The Nation Newspaper

Tag: CCT

  • CCT: Saraki’s trial to resume today

    CCT: Saraki’s trial to resume today

    The trial of Senate President, Dr. Bukola Saraki, on alleged false declaration  of assets is set to resumed at the Senate President, Dr. Bukola Saraki today,  Wednesday, April 6, 2016.

     

    On Tuesday, counsel to Saraki, Mr. paul Usoro asked for an adjournment on the ground of appeal that had been entered before the appellate court.

     

    Usoro reiterated that the process of appeal had been transmitted to the CCT and the record of appeal was before the Tribunal.

     

    The defendant filed a motion of stay of proceedings which is before the Registrar of the court, he told the Tribunal.

    He explained that the prayer for adjournment was to essentially allow the Court of Appeal to entertain and arrive at a decision in the appeal, which it had graciously

     

    However, the trial is set to resume with counsels to the case, announcing their appearances.

     

    .

  • CCT trial : Saraki flies in experts from US, Israel, Scandinavian countries

    CCT trial : Saraki flies in experts from US, Israel, Scandinavian countries

    Senate President, Dr. Abubakar Bukola Saraki may have decided to engage the prosecution in the suit filed against him by the Federal Government over his asset declarations when he held sway as governor of Kwara State.

    To this end, the Senate President, sources said, has flown in a group of experts from the United States, Israel and one of the Scandinavian countries to provide ‘specialized services’ to his team of lawyers led by Chief Kanu Agabi, SAN.

    It was gathered that the experts are not lawyers, but are crack investigators, forensic and handwriting specialists whose role will be to help get more information on the witnesses and documents that have already been filed before the Tribunal by the prosecution.

    The experts, are believed to have arrived on Monday and immediately had a preliminary meeting with the Senate President’s team on Monday in Lagos. They are also to move to Abuja any moment from now.

    “The investigators will ferret out and scrutinize thoroughly all available information on the eight prosecution witnesses, including their school records, service records from their past and present places of employment and personal information that may help the defence team in the course of the trial. Most of those so-called witnesses will not be credible when information concerning their life is presented publicly before the Tribunal.

    “It is also expected that with the fear that the prosecution may present forged documents, our team needs to be vigilant and pro-active considering the manner in which the proceedings before the tribunal is being conducted. Our people believe that with the way properties that have nothing to do with Saraki are being put on the charge sheet, there are tendencies that documents to sustain their claims may have been forged. All these the experts will screen and help the lawyers with information that may help them,” the source said.

    The listed witnesses who are mostly from the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) are Michael Wetcas, Nura Ali Bako, Mustapha Abubakar Musa, Nwachukwu Amasu, Samuel Madojemin, Adamu Garba and Bayo Dauda ( a member of staff of Guaranty Trust Bank, GTB).

  • Saraki loses bid to stall trial at CCT

    Saraki loses bid to stall trial at CCT

    Senate President, Bukola Saraki has lost in a bid to quash the 13-count charge of false assets declaration as the Code of Conduct Tribunal dismissed his application to that effect.

    Tribunal Chairman, Danladi Umar, in a ruling Thursday morning, dismissed the application by Saraki on the ground that it was without merit.

    He held that Saraki was wrong to have requested the tribunal to be guided by its decision in the Bola Tinubu case.

    Umar said the tribunal could not rely on its decision in the Tinubu having held in subsequent cases departed from the position it took in the Tinubu case.

    Tribunal Chairman upheld argument by lead prosecution lawyer, Rotimi Jacobs (SAN) to the effect that the CCT, in its subsequent judgments, has realized that its decision in FRN v. Bola Ahmed Tinubu was given per incuriam (without due regard to the law or the facts) and had departed from it and followed the provision of the Constitution.

    He held that the provision of Paragraph 3(e) of Part 1 of the 3rd Schedule to the 1999 Constitution emphatically removed and omitted the proviso (in Section 3(d) of the Code of Conduct Bureau and Tribunal (CCB/T) Act requiring written admission or denial.

    “That proviso that is repeated in Section 3(d) of the CCB/T Act cannot be sustained any longer under the 1999 Constitution. The decision in Tinubu’s case was given per incuriam and the tribunal should not follow such a decision,” he said.

    Umar also faulted Saraki’s calim that it was wrong for the Code of Conduct Bureau (CCB) file seek to prosecute him now about 15 years after he allegedly committed the offences of false assets declaration.

