Exclusive: Rivers Assembly Lawmakers Took ₦350 Million Each for Constituency Projects — Fresh Allegations Deepen Rift With Governor Fubara
In a dramatic escalation of political tensions rocking Nigeria’s oil-rich Rivers State, a key aide to Governor Siminalayi Fubara has publicly alleged that every member of the Rivers State House of Assembly received ₦350 million each for constituency project allocations — money that has become the center of a bitter dispute over legislative appropriation, budget transparency, and impeachment threats.
The explosive claim was made by Darlington Orji, Special Adviser to Governor Fubara, during a Friday appearance on Arise Television’s Morning Show. Orji’s comments come amid a deepening crisis between the executive arm of government and the state legislature, with the Assembly openly threatening impeachment proceedings against the governor and his deputy over alleged financial impropriety and constitutional violations.
Let’s unpack this unfolding story, its political undercurrents, fiscal accountability concerns, and what it means for governance in Rivers State.
Background: A Political Storm Brewing
The relationship between Governor Fubara and the Rivers State House of Assembly has been strained for months, as disagreements over budget processes, legislative input, and constitutional compliance continue to escalate.
In early January 2026, the Assembly commenced impeachment proceedings against Governor Fubara and his Deputy, Ngozi Odu, citing gross misconduct and disobedience to constitutional provisions. The legislature argued that the governor failed to present the Medium-Term Expenditure Framework (MTEF) and the 2026 appropriation bill for consideration — a move they deemed unconstitutional.
In response, members of the Assembly have repeatedly taken positions against the executive, including refusing to receive the 2026 budget and criticizing alleged unilateral financial actions by the governor’s office.
The ₦350 Million Constituency Project Claim
Against this volatile political backdrop, Darlington Orji made a startling assertion: that each member of the Rivers State Assembly had, in the past, received ₦350 million each for constituency projects. According to Orji, these payments — substantial in themselves — were accepted by lawmakers without objection, raising questions about the current contention over smaller payments that the legislators now label as unappropriated.
What Orji Said
During the television interview, Orji pointed out what he described as inconsistency in the lawmakers’ stance on appropriated funds. Here are the key points from his remarks:
In December, civil servants received a ₦100,000 end-of-year appreciation payment from the state government.
Members of the House of Assembly were also extended the same gesture, but some refused the ₦100,000, claiming it was not captured in the appropriation bill.
Orji challenged lawmakers to explain why they did not reject the much larger ₦350 million allocations for constituency projects on the same grounds.
Orji stressed that he would not make unverified claims, underscoring his assertion that the earlier constituency project funds were distributed without objection despite similar appropriation arguments.
Why This Matters: Budget Appropriation, Transparency & Accountability
In Nigeria’s constitutional system, appropriation of public funds must ordinarily be approved by the legislature as part of a state’s annual budget cycle, ensuring democratic oversight over spending.
Yet the dispute in Rivers State suggests possible conflicts over:
1. Interpretation of Budget Law
The lawmakers contend that any expenditure not explicitly included in the approved budget is unauthorized and unconstitutional — a position that underpinned their rejection of the ₦100,000 bonus. But they appear to have accepted larger constituency project funds in the past without raising similar procedural concerns.
2. Fiscal Prudence vs. Political Interest
A governor’s ability to allocate funds for grassroots projects is a powerful instrument — and is often politically sensitive. By highlighting the bigger constituency project allocations, Orji’s allegation seeks to shift the public narrative and question the Assembly’s motives behind recent financial criticisms.
3. Public Perception & Political Capital
For residents of Rivers State, millions of naira allocated for constituency projects should ideally translate into tangible infrastructure — roads, schools, healthcare facilities, potable water, job-creation initiatives, and more. Whether these funds have indeed impacted communities is a critical question in the court of public opinion.
A perception of misuse or inconsistent demands about appropriated funds can erode confidence in both the legislative and executive branches of government.
What Lawmakers Say
While Darlington Orji’s comments have made headlines, members of the Assembly have their own narrative:
They have emphasized the need for constitutional compliance, particularly with respect to the appropriation of public funds.
Their rejection of the ₦100,000 payments in December was framed on the basis that the funds were not voted for in the budget, and therefore could not be lawfully disbursed to civil servants or legislators.
The impeachment notice, read during plenary sessions, formally accused the governor of violating constitutional provisions.
The Assembly’s position reflects a broader theme of institutional independence: asserting that the legislature must be respected as an equal branch of government, especially regarding budget oversight and fiscal governance.
The Broader Political Context
The expectations and obligations of state governance in Nigeria are deeply influenced by constitutional arrangements, political affiliations, and judicial interpretations.
Notably, Rivers State has endured a series of political upheavals in recent years, including Supreme Court rulings reshaping Assembly composition and disputes over governance legitimacy.
The fight over appropriation — and now over alleged past payments — adds another layer to what many political analysts describe as a power struggle between competing political factions within the state.
Implications for Governance and the Public
Fiscal Governance
If the allegations are accurate — that lawmakers once accepted ₦350 million each without complaint — questions arise about budget discipline, transparency, and uniform application of financial oversight rules.
The issue underscores the need for tighter public financial management systems in state governments across Nigeria.
Political Stability
The fight between the executive and legislative arms risks creating governance paralysis. The refusal to consider the 2026 budget and move toward impeachment could slow delivery of essential public services and delay development projects.
Citizen Trust
Political disputes over public funds can corrode trust among citizens who are already frustrated with economic challenges. Transparency in allocation and tangible returns on constituency funding are essential to sustain democratic legitimacy.
Moving Forward: What to Watch
Here are key developments to monitor in the coming weeks:
📌 Impeachment Proceedings — Whether the Assembly will formally adopt impeachment articles against Fubara and his Deputy.
📌 Public Response — How residents of Rivers State react to the controversy, especially regarding constituency funds and governance accountability.
📌 Judicial Intervention — Possible legal challenges that could emerge — either from the governor’s camp or the legislature — alleging constitutional missteps.
📌 Political Negotiations — Whether political stakeholders will manage to broker peace before governance stalls.
Conclusion
The allegation that Rivers Assembly members took ₦350 million each for constituency projects — raised by Governor Fubara’s aide — has intensified an already volatile constitutional confrontation in Nigeria’s Rivers State.
It raises crucial questions about budget transparency, legislative accountability, and political consistency.
As the dispute unfolds, Nigerians — especially those in Rivers State — will be watching closely to see whether political interests overshadow the imperative of good governance and the proper stewardship of public funds.
0 Comments