Human rights lawyer and Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Femi Falana, has boldly challenged the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, Nyesom Wike, to report him to the Legal Practitioners’ Disciplinary Committee (LPDC) following a heated dispute over Falana’s interpretation of a recent Supreme Court judgment on the Rivers State political crisis. Falana dismissed Wike’s accusations that he lied about the apex court’s ruling on the defection of 27 Rivers State House of Assembly members as “spurious and tendentious,” accusing the minister of attempting to incite the Supreme Court against him without any factual basis.
The controversy ignited after Wike publicly condemned Falana during a press conference in Abuja, accusing the senior lawyer of deliberately misrepresenting the court’s decision during a Channels TV appearance. Wike warned that such alleged falsehoods from a respected legal figure could escalate political tensions and crises. However, Falana responded by clarifying that his comments were grounded in the fact that the defection issue was still pending before the Federal High Court in Port Harcourt at the time of the Supreme Court ruling. He further pointed to video evidence and sworn affidavits confirming the legislators’ defection from the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) to the All Progressives Congress (APC).
Falana emphasized that his right to critique court judgments is constitutionally protected under Section 39 of the Nigerian Constitution and reinforced by international human rights law. He also highlighted Wike’s history of attacking judges when rulings do not align with his political interests, contrasting it with his own respectful and good-faith criticisms of judicial decisions. Quoting the late Justice Oputa and former Chief Justice Ibrahim Tanko Muhammad, Falana underscored the judiciary’s openness to constructive criticism as part of the justice delivery process.
Taking a firm stance, Falana invited Wike to formally report him to the LPDC if he genuinely believed there was professional misconduct, challenging the minister’s role as an unsolicited defender of the judiciary. He also expressed concern that the Supreme Court’s recent requirement for proof of defection through party membership registers could be exploited by politicians to justify “political prostitution,” urging the court to adhere to previous rulings that legislators who defect automatically lose their seats.
In closing, Falana declared Wike’s attempts to discredit him unsuccessful, stating that the allegations were baseless and that the minister’s efforts to incite the Supreme Court against him had failed. He further dismissed Wike’s earlier personal attacks, noting that losing cases is not a crime and criticizing Wike for never having handled cases in trial or appellate courts, unlike himself, who regularly appears before domestic and regional courts.
