executive and the legislature has been visibly strained. Analysts say the court order introduces a temporary pause that could either open space for political negotiation or harden positions on both sides.

For the APC, the stakes go beyond the immediate fate of Governor Fubara and his deputy. The party warned that the impeachment push could damage its internal cohesion and public standing in Rivers State, particularly if it appears divided or indifferent to due process.

“This unfortunate path chosen by the legislative arm serves as a dangerous footnote to the health and survival of the APC in Rivers State,” the statement said.

Call for National Party Intervention

In a notable escalation, the Rivers APC appealed to the party’s national leadership to step in. The statement urged the National Working Committee to activate its internal disciplinary and conflict-resolution mechanisms under Article 21(b)(iii) of the APC Constitution 2022, as amended.

The party said swift intervention was necessary to prevent what it described as an embarrassing outcome for the APC at both state and national levels.

This call underscores the internal party dimension of the crisis, suggesting that the impeachment effort is not merely a contest between branches of government but also a test of party discipline.

Broader Implications

Legal observers say the immediate question is whether the interim injunction will be challenged or upheld in subsequent court proceedings. If the order stands, it could delay the impeachment process indefinitely, forcing lawmakers to reconsider their strategy.

Politically, attention is likely to shift to behind-the-scenes negotiations involving party leaders, lawmakers and national figures. The response of the APC’s national leadership may also signal how willing the party is to enforce internal unity in high-stakes state-level disputes.

For Rivers residents, the episode raises broader concerns about governance stability, legislative accountability and the balance of power among state institutions.

As the Rivers impeachment saga unfolds, the court’s interim order has become a focal point in a widening legal and political struggle. The APC’s demand that the Chief Judge comply with the ruling reflects growing unease within the party about the direction of events. Whether the dispute leads to reconciliation, prolonged litigation or deeper political fallout will depend on how the judiciary, the legislature and party leaders navigate the days ahead.