The Nation Newspaper

Tag: CCB/CCT

  • Before the President assents to the CCB/CCT Bill

    According to media reports, the National Assembly, on Thursday, October 27, arrogated to itself the powers to control the Code of Conduct Bureau and the Code of Conduct Tribunal via a Bill which purportedly amended sections 12 (1) (2), 21 (1) and 22 (1) of the Code of Conduct Bureau and Tribunal Act, 2004. Section 12 (1) of the Act provides that “The President may by order exempt any cadre of public officers from the provisions of this Act if it appears to him that their position in the public service is below the rank which it considers appropriate for the application of those provisions.” Subsection (2) thereof empowers the President to confer “on the Bureau such additional powers as may appear to it to be necessary to enable it to discharge more effectively the functions conferred upon it under this Act.”

    Section 21 of the said Act provides, “21 (1) The tenure of office of the staff of the Tribunal shall, subject to the provisions of this Act, be the same as that provided for in respect of officers in the civil service of the Federation.” Section 22 (1) then unambiguously states that “…a person holding the office of chairman or member of the Tribunal shall vacate his office when he attains the age of seventy years.”

    It would be clear presently that the above provisions were lifted almost ipsissima verbis from the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended), which, in its section 157 (1) states that the chairman and members of the Code of Conduct Bureau may only be removed from office by the President acting on an address supported by two-thirds majority of the Senate. In paragraph 1 of Part 1 of the Third Schedule thereof the Constitution expressly provides that “The Code of Conduct Bureau shall comprise the following members (a) a Chairman; and (b) nine members, each of whom…shall vacate his office on attaining the age of seventy years.” But the new Bill reduces the tenure of the chairman and of all members of the Code of Conduct Bureau to a term of five years subject to the confirmation of the Senate! In the language of the new Bill, “The Chairman and members shall serve for a term of five years, subject to renewal for one further term.” Yet, sub-paragraph (1) of paragraph 16 of Part 1 of the Fifth Schedule to the Constitution unequivocally provides that “The tenure of office of the staff of the Code of Conduct Tribunal shall, subject to the provisions of this Code, be the same as that provided for in respect of officers in the civil service of the Federation”, whilst sub-paragraph (1) of paragraph 17 thereof categorically states that “a person holding the office of Chairman or member of the Code of Conduct Tribunal shall vacate his office when he attains the age of seventy years.” A civil servant retires after thirty-five years in office or attains the age of sixty years, whichever is earlier.

    Sub-paragraph (4) of paragraph 17 emphasizes that “A person holding the office of Chairman or member of the Code of Conduct Tribunal shall not be removed from office before (the) retiring age (i.e. age 70)  save in accordance with the provisions of this Code.”

    Sections 4, 5 and 6 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended) enshrines the doctrine of separation of powers by delimiting the powers of the three arms of government, the legislature, the executive and the judiciary. The assigned powers in the said sections cannot, and should not, be transcended, mistaken or forgotten by any of the arms of the government because they are defined and limited by a written constitution. Any attempt by any arm of government to intrude into the province of the other arm and/or to intermeddle with the prerogatives of the other(s) would be unconstitutional, null and void.

    In the classic case of William Madbury vs. James Madison (1803), a cause célèbre, Honourable Chief Justice John Marshall had cause to ask, “To what purpose are powers limited, and to what purpose is that limitation committed to writing, if these limits may, at any time, be passed by those intended to be restrained?” He added, with approval, “Certainly, all those who have framed the written constitutions contemplate them as forming the fundamental and paramount law of the nation, and, consequently, the theory of every such government must be, that an act of the legislature, repugnant to the constitution, is void.”

    As if to dramatize the self-serving nature of the Bill, a portion of it makes it compulsory for a breach of, or non-compliance with the Code of Conduct Act to be brought to the notice of the alleged offender to enable him to make a written admission of such a breach or non-compliance, and where such is done, there should be no reference to the Tribunal! This strange provision forecloses the need for a Code of Conduct Tribunal. Or can there be a good law without sanctions?

    The National Assembly knows, or should know, that without amending the 1999 Constitution with regard to those provisions of the Code of Conduct Bureau and Tribunal Act, 2004, which it purportedly amended, its amendment thereof would be unconstitutional and of no effect. The questions the National Assembly should ask itself should include the following: did it comply with the provisions of section 9 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) regarding the mode of altering the provisions of the Constitution before amending the provisions of the Code of Conduct Bureau and Tribunal Act, which is rooted in the constitution? If the country is governed by the rule of law and by the due process of the law, how can the National Assembly amend the constitution or any law derived therefrom and appropriate the powers conferred on the executive by the constitution in utter disregard of due process? Or is there any zone of twilight in which the National Assembly and the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended) possess concurrent authority? The President would be right to return this Bill – the CCB/CCT Bill – to the National Assembly for reconsideration.

