Manny Ita –
The Court of Appeal in Port Harcourt has upheld a 2007 Rivers State High Court judgment restraining the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) from investigating the finances and public accounts of the Rivers State Government, a decision that effectively continues to shield former Rivers governor Peter Odili from EFCC investigation and prosecution.
The appellate court, in a judgment delivered on Friday by a three-member panel comprising Justices Ugochukwu Ogakwu, Isah Gafai and Zainab Abubakar, ruled that the earlier High Court decision remains valid and binding because it was never appealed.
Delivering the lead judgment in the appeal marked CA/PH/622/2008, Justice Ogakwu held that the EFCC could not ignore a subsisting court judgment nearly two decades after it was issued.
According to the court, the constitutional interpretation made by the Rivers State High Court in 2007 remains conclusive, whether right or wrong, since it was not challenged on appeal.
The dispute originated from a February 16, 2007 judgment of the Rivers State High Court which held that only the Rivers State House of Assembly, the Accountant-General and Auditor-General of the state possess constitutional powers to scrutinise and control the state’s finances and public records.
Relying on Sections 120, 121, 122, 124, 125 and 128 of the 1999 Constitution, the lower court ruled that such powers could not be shared with any external institution or agency, thereby restraining the EFCC from investigating the state’s accounts.
The case stems from the long-running legal battle over EFCC attempts to probe the administration of Mr Odili, who governed Rivers State from 1999 to 2007.
In 2007, Mr Odili secured a perpetual injunction from the Federal High Court in Port Harcourt barring the EFCC from investigating, arresting or prosecuting him, while also preventing the anti-graft agency from examining the finances of the Rivers State Government during his tenure.
Although the EFCC challenged the injunction in 2008, the order effectively protected the former governor from investigation for almost two decades.
In 2018, the Court of Appeal granted the EFCC leave to challenge the Federal High Court judgment, prompting the Attorney General of Rivers State and the Speaker of the Rivers State House of Assembly to file separate appeals at the Supreme Court seeking to overturn that decision.
However, in March 2025, the Supreme Court dismissed the appeals after they were withdrawn, directing the parties to return to the Court of Appeal for the substantive matter.
Despite that development, the Court of Appeal ruled in its latest judgment that the original 2007 Rivers High Court decision still subsists and remains binding because it was never directly appealed.
The appellate court further held that the EFCC could not rely on provisions of its Establishment Act to override a constitutional interpretation already made by a competent court, stressing that the Constitution takes precedence over any other legislation.
EFCC spokesperson Dele Oyewale declined to comment when contacted over the implications of the judgment.
Reacting to the ruling, former chairman of the National Human Rights Commission Chidi Odinkalu warned that the decision could have wider implications for the EFCC’s operations nationwide.
According to him, other states may seek to benefit from the judgment, while politicians could exploit judicial protection to evade accountability. He also remarked on the unusual speed with which a certified true copy of the judgment became available.
