By PASCHAL NJOKU, Abuja
The Supreme Court has fixed May 16, for judgment on the suit filed by the Attorney General of Rivers state against the Attorney General of Imo state wherein he is seeking for a declaration that the boundary between Rivers state and Imo state, as delineated on Nigeria administrative map, 10, 11 and 12 editions and other maps bearing similar delineations are inaccurate, incorrect and do not represent the legitimate and lawful boundaries between Rivers and Imo State.
Rivers state government also wants the Supreme Court to declare that the correct instrument maps and documents to be relied on in determining the boundary between Rivers and Imo state are those used by the plaintiff in delineating the boundary line between Rivers and Imo state.
Other defendants in the matter are; the Revenue Mobilisation Allocation and the Fiscal Commission, RMAFC, the office of the Accountant General of the Federation and the AGF.
Justice Olukayode Ariwoola who led the panel of Justices fixed the date after adoption of written addresses by various lawyers in the matter.
Rivers State, represented by Joseph Daudu, SAN while adopting his final addresses asked the apex court to rule in favour of the plaintiff on the ground that historical evidence right from 1927 till date clearly indicated that the oil well belong to Rivers state.
Daudu told the court that from the boundary adjustment paper of 1976 where Ndoni and Egbema were confirmed to belong to Rivers state.
Daudu said that all the historical document s right from the colonial era are sufficient for the court to determine the real owners of the oil wells.
Counsel representing Imo state, Olusola Oke SAN asked the apex court to dismiss the suit on the grounds that it did not originate from the Federal High Court.
Due to the nature of the case, Oke stated that oral evidence ought to have been called for from the people of the area to confirm where they actually belong.
Similarly, counsel to the AGF, Dr Remi Olatubora, SAN aligned himself with the position of Imo state, to the effect that proper procedure for such a suit was not adopted by rivers state.
The SAN insisted that witnesses including official of the National Boundary commission, Surveyor general of the federation and indigenes of the disputed areas ought to be heard for the court to make appreciable and acceptable findings. (Daily Independent)
About the Author
125442 721780Dead written articles , appreciate it for entropy. 551644
321630 618287Considerably, the story is in reality the greatest on this noteworthy topic. I agree together with your conclusions and will eagerly watch forward to your next updates. Saying good one will not just be sufficient, for the fantastic clarity inside your writing. I will immediately grab your rss feed to stay privy of any updates! 253393