     

    • Akiri is a legal practitioner in Lagos.
  • More knocks for Senate on CCB/CCT Act amendment

    More knocks for Senate on CCB/CCT Act amendment

    The Senate received more knocks at the weekend for last week’s amendment to the Code of Conduct Bureau (CCB) and Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) Acts.

    Many Nigerians reacted angrily to the concurrence of the Senate with the House of Representatives to take the powers over the CCB away from the President to the lawmakers.

    Yesterday, the Trade Union Congress (TUC), the Conference of Nigerian Political Parties (CNPP) and Jigawa North Senator Abdullahi Abubakar joined the fray.

    The TUC accused the lawmakers of making frantic efforts to sabotage the ongoing fight against corruption by attempting to take over the controlling power of the CCB and the CCT from the President.

    In a statement, the Congress said lawmakers had consistently shown Nigerians that they were not ready to perform the function for which they were elected.

    The statement signed by National President Bobboi Bala Kaigama and Acting General Secretary Simeso Amachree, said the interest of the senators is not to enhance the anti-corruption fight, but to shield themselves from prosecution when they engage in acts of misconduct.

    The statement reads: “The Trade Union Congress of Nigeria condemns the plot by some members of the Senate to amend the Code of Conduct Bureau and Tribunal Act to their own advantage. By this, they would now take over the controlling powers of the bureau and the tribunal from the President, to shield themselves from prosecution when they engage in acts of misconduct.

    “The mission and vision of the 8th National Assembly is becoming clearer by the day, as they have abandoned pressing issues for parochial and self-serving ones.

    “It is our belief that if the people in authority do the right thing, there would be no need trying to circumvent statutory laws and acts.  For us at congress, allowing the President to maintain his power of appointment into the CCB only is not enough if the war against corruption must be won.

    “In the last one and half years the lawmakers have given the country cause to worry, to say the least. They are paid humongous wages and allowances with the tax payers’ money for doing nothing, even at a time the wages of an average worker can barely take him or her home.

    “We salute the courage of the Appeal Court on its declaration on the case involving the Senate President, Dr. Bukola Saraki, on charges of false assets declaration brought against him by the federal government.

    The CNPP also called on well-meaning Nigerians and civil society groups, including the Nigerian Labour Congress (NLC) and the Trade Union Congress (TUC), to mount pressure on Buhari to withhold his assent to the said amendment.

    The umbrella body of all the registered political parties and associations, in a statement yesterday by its Secretary General Chief Willy Ezugwu, noted that the CNPP’s decision was taken after a careful study of the amendment and the circumstances surrounding the controversial move.

    “We are taken aback that just months after it initially suspended the move to amend the Code of Conduct Bureau (CCB) and the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) Act, the National Assembly subtly passed the amendment Bill.

    “When the plan by the National Assembly to amend the Act first became known to members of the public, there was deafening outcry, which forced the lawmakers to suspend the move.

    “The CNPP, just like many other Nigerians, had thought that the National Assembly by the suspension of the earlier move to amend the CCT/CCB Act was a sign of good days ahead where the lawmakers respect the majority opinion of their respective constituencies.

    “But the subtle passage of the amendment Bill is an indication that the National Assembly is serving the interest of its principal officers, and not that of the Nigerian people who unfortunately elected this crop of lawmakers, so insensitive to the core issues bothering the ordinary citizens”, the CNPP said.

    The Conference also noted: “The speed with which the amendment was carried out at a time some principal officers were accused of false declaration of assets is an indication of the interest it intended to serve.

    “We therefore urge President Muhammadu Buhari to withhold his assent by not signing the amended Act into law as the circumstances surrounding the amendment show it was done in bad fate and the action of the National Assembly amounts to taking over executive powers to the detriment of the constitutional principle of separation of powers. It must be noted that appointment of the staff of the CCT and CCB are clear executive powers, which the National Assembly cannot be allowed to usurp.”

    Senator Abubakar (Jigawa North West) told the News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) in Birninkudu, that “laws are meant to outlive individuals not meant for individuals.’’

    The senator, who said he was away on oversight duties when the amendment was made, said he was completely opposed to the decision.

