Falana Fires Back at Wike: “You Are the Only Life Bencher Who’s Never Handled a Court Case”
By HeadlineNews.News – April 22, 2025
Abuja, Nigeria – The legal and political drama surrounding the defection crisis in Rivers State took a new turn this week as renowned human rights lawyer, Femi Falana, SAN, delivered a pointed response to the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) Minister, Nyesom Wike, in what has become a heated public exchange over judicial interpretation, legal credentials, and political legitimacy.
In a sharp rebuttal to Wike’s televised remarks—where the former governor referred to Falana as a “television lawyer” and questioned his interpretation of a recent Supreme Court ruling—Falana responded with a statement that has quickly gained traction across legal and political circles.
“Nyesom Wike is the only Life Bencher in Nigeria who has never handled a case in any trial or appellate court,” Falana said, reinforcing his position on both the legal issues and Wike’s credibility as a senior legal figure.
The Genesis of the Clash: Rivers State House Defections
The public feud began after Falana, speaking on national television, disputed claims by Wike and his allies that the Supreme Court judgment had affirmed the legitimacy of the 27 Rivers State lawmakers who defected from the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) to the All Progressives Congress (APC).
Falana argued that the Supreme Court did not rule on the legitimacy of the lawmakers post-defection, and that the matter of their seats becoming vacant still stood under Section 109(1)(g) of the 1999 Constitution, which provides for seat forfeiture upon party defection.
In response, Wike and his media aide, Lere Olayinka, launched a broad attack against Falana’s legal standing, questioning the cases he has won and dismissing him as a lawyer better known for “television appearances” than courtroom victories.
Falana’s Record and the Rebuttal
Femi Falana, SAN, a globally recognized rights advocate and constitutional lawyer, has a legal career spanning over four decades. Though more prominent for public interest litigation, media advocacy, and civil liberties activism, Falana has led or contributed to several landmark constitutional and human rights cases at national and international levels.
“This is not about television. It is about the Constitution,” Falana asserted, reiterating that his comments were grounded in legal interpretation, not partisanship.
Falana’s supporters point out that while he may not have built his legacy on commercial litigation or state briefs, his consistent use of the courts to challenge abuse of power, defend press freedom, and uphold citizens’ rights is a contribution unmatched in many quarters of the Nigerian legal space.
Legal vs. Political Benchers: A Question of Contribution
At the center of this controversy is the Body of Benchers, Nigeria’s highest regulatory body for legal education and discipline. While Wike is a Life Bencher, Falana’s rebuttal questions the merit and meaning of that status when it is not accompanied by courtroom or jurisprudential contribution.
Wike, a lawyer by training and former Minister of State for Education, became more visible as a political administrator and governor. Critics argue that while he has built legal infrastructure, including contributions to the Nigerian Law School campuses, he has not built a significant litigation record or legal jurisprudence.
A Broader Reflection on Law, Politics, and Public Influence
This war of words has ignited conversations about the role of legal professionals in politics, and whether governance credentials can substitute for traditional legal achievements in assessing a lawyer’s standing.
“You can build a courtroom, but it doesn’t make you a litigator,” said Professor Olamide George, senior legal analyst. “The real debate here is how we define legal legacy: by physical structures or judicial reasoning?”
Conclusion: A Dispute of Interpretations and Identities
As the Rivers political situation continues to evolve, the Falana-Wike clash is emblematic of a larger debate about legal authority, constitutional fidelity, and public influence. While both men come from legal backgrounds, their paths—and platforms—could not be more different.
Whether in the courtroom, the press, or the political arena, one truth remains: the law must be interpreted based on fact, not fame; on merit, not might.
Reference:
Section 109(1)(g) – Nigerian Constitution
A member of a House of Assembly shall vacate his seat if, being a person whose election to the House of Assembly was sponsored by a political party, he becomes a member of another political party before the expiration of the period for which that House was elected.
Headlinenews.news special report.
