An Appeal Court in Port Harcourt, has ruled on some motions bordering on the case filed a Martin Amaewhule and others, to challenge the order of injunction granted by a Rivers State High Court, restraining them from acting as state lawmakers.
The ruling which was delivered virtually, is reported to have requested the parties in the matter to maintain the status quo pending the hearing and determination of the Appeal.
Like in a recent court judgement by a state high court, today’s virtual ruling of the Appeal Court is generating controversial interpretations by interested parties.
In its reaction, the Rivers State Government explained that the court ruled on two motions filed by Martin Amaewhule and the others in the case with the number CA/PH/198/2024.
The State Commissioner for Information and Communication, Joe Johnson in a statement, said while ruling on the first motion, the court “granted the Appellants’ prayers for leave to compile and transmit the Records of Appeal, deeming the Appellants’ Brief of Argument as filed, accelerated hearing and a stay of further proceedings at the High Court”.
Johnson said the Court of Appeal, however, refused to grant the prayer to set aside the various actions of Victor Oko-Jumbo.
He said the court held that granting the order would be tantamount to determining the appeal at this stage.
He said the court, however, went on to order that “the present status quo should be maintained pending the hearing of the Appeal”.
On the second motion, the Commissioner for Information in Rivers State, explained that the appeal court equally dismissed the motion on notice to set aside the Order of Interlocutory Injunction by Honourable Justice C.N Wali of the State High Court, decreed on May 29, 2024.
He said the court reiterated that the ‘present’ status quo should be maintained contrary to the status quo, before the filing of the suit that was sought by the appellants
He argued that the respondents are to file their briefs within 72 hours of being served, while the case was adjourned to June 20, 2024 for hearing of the appeal.
He urged the public, to ignore what he calls misrepresentation of the ruling in certain quarters.