    He also described the Bill on inheritance before the Senate as a negation of the provisions on freedom of worship, adding that it would not see the light of the day.

    According to him, Christians and Muslims are against the law.

    “We are there as representatives of the people and anything that the people don’t want will not scale through.

    “We will make sure that the aspirations of the people we represent are not sacrificed at the altar of a few members of the Senate.

    “Even though the bill has passed second reading, I believe any law can be stepped down at any stage and this is not an exception,’’ Abubakar said.

  • ‘Amendments will make CCB/CCT glorified Magistrates’ Court’

    ‘Amendments will make CCB/CCT glorified Magistrates’ Court’

    The Chairman, Senate Committee on Rules and Business, Senator Jide Omoworare, has warned that the Senate’s attempt to amend the Act setting up the Code of Conduct Bureau and Tribunal will whittle down their powers to that of a Magistrates’ Court.

    He described the planned amendment, including that of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA) 2015, as legally strange, sacrilegious and “a legislative desecration of the hallowed red chambers.”

    “Let me say ab initio without mincing words that I oppose the Bill in toto on points of law and I am averse to same for moral reasons, having taken more than a cursory look at the Constitution, Code of Conduct Bureau and Tribunal Act, the Bill in question and the lead debate of Senator Nwaoboshi,” the Senator said.

    He also warned the Senate against passing another bill, Senate Bill 249 – A Bill for an Act to Amend the Administration of Criminal Justice Act, 2015; and for Other Related Matters by Senator Isah Misau.

    Omoworare identified the bill as having several negative implications for the judicial system, including the prevention of the ACJA from applying to Courts-Martial and other courts and tribunals not listed in Section 6 (6) of the Constitution.

    He said the proposed amendment of the ACJA would remove the Code of Conduct Tribunal from courts that the ACJA provisions would be applied.

    Omoworare added: “Lest we forget, the ACJA, passed by the Seventh Senate, enables matters to be expeditiously prosecuted. Trials are now meant to be taken “day by day” instead of the grant of long adjournments.

    “Furthermore, gone were the days when an interlocutory appeal is filed, and a stay of proceedings is obtained until the interlocutory appeal is dispensed with.”

    He continued: “My opposition to the CCB&T Amendment Bill and the ACJA Amendment Bill is that they will make the CCT a glorified Magistrate Court, which it is not. The ACJA will stop applying to it.”

    The Senator admitted that the CCT was not listed in Section 6 of the Constitution, but advised the upper chamber to add it to the list through a constitutional amendment.

    “Already, the CCT exercises criminal jurisdiction,” he added, saying: “This is so because the proceedings before the tribunal is criminal proceedings similar to the courts listed under Section 6(6). And most importantly, the Constitution gives the Code of Conduct Tribunal power to impose punishment under Paragraph 18(2) of the Fifth Schedule, Part 1 to the Constitution.”

    He faulted the argument that because the Long Title of the CCB&T Bill did not contain the word “Crime,” it did not envisage criminal proceedings at the CCT, adding that “the Supreme Court had ruled against the Senate president that the Code of Conduct Tribunal is a court of law.”

    “If the Administration of Justice Act, 2015 is not applicable to the proceedings of the tribunal, which rules of procedure will be applicable?”  Omoworare wondered.

    “So there will be a serious lacuna if the sponsors of this Bill succeed in seeing that the amendment is passed and becomes law,” he added.

    Omoworare reminded the sponsors that “any matter pending at the moment cannot be affected by any amendment. Any law with criminal flavour cannot have a retrospective effect.”

    He described the timing of the amendments “injurious, and the acts self-seeking and self-regarding,” adding that the deputy Senate president sat on the day the second reading came up, “without impugning on Order 53, Rule 7 of the Senate Standing Rules – which forbids imputation of “improper” motives to any other Senator.”

    “This alone does not satisfy the strict test of nemo judex in causa sua (a judge does not sit in his own cause) on the part of the Senate president, but also on the part of the entire Senate.

    “The Senate president and the Senate as a whole will be judged in the public space as suffering from desperation of no small proportion.”

  • CCB/CCT Act’s amendment: NLC, TMG, Falana slam Senate

    •SERAP petitions UN special rapporteur

    More criticisms yesterday trailed the planned amendment by the Senate of the Act establishing the Code of Conduct Bureau (CCB) and the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT).

    The Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC) described the amendment as a legislative ambush capable of scuttling Senate President Bukola Saraki’s trial.

    In a statement, entitled: “A Dangerous Amendment” by its President, Comrade Ayuba Wabba, the congress said Nigerians believed that the amendment was aimed at scuttling the trial.

