BREAKING: Court Orders FG To Pay Rivers State Monies Deducted To Fund Nigeria Police

The Federal High Court sitting in Abuja on Wednesday ordered the federal government to refund Rivers state its share of the monies deducted from the Federation Account to fund the Nigeria Police Trust Fund.

Justice Ahmed Mohammed gave the judgement in a suit filed in 2020 by the Attorney General of Rivers State, against the Attorney General of the Federation, Accountant General of the Federation, Revenue Mobilization and Fiscal Allocation Commission and the Minister of Finance.

The Rivers State government had in 2020 urged the court to declare that funds in the federation account “can only be distributed among the Federal Government, state governments and local government councils in each state of Nigeria and not directly to any agency of the Federal Government including the Nigeria Police Force.”

It also asked the court to declare that “permitting the direct deduction of any sum or percentage of revenue accruing to the Federation Account or which ought to have been paid into the Federation Account for the purpose of providing funds for the Nigeria Police Trust Fund” is
unconstitutional.

The administration of Nyesom Wike had contended that deduction of 0.5 percent from the federation account before sharing remaining funds to FG, states and local government is depriving Rivers of its dues.

But the Office of the AGF, had filed a notice of preliminary objection on July 2, 2020, contending the competence of the trial court to hear the suit on the ground that the subject matter does not fall under the purview of the Federal High Court.

The AGF through its lawyer said the jurisdiction to determine the case lies only with the Supreme Court because the dispute is between the state and the federal government.

The AGF wondered why the River State government was challenging certain sections in the Police Trust Fund Act, which was framed for the welfare of the police.

The AGF had further contended that Rivers State was meant to follow due process by filing for Judicial review.

Furthermore, the AGF, in a counter affidavit filed on 3rd November 2021 , had argued that the Nigeria Police Trust Fund was established by an act of the National Assembly for the federation.

The federal government’s attorney had told the court that the Police Trust Fund was framed to improve the general welfare of the police and enhance their capacity to provide law and order across the country.

On his part, the Rivers AG’s counsel Joseph Daudu, SAN had argued that the Nigeria Police is an agency of the federal government and should be funded by FG based on what is allocated to it from the federation account.

“Rivers is deprived when 0.005 percent of the net profit of the companies operating business in Nigeria is withheld and distributed to the Police Trust Fund,” the state government argued adding that funding the Police is the federal government’s own responsibility.

In his verdict on Wednesday, Justice Ahmed Mohammed dismissed AGF’s argument that the trial court cannot determine the suit.

“I am not in doubt that before the Supreme Court will look into a matter, there must be a dispute between the federation and the state.

“I am convinced that the suit is against the federation and its agencies and therefore fall within the jurisdiction of this court.

“The trial court has requisite jurisdiction,” he said.

After comparing the Section 162 of the 1999 constitution and the Nigeria Police Trust Fund Act, the judge said all funds from the federation account can only be paid to the three tiers of government and no other fourth party like the Police Trust Fund.

“It is my considered opinion that the revenue standing to the federation account can not be disbursed to the Police Trust Fund but to the Federal, State and Local government.”

Subsequently, the judge declared as unconstitutional, the deduction of monies from the federation account for the purpose of funding the Nigeria Police Trust Fund.

However, he ruled that since it was only the Rivers state government that instituted the case, it is the only one entitled for a refund of the monies already deducted.

The judge also observed that since the case was instituted in 2020, the three other defendants did not send any legal representation.