    The CCT Chairman agreed with Jacobs that, since there is no time limit within which an individual can submit a complaint of an infraction or non-compliance with the provision of the Code of Conduct, the defendant’s argument that once there was no official complaint against him within a reasonable time of his submitting the declaration, he could no longer be investigated and prosecuted, cannot stand.

    He also noted that there can be no clearance by implication, unless it is expressly stated by the statutes and time does not run against the state.

    “It is not out of place to charge the accused person now and ask him to answer to the charges against as there is no statute of limitation in relation his case,” Umar said.

    The CCT Chairman rejected Saraki’s contention that the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF) was without powers to initiate and prosecute cases before the tribunal.

    He held that the AGF, empowered by the Constitution to intimate or take over initiated criminal cases on behalf of the Federal Government, he (AGF) was could initiate and prosecute cases before the tribunal.

    The tribunal Chairman noted that defendant’s claim that he was denied fair hearing having not been called to make written statement before the filing of the charge, could be raised latter in the case.

    He held that such argument was premature and could be raised in the course of the hearing of the substantive suit.

    “The motion by the defendant, to quash the charge against him is refused. In the final analyses, the tribunal assumes jurisdiction in this case. The prosecution is to invite it’s witness,” he said.

    Shortly after the ruling, and upon inquiry by the CCT Chairman about what next steps should be taken, Jacobs urged the tribunal to allow the prosecution open its case.

    “We are ready for trial, my lord. And our witnesses are ready and are in court. Let us open our case by calling our first witness, even if it is for just five minutes,” Jacobs said.

    Lead defence witness, Kanu Agabi (SAN) objected to the commencement of trial. He said the case was adjourned to yesterday for ruling.

    He said the tribunal would create the impression that it had made up its mind, before the ruling, to proceed with trial, even when the defence was challenging its jurisdiction.

    Agabi sought a fresh date for the commencement of trial.

    Ruling, tribunal Chairman agreed with Agabi that it was unnecessary for the tribunal to rush into trial. He noted that the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA), though seeks prompt determination of criminal cases, recognises the need for the defendant to be given adequate time to prepare its defence.

    “We do not need to rush. We need to proceed carefully in the interest of justice and to ensure that justice is done to all parties. The ACJA did not say the defendants should not be given adequate time to prepare its defence,” he said.

    He adjourned to April 5 for the prosecution to open its case.

     

  • Saraki’s trial: CCB urges CCT not to repeat past errors

    Saraki’s trial: CCB urges CCT not to repeat past errors

    •Fault Senate President’s reliance on decision in Tibunu’s case

    The Code of Conduct Bureau (CCB) has cautioned Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) Chairman, Danladi Umar against repeating some of its past errors in its handling of the case involving Senate President Bukola Saraki.

    The CCB, which is prosecuting the Senate president on a 13-count charge of false assets declaration, faulted Saraki’s reliance on the CCT’s 2011 decision in the case involving former governor of Lagos State, Bola Ahmed Tinubu.

    Saraki’s lawyer Kanu Agabi (SAN) urged the tribunal to adopt its decision in the Tinubu case  and strike out the case against his client.

    Agabi noted that since the charge against Tinubu was struck out on the ground that he was not first invited to either admit or deny the anomalies in his assets declaration forms, his the charge against Saraki should also be struck out because he was equally not allowed to either deny or accept responsibility for the perceived anomalies in his forms.

    In its counter argument, now before the CCT, filed by its lawyer, Rotimi Jacobs (SAN), the CCB reminded the CCT Chairman, that the tribunal has in subsequent cases after the Tinubu case, admitted being misled into committing an error in striking out the charge.

    It contended that it would amount to a wrong paractice where the tribunal persists in rendering wrong decisions on the pretext of abiding by the principle of precedent.

    The Bureau also faulted Saraki’s reliance on the provision of Section 3(d) of the Code of Conduct Bureau and Tribunal (CCB/T) Act. In arguing that he was never invited to make written admission or denial of the alleged breach of the Code of Conduct.

    It noted that the CCB/T Act was enacted in 1989 as Decree No. 1 of 1989 and that the Act and Section 3(d) thereof were patterned after the 1979 Constitution, which in Paragraph 15(1)(d) of Part 1 of the 5the Schedule to the 1979 Constitution.

    The CCB noted that the effect of Paragraph 15(1)(d) of Part 1 of the 5the Schedule to the 1979 Constitution is that once a public officer, who contravened any provision of the Code of Conduct is invited  and he/she makes a written statement, admitting the contravention, the CCB would be incapacitated and would not be able to try such public officer or refer the case to the CCT.

