A looming confrontation may be brewing between the immediate past Rivers State Administrator, Vice Admiral Ibok-Ete Ibas (retd.), and the Rivers State House of Assembly following the lawmakers’ move to probe state expenditure during the six months of emergency rule.
Bellnews understands that Ibas ceased to be the state administrator on September 17, after President Bola Tinubu lifted the emergency rule and directed Governor Siminalayi Fubara, his deputy, and lawmakers to resume their offices.
At its first plenary after resumption, the Assembly, led by Speaker Martin Amaewhule, resolved to investigate financial transactions carried out during the period.
The lawmakers noted their intention “to explore the process of knowing what transpired during the emergency rule with regard to spending from the consolidated revenue fund for the award of contracts and other expenditure.”
Reacting, Ibas insisted the Assembly had no authority to investigate him, as they did not appoint him.
Speaking through his Senior Special Adviser on Media, Hector Igbikiowubu, with Punch on Sunday, Ibas argued that the probe was effectively a challenge to the President, who appointed him, and the National Assembly, which supervised his tenure.
He, however, dismissed their resolve as “commentary,” describing any probe against the former administrator as futile.
He said, “When you say they were going to probe the tenure of the administrator, was it the Assembly that appointed the administrator?
“You see, the point to note is that commentary is free. You can’t stop people from running commentary. The House of Assembly has been on break for a very long time, and you will appreciate that they have not been able to discharge their functions for such a long time.
“Now that they have resumed, they have to make an effort to carry out their functions. So, it will seem their right to probe what has gone wrong in the state. Nobody can stop the lawmakers from carrying out a probe of what they perceive to be their functions within the state.
But like I asked earlier, were they the ones that appointed the administrator? So, if you didn’t appoint the administrator, it goes to reason that you have certain limitations. When you also realise that the administrator was appointed by the President, it goes without reason that the administrator acted for and on behalf of the President.”
“When you also reason that the administrator was supervised by the National Assembly, it goes without reason that when you decide to probe the administrator, you’re invariably saying that you will be probing the administrator and the National Assembly.
“So, I wish them good luck with their plan and their probe. But you and I know that such an enterprise amounts to a fool’s errand.”