From Godwin Tsa, Abuja

The Supreme Court, yesterday, in Abuja, fixed May 6  for judgment in a legal battle between Rivers and Imo states over the ownership of 17 oil wells in their territories.

The apex court fixed the date after taking arguments from lawyers involved in the oil wells ownership tussle.

Justice Olukayode Ariwoola, who led the panel of Justices, fixed the date after adoption of final written addresses by the lawyers.

The plaintiff in the matter represented by Joseph Daudu, SAN, while adopting his final addresses, asked the apex court to give judgment in favour of Rivers State on the ground that historical evidence right from 1927 till date clearly indicated that the oil wells belong to the state.

Daudu drew the attention of the Supreme Court to the boundary adjustment paper of 1976 where Ndoni and Egbema were confirmed to belong to Rivers state.

The senior lawyer disagreed with the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF) in his claim that adjudication of the suit on the oil wells ought not to have originated from the Supreme Court, but a Federal High Court, because oral evidence ought to be taken from the people in the area.

Daudu said that the Supreme Court has original jurisdiction and can conveniently use all available sufficient historical documents right from the colonial era to determine the real owners of the oil wells.

In his own arguments counsel to Imo state, Chief Olusola Oke, SAN, asked the apex court to dismiss the suit on the grounds that it ought to have originated from the Federal High Court.

Oke claimed that because of the nature of the matter, oral evidence ought to be called from the people of the area to confirm where they actually belong.

The senior lawyer contended that Rivers ought not to have started the suit from the Supreme Court and, therefore, prayed the court to dismiss the suit.

In the same vein, counsel to the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF), Dr Remi Peter 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 officials of the National Boundary Commission (NBC), Surveyor General of the Federation (SGF) and indigenes of the disputed areas ought to be heard for the court to make appreciable and acceptable findings.

Olatubora claimed that the AGF was neutral in the disputed oil wells ownership, but, however, said that scientific evidence must be considered along with open court hearings for the Supreme Court to make good findings.

Justice Olukayode Ariwoola, thereafter, announced May 6 for judgment in the matter.

Also, the Supreme Court, yesterday, fixed May 6 for judgment in the suit filed by the Rivers government challenging the decision of the Court of Appeal that ordered it to maintain status quo on the collection of Value Added Tax (VAT).

The Rivers government, in its 10 grounds of appeal, is equally praying the apex court to order that the substantive appeal by the FIRS marked CA/PH/282/2021, and all other processes therein, be heard and determined by a new panel of the Court of Appeal.

It maintained that the three-man panel of Justices of the Court of Appeal, led by Justice Haruna Tsammani, had in the ruling they delivered, erred in law when they relied on the provisions of Section 6(6) of the 1999 Constitution and the inherent jurisdiction of the appellate court, to order all the parties to maintain status quo on the VAT dispute.

Justice Olukayode Ariwoola, who led a six-member panel of justices, fixed the date after the counsel to all the parties adopted their briefs.