    The NLC said while the intention of the Senate might be noble and in line with their legislative function, the timing of the amendment calls to question the real intentions of the upper house.

    The statement reads: “It is quite intriguing that it took the trial of the Senate president for the Senate to discover the flaws in the law(s).  Putting it bluntly, despite the spirited defences by the deputy Senate president to the contrary, not a few believe that this legislative move is a desperate attempt to scuttle the trial of the Senate President, Dr. Bukola Saraki, at CCT.

    “On our part, we do not think the privileges of the Senate president extend to exemptions from civil or criminal trials. At the moment, only the President and his deputy, the governor and their deputies enjoy this privilege. Thus, what the Senate is trying to do is no more than a legislative ambush.”

    The Transition Monitoring Group (TMG) urged the Senate to halt the desecration of the upper chamber of the National Assembly with the amendment.

    The TMG, in a statement in Abuja yesterday by its Chairman, Ibrahim Zikirullahi, said the amendment showed the level of desperation and the despicable extent to which legislators were willing to descend.

    “As far as we are concerned, Saraki’s trial at the CCT is his personal business.

    “ It is, therefore, a vexatious affront on the sensibilities of Nigerians that the weight of the legislature would be brought to bear in this disturbing attempt at given him political rehabilitation.

    “TMG frowns at this gangster approach to legislative business.”

    Also yesterday, Lagos lawyer Femi Falana (SAN) advised the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Yakubu Dogara, not to lend his weight to the proposed amendment by the Senate.

    Falana told Dogara that the proposed amendments were illegal and unconstitutional.

    He argued that where the constitution already made provisions for an Act the National Assembly is seeking to amend, such new provisions would be regarded as invalid, duplication and inoperative.

    He contended that the CCB and CCT Act could not be amended without first amending the constitution and advised him and other members of the House to persuade the Senate to terminate the proposed amendments.

    The lawyer noted that when the Corrupt Practices and other Related Offences Act 2000 was amended in 2003, following investigation allegations of corruption involving the leadership of the Senate, the Federal High Court set aside the amendment since it violated the constitution.

    Falana gave three reasons why the amendment proposed by Senator Peter Nwaoboshi, which the Senate passed the second time is unconstitutional.

    He said: “First, to the extent that the proposed amendment is designed to serve the interests of an individual, it is a violation of section 4 (2) of the Constitution, which has empowered the National Assembly to make laws ‘for the peace, order and good government of the federation or any part thereof…’

    “Second, notwithstanding that the Senate president has decided not to preside over the plenary in the Senate, whenever the bill is being debated, the whole exercise is a clear violation of Paragraph 1 of the Code of Conduct for Public Officers enshrined in Part 1 of the Fifth Schedule to the Constitution, which stipulates that ‘a public officer shall not put himself in a position where his personal interest conflicts with his duties and responsibilities’.

    “Third, Section 3 of the Act, which the National Assembly seeks to amend, has become spent. Senator Nwaoboshi was reported to have said that he was proposing an amendment to Section 3 of the Act to provide ‘for an opportunity for the person whose rights and obligations may be affected to make representations to the administering authority before that authority makes the decision affecting that person’.

    “With respect, Section 3 of the Act is in pari materia with Paragraph 3 (e) of Part 1 of the Third Schedule to the constitution. To that extent, Section 3 of the Act is inoperative and invalid in every material particular. In Attorney-General of Abia v Attorney-General of the Federation (2001) 17 WRN 1, the Supreme Court held: ‘Where the provision in the Act is within the legislative powers of the National Assembly, but the constitution is found to have already made the same or similar provision, then the new provision will be regarded as invalid for duplication and or inconsistency and therefore inoperative. The same fate will befall any provision of the Act which seeks to enlarge, curtail or alter any existing provision of the Constitution. The provision or provisions will be treated as unconstitutional and therefore null and void.”

    The Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) yesterday said it petitioned United Nations (UN) Special Rapporteur on Extreme Poverty and Human Rights Prof. Philip Alston, asking him to request the Senate to withdraw the proposed amendments.

    In a petition by its Executive Director, Adetokunbo Mumuni, the organisation argued that the proposed amendments, “if passed into law, would weaken the act, undermine the fight against corruption, exacerbate poverty and violations of internationally recognised human rights.”

    The organisation urged the Special Rapporteur to pressure the Senate to withdraw the amendments and ensure that a climate of legislative impunity and official corruption is not allowed to undermine the mandate of the Special Rapporteur to advance human rights and address poverty.