A Federal High Court in Port Harcourt has adjourned until May 22, 2025, the hearing of a high-stakes legal challenge against Rivers State Sole Administrator, Ibok-Ete Ibas, over his controversial appointment of local government administrators across the state’s 23 Local Government Areas.
At the resumed session, the claimant, Oyingi Imiete, informed the court that the matter had been slated for a hearing on a motion for interlocutory injunction. The lawsuit—filed by the PILEX Centre for Civic Education Initiative and its coordinator, Courage Nsirimovu—seeks to block what they describe as unconstitutional appointments made by Ibas, arguing that such actions undermine democratic principles and due process.
Appointments Made Despite Court Order
Imiete disclosed that the respondent, Ibok-Ete Ibas, went ahead with the appointments on April 9, 2025—just hours after being served with the originating court documents and interim injunction granted on April 7 by Justice Adamu Turaki Mohammed.
“The respondent acted in defiance of the court’s order,” Imiete told the court. “We have now filed a motion for a mandatory restorative order due to the impact of his actions on the core of the case.”
The motion for interlocutory injunction was subsequently withdrawn by the claimant, who argued that the new motion—which seeks to restore the pre-appointment status quo—better addresses the urgency of the situation.
Respondent Calls Appointments a “Completed Act”
Counsel for the defendant countered that the originating processes were not properly served until two days after the appointments were made and supported the withdrawal of the initial motion. He described the appointments as a “completed act,” and stated that his client had yet to be served with the new motion but reserved the right to respond when service is effected.
The court, presided over by Justice Mohammed, affirmed that all applications, regardless of perceived merit, must be heard in accordance with the rule of law. He emphasized that the court would remain impartial, and that all parties should prepare for the substantive hearing of the originating summons.
Background and Broader Implications
The plaintiffs contend that Ibas’ actions violate both constitutional provisions and the democratic requirement for duly elected local government officials. The interim order issued by the court earlier this month explicitly barred Ibas from proceeding with the appointments and required him to appear to justify his actions.
Despite this directive, the Sole Administrator moved ahead with installing administrators across all 23 LGAs—drawing sharp criticism from civil society organizations and democracy advocates, who say the move erodes public trust in local governance and undermines judicial authority.
With the matter now set for substantive hearing, all eyes remain on the May 22 proceedings, which could have wide-ranging implications for executive accountability and the rule of law in Rivers State.