    “This provision of the 1979 Constitution was however adopted in Section 3(d) of the CCB/T Act when the CCB and CCT were established in 1989. This absurd situation led to the failure of the CCB and CCT under the 1979 Constitution.

    “This deficiency has however been corrected in the 1999 Constitution, with the deletion of the provision, in the 1979 Constitution and the Code of Conduct Decree N. 1 of 1989, to the effect that once a written admission is made by the erring public officer, no reference should be made to the tribunal.

    “Paragraph 3(e) of Part 1 of the 3rd Schedule to the 1999 Constitution provides that: ‘The Bureau (CCB) shall have power to…receive complaints about  non-compliance or breach of the provisions of the Code of Conduct or any law in relation thereto, investigate the complaint and, where appropriate, refer  such matters  to the CCT.’

    “Under the 1999 Constitution, the CCB needs not request the erring public officer to either admit or deny the allegation of breach of the Code of Conduct,” CCB said,

    It argued that in view of the provision of Section 1(3) of the 1999 Constitution, the provision of Section 3(d) of the CCB/T Act, which was Decree No. 1 of 1989 cannot override the clear provisions of Paragraph 3(e) of Part 1 of the 3rd Schedule to the 1999 Constitution.

    “Decree No. 1 of 1989 codified in the Laws of the Federation as CCB/T Act, CAP C15, LFN 2004, as an existing law under Section 315 of the 1999 Constitution, is only applicable to the extent that it is not inconsistent with the provision of the Constitution itself,” it said.

    The CCB opined that Saraki could not rely on the CCT’s decision in the case of FRN v. Bola Ahmed Tinubu, decided on November 30, 2011 to request that the charge against him be struck out. It cited other cases later decided by the CCT, including the case of FRN v. Emil Lemke Inyang (in charge No: CCT/ABJ/02/2012 where the CCT admitted being misled in giving the decision it gave in the Tinubu case.

    “This tribunal, in its subsequent judgments, has realised that its decision in FRN v. Bola Ahmed Tinubu was given per incuriam (without due regard to the law or the facts) and had departed from it and followed the provision of the Constitution.

    “This tribunal found (in the FRN v. Emil Lemke Inyang case) that its earlier decision was given by it without reference by counsel to the provision of Paragraph 3(e) of Part 1 of the 3rd Schedule to the 1999 Constitution. That Schedule emphatically removed and omitted the proviso requiring written admission or denial.

    “That proviso that is repeated in Section 3(d) of the CCB/T Act cannot be sustained any longer under the 1999 Constitution. The decision in Tinubu’s case was given per incuriam and the tribunal should not follow such a decision.

    “It is indeed, well settled that this tribunal will not perpetuate error through dogged application of the doctrine of stares decisis (requiring court to abide by principles established in earlier decided similar cases) by following a decision that was given per incuriam.

    “The tribunal or any court must depart from its previous decision once it discovers that the decision was given per incuriam,” it said.

    CCB also faulted Saraki’s argument to the effect that since the alleged anomalies in his assets declaration forms were not formerly brought to his attention by the CCT within a certain time, he was deemed to have been cleared, in view of the provisions in Paragraphs 3(b)and (c) of the 3rd Schedule to the 1999 Constitution.

    “The defendant failed to take cognizance of the provision of Paragraph 3(e) to the 3rd Schedule of the 1999 Constitution that enables the CCB ‘to receive complaint about non-compliance with or breach of the provision of the Code of Conduct or any law in relation thereto.’

    “The provision did not limit the power of the CCB to the examination of the declaration only, but also empowers the CCB to receive complaint of non-compliance from outsiders, including body corporate such as the EFCC and Independent Corrupt practices and other related offences Commission (EFCC).

    “Since there is no time limit within which an individual  can submit a complaint of an infraction or non-compliance with the provision of the Code of Conduct, the defendant’s argument that once there was no official complaint against him within a reasonable time of his submitting the declaration, he could no longer be investigated and prosecuted, cannot stand.

    “There can be no clearance by implication, unless it is expressly stated by the statutes and time does not run against the state,” the CCB said.

    However, despite the Supreme Court’ judgment to the effect that the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA) was applicable to the CCT, and the provision of Section 396(2) of the ACJA, CCT Chairman, Umar has scheduled ruling for tomorrow.

    Section 396(2) of the ACJA provides that: “After the plea has been taken, the defendant may raise any objection to the validity of the charge or the information at anytime before judgment, provided that such objection shall only be considered along with the substantive issues and a ruling thereon made at the time of delivery of judgment.”

