Rivers State once had most of the oil wells in Nigeria and was thus the highest oil-producing state in Nigeria. The Nasir Boundary Adjustment Commission of 1976 endured this. Not anymore!
Now, Rivers State is about the third state after Delta and Akwa Ibom. This came after the Jonathan administration finished with ceding Rivers oil wells to Bayelsa, Akwa Ibom and Abia States. Now, it seems it’s the turn of Imo State to collect back what they felt was theirs.
The Rivers State government would not give up the oil wells without a fight, in the courts, that is. The raging case for now is an injunction asking the FG not to cede the wells yet to Imo State as earlier directed. The Supreme Court is to hear a series of motions on the matter but when the parties showed up in the heat of the invasion of the home of the second most senior justice of the Supreme Court, the apex court may not have been in the mood for such cases.
Thus, the Supreme Court refused to hear a motion challenging its right to hear a case over order of the federal government to cede oil wells in Rivers State to Imo State. This comes on the heels of a 48-hour ultimatum by Rivers State government to the FG to fish out those who invaded the home of a Supreme Court justice, Mary Odili.
Now, the Rivers State government is saying the Supreme Court order of injunction restraining the Federal Government and its agencies from ceding oil wells in Akri and Mgbede, Rivers State to Imo State, still subsists, since the case was adjourned to 2022.
At the resumed hearing of Suit No SC.1037/2020 filed by Attorney General of Rivers State (plaintiff) vs Attorney General of the Federation and others (defendants) on Monday, the Supreme Court adjourned the case to 17 January, 2022 for hearing of the substantive matter.
At the court session on Monday, the Attorney-General of the Federation and Attorney General of Imo State suffered setback, as the Supreme Court tacitly did not take an intended motion to set aside the ex-parte order restraining federal government and its agencies from ceding oil wells, located in Akri and Mgbede communities, to Imo State.
The counsel to the Attorney-General of the Federation, Remi Olatubura, and Attorney General of Imo State, Olusola Oke, had wanted their motion challenging the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court to hear the matter to be heard, but the counsel to Rivers State government countered led by Emmanuel Ukala, SAN, with a motion for direction to streamline all the other motions.
The Supreme Court seven-member panel of justices led by KudiratKekere-Ekun, adjourned the matter to January 17, 2022 to hear the substantive matter.
Speaking to journalists outside the court, counsel to Rivers State government, Sebastian Hon, SAN, said the matter was adjourned to 17 January, when all interlocutory applications will be withdrawn and the substantive matter heard.
“There is a boundary dispute with respect to some oil wells against Imo State. But we joined the Attorney General of the Federation who is a necessary party because of the regulatory bodies like the National Boundary Commission, the Revenue Mobilisation and Fiscal Allocation Committee, etc, that are federal agencies.
Read also: Oil wells: Supreme Court adjourns case involving Imo, Rivers to 2022
“Basically, it is a dispute that borders on some oil wells which Rivers State is claiming belongs to it. They (defendants) said the court ought to have taken their motion challenging jurisdiction first, but we said no, we have a motion for direction to streamline all the other motions.
“Then the court said instead of wasting time, let’s wait till January to hear the substantive matter. Everything will be taken on that day. They (defendants) actually wanted the court to quash the injunction, but tacitly the court refused to go into that,” Hon said.
Rivers State government had filed a suit against the Attorney-General of the Federation and the AttorneyGeneral of Imo State before the Supreme Court, asking for a declaration that the boundary between Rivers State and Imo State as delineated on Nigeria’s administrative map, 10, 11 and 12th editions and other maps bearing similar delineations are inaccurate, incorrect and do not represent the legitimate and lawful boundary between Rivers and Imo.
Rivers, through its Attorney-General also sought a declaration that the country’s administrative map 10, 11 and 12th editions and other maps bearing similar delineations with respect to the boundary between Rivers and Imo, are unlawful and void, and cannot be relied on to determine the extent of the territorial governmental jurisdiction of Rivers State and to determine the revenue accruing to the State from the federation account, including the application of the principle of derivation and other revenue allocation principles as contained in the 1999 Constitution.
The Rivers State government prayed the Supreme Court to declare that all the oil wells within Akri and Mgbede communities are wrongly attributed to Imo State and that they are all oil wells within the territory of Rivers State and form part of Rivers State, and that only Rivers is entitled to receive the full allocation of the distributable revenue from the oil wells on the basis of the 13 percent derivation as contained under Section 162 of the 1999 Constitution.
