Human rights lawyer and Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Femi Falana, has fired back at the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, Nyesom Wike, over accusations that he (Falana) misrepresented a Supreme Court ruling on the defection crisis rocking the Rivers State House of Assembly.
In a statement made available to journalists on Monday, Falana insisted he never lied about the apex court’s decision, describing Wike’s comments as a deliberate attempt to incite the judiciary against him.
“In a recent media outburst, the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, Mr. Nyesom Wike, taunted me for losing a case which he won at the Supreme Court.
“He went as far as dubbing me ‘a television lawyer’. However, I did not respond at the time because Mr. Wike is the only Life Bencher in Nigeria who has never handled a case in any trial or appellate court,” Falana stated.
Falana noted that Wike renewed his attacks during a press conference in Abuja, accusing him of lying about the defection status of 27 lawmakers in Rivers State during a Channels Television interview.
Wike had accused the SAN of misinformation regarding the alleged defection of the 27 Rivers lawmakers.
The minister further claimed that such misinformation from respected legal figures could destabilise the state and cause political unrest.
He stated, “A few days ago, the Supreme Court settled this matter of defection. If someone of Femi Falana’s calibre can go on national television and lie, it’s very serious. Lies can cause a lot of crises.”
However, Falana maintained that his commentary was a factual and constitutional analysis of the situation.
“Contrary to Mr Wike’s assertion, I did not lie against the Supreme Court,” he said.
“All I said was that the matter of the defection of the 27 legislators was raised suo motu and determined by the eminent Justices of the apex court,” he added
He emphasised that his comments were rooted in the fact that the issue of defection was already pending before the Federal High Court in Port Harcourt at the time.
He also pointed out that the defectors had publicly confirmed their switch from the People’s Democratic Party to the All Progressives Congress through affidavits and video recordings.
“It is public knowledge that Mr Wike praised the Supreme Court to high heavens and held a thanksgiving service to celebrate the decision. However, he has decided to attack me for commenting on the same judgment — without any legal justification,” the SAN said.
Citing Section 39 of the Nigerian Constitution and Article 9 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, Falana insisted he had a legal right to criticise court judgments.
He challenged Wike to petition the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee if he believed there had been professional misconduct.
The human rights lawyer said, “I would have ignored the minister’s latest gratuitous attack, but he recently urged the Body of Benchers to sanction lawyers who criticise judgements of Nigerian courts,” Falana continued.
“Unlike Mr Wike, who calls judges names when they disagree with his politics of opportunism, I have always criticised judicial decisions with utmost decorum and in good faith,” he said.
Referencing the landmark case of Adegoke Motors Ltd v Adesanya (1989) 3 NWLR (Pt 109) 250, Falana reminded Wike that even the Supreme Court acknowledges the fallibility of its judgements.
“As Justice Oputa famously stated, ‘We are final not because we are infallible; we are infallible because we are final,’” he noted.
Falana also cited former Chief Justice of Nigeria, Ibrahim Tanko Muhammad, who once encouraged legal practitioners to criticise court decisions constructively to ensure accountability and improve the justice delivery system.
“It may interest Mr Wike to know that from time to time, many respected Justices commend my critique of court decisions and my defence of the judiciary. At a recent valedictory session, a retiring Supreme Court Justice referred positively to one of my critical remarks,” he said.
He concluded by warning that the Supreme Court’s recent interpretation of defection laws could be weaponised by unprincipled politicians.
“No doubt, the decision of the Supreme Court is final on defection. Their Lordships said it must be proved by producing the membership register of political parties. But my fear is that this ruling could be used by unpatriotic politicians to justify political prostitution,” Falana said.
The political turmoil in Rivers State began in late 2024 when 27 lawmakers, elected under the PDP and aligned with Wike, allegedly defected to the APC.
The move was widely interpreted as an attempt to undermine Governor Siminalayi Fubara’s administration.
The alleged defectors, led by Speaker Martin Amaewhule, initiated impeachment proceedings against the governor.
Amid mounting tensions, President Bola Tinubu declared a state of emergency in Rivers on March 18, 2025.
This led to the suspension of Governor Fubara, his deputy, and all lawmakers for six months, with retired Vice Admiral Ibok Ibas appointed as the Sole Administrator.
The Supreme Court had ruled on February 28, 2025 that no lawful evidence was presented to confirm the lawmakers’ defection, especially after Governor Fubara withdrew his claims without substantiating them.
The court held that, in law, the defectors remained PDP members.
Despite this, the PDP has called on INEC to declare their seats vacant, while the Labour Party’s legal challenge to unseat the lawmakers was dismissed by a Federal High Court.