  • How Saraki looted Kwara – EFCC, CCB

    How Saraki looted Kwara – EFCC, CCB

    The Code of Conduct Bureau (CCB) and the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) Friday gave details of how Senate President, Bukola Saraki allegedly looted Kwara State while he served as the state’s governor between 2003 and 2011.

    The CCB and EFCC, in a joint response to claim by Saraki that his trial before the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) was mere persecution and witch-hunt, gave details of how Saraki allegedly acquired property in Lagos, Abuja and London, using kwara State funds.

    The agencies also gave details of how Saraki allegedly syphoned Kwara state funds, using his link with a commercial bank, Guaranty Trust Bank (GTB) Plc into his foreign account, and with which he procured property in London.

    The joint response by the CCT and EFCC is contained in the counter-affidavit filed by the prosecution in the trial of Saraki on charges of false assets declaration.

    Saraki had, in a fresh motion filed by his new lawyer, Kanu Agabi (SAN), queried the competence of the charge against him, the jurisdiction of the CCT to try the charge on the ground that he was not accorded fair hearing by the CCB before he was charged before the EFCC over alleged discrepancies in his asset declarations forms.

    He queried the timing, arguing that most of the offences were allegedly committed about 15 years ago while he was a governor and that he was not confronted with the discrepancies as required under the Constitution, to  enable him explain either agree or deny the discrepancies.

    Friday, prosecution lawyer, Rotimi Jacobs (SAN) argued the prosecution’s counter-affidavit and urged the court to dismiss Saraki’s fresh motion on the ground that it constituted an abuse of court process.

    An official of the CCB, Peter Danladi stated in the counter affidavit, that the investigation of the various petitions of corruption, theft, money laundering, among others against Saraki in 2010, was conducted jointly by official of the EFCC, CCB and the DSS.

    “The EFCC conducted its investigation on the various petitions and made findings which showed that the defendant/applicant abused his office while he was the governor of Kwara State and was involved in various acts of corruption as the governor of the state.

    “The defendant/applicant borrowed huge sums of money running into billions from commercial banks, particularly Guarantee Trust Bank and used the proceeds of the loan to acquire several landed property in Lagos, Abuja and London, while he was the governor of Kwara State.

    “As against the defendant using his own legitimate income to defray the loan, he took public funds, running into billions from Kwara State Government and lodged same in several tranches and in cash into his GTB account I GRA (Government Reservation Area), Ilorin, Kwara State.

    “The defendant/applicant’s account officer in GTB, confirmed that the defendant/applicant gave him several cash in government house to lodge into the account and in some occasions, the defendant sent his aids from government house to give him the cash for lodgement into his account.

    “When the EFCC submitted its report to its legal department and the Federal Ministry of Justice, the Ministry of Justice formed the opinion that the offences revealed from the investigation, particlularly as they relate to the property acquired by the defendant/applicant while he was governor of Kwara State and various moneys sent into  his various accounts outside Nigeria can be better handled through the Code of Conduct Bureau  (CCB) and Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT).

    “The office of the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF) then sends the findings and the evidence gathered during investigation by the EFCC as a complaint to the Code of Conduct Bureau for investigation and that the operatives of the EFCC would collaborate with the officers of the CCB for effective investigation.

    “Our investigation on the CCB Assets Declaration Forms for public officers filed by the defendant/respondent revealed the following:

    “The landed property listed as No: 42 Gerald Road, Ikoyi was visited by Mr. Ikechi Iwuagwu (Deputy Director, CCB), Miss. Geraldine Longsten (DSS) and Adamu Garba (EFCC) sometime in 2006 and discovered that the property was under construction.

    “Contrary to the declaration by the defendant that he was earning an annual income of N110, 000,000 from No: 42 Gerald Road, Ikoyi, Lagos, there were no tenants in the property as same was an empty land as at the time of the declaration.

    “Contrary to the declaration by the defendant that he owned 15A and 15B Mcdonald, Ikoyi, Lagos as at the time of the declaration in 2003 our investigation revealed that the said property were acquaired in 2006 from the implementation committee on Federal Government Landed properties through his companies called Tiny Tee Limited and Vitti Oil Limited wherein he paid the sum of N396, 150,000 to the federal Government of Nigeria.

    “The defendant made an anticipatory declaration for the said 15A and 15B, Ikoyi, Lagos. The defendant acquired the property in the name of two companies because he could not buy two Federal government property in his personal name.

    “The defendant bided for and acquired 17, 17A and 17B Mcdonald, Ikoyi, Lagos from the Implementation Committee on Federal government Landed Property and paid an aggregate sum of N497, 200,000 to the Federal Government between October 2006 and 2007.

    “A scrutiny of the defendant’s salary account with the Intercontinental Bank (now Access Bank) of account No: 0100857813 reveals that his monthly take home salary as at the time he acquired the property was not more than N500, 000 and the defendant acquired property far in excess of his income.

    “While the Federal Government was selling its property, the Centarl Bank of Nigeria, being an agency of the Federal Government sold plot 2A, Glover Road, Ikoyi, Lagos for N325,000,000 between 2007 and 2008 to the defendant, which the defendant purchased through his company called Carlisle Properties when he was the governor of Kwara State,” Danladi said.

    He added that further investigation by the CCB  revealed that Saraki also acquired a property at Plot #&A  Glover Road, Ikoyi, Lagos through Carlisle Properties Limited while he was governor of Kwara state and that he has been receiving rent form the property.

    Danladi said investigation on the asset declaration forms submitted by Saraki between 2003 and 2011 revealed that he failed to declare his interest in Plot 2A Golver Road, Ikoyi, Lagos (in his 2011 asset declaration form); No: 1 Targus Street, Maitama, Abuja otherwise known as 2482 Cadastral Zone A06, which he claimed he acquired in November 1996 from one David Baba Akawu (in his assets declaration form of 2003).

    Saraki was also said to have failed to declare his ownership of No: 3 Targus Street, Maitama, Abuja otherwise known as 2481 Cadastral Zone A06, Abuja which he acquired from one Alhaji Attahiru Adamu in his asset declaration form (of June 3, 2011.) and No: 42 Remi Fani-Kayode Street, Ikeja Lagos, which he acquired through his company, Skyview Properties Limited from First Finance Trust Limited on December 12, 1996.

    “The defendant has a domiciliary account with GTB Plc in Nigeria with account No: 441441953210 from where he made various cash transfers totalling 3.4million US dollar between 2009 and 2012 to American Express Service Europe Limited with account No: 730580 maintained with the American Express bank, New York and the various sums were transferred into the defendant’s card account No: 374588216836009 maintained by the defendant outside Nigeria.

    “Sometime in February 2010 the defendant obtained a loan of N375, 000,000 from GTB Plc in Nigeria, which he converted into 1,516,194.53 pounds sterling and gave instructions to the bank to transfer the entire sum to the united Kingdom in favour of Forts Bank SA/NV the purpose of which the defendant stated to be the full and final payment of mortgage redemption for the property he purchased in London,” Danladi said.

    Arguing Saraki’s motion earlier, Agabi was of the view that the tribunal lacked jurisdiction to entertain the charges, on among other grounds, that the Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice lacked the powers to file charges before the tribunal.

    He also argued that the failure of the Code of Conduct Bureau to invite Saraki to confront him with the breaches in his assets declaration form was fatal to the validity of the charges.

    Responding, Jacobs argued that Agabi’s argument was embarrassing and self-serving. Jacobs, who once served as aide to Agabi while he was the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF) wondered why his former principal will now argue against the power to initiate proceedings before the CCT.

    “On their argument that the AGF cannot initiate proceedings before this tribunal, we are saying that issue, which is their NO: 2 is embarrassing. They had earlier argued, up to the Supreme Court, that it is only the AGF that can initiate cases here. They dragged that case before the Supreme Court and lost. Then they have come back here to now argue the opposite, that the AGF cannot initiate a case before the CCT.

    “Fortunately for me, I served with the lead defence lawyer (Agabi) as a Special Assistant (SA) when he was the AGF. He signed several charges, which I prosecuted before this tribunal on his behalf. Some these case included that involving former Minister of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT, Jeremiah Useni, former Plateau State governor, Joshua Dariye, among others.

    “He did not only sign those charges, I represented him. Having benefited and utilised those law, can he now come back to condemn the law? That is embarrassing. And it should not be accepted. The same AGF, who worked with that provision of the Constitution, cannot now argue that the EFCC cannot liaise with the CCB in investigating cases,” Jacobs said.

    Jacobs argued that the fresh motion by Saraki was an abuse of court process because he had raised similar issues and sought the same reliefs in about four other motions he filed before different courts in the country.

    He cited the cases marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/775/15, FHC/ABJ/CS/905/15 and FHC/ABJ/CS/1507/15 already filed by Saraki in attempt to frustrate his trial before the CCT.

    CCT Chairman, Danladi Umar has adjourned to March 24 for ruling and possible commencement of trial.

     

  • CCT: Saraki prevents commencement of trial

    CCT: Saraki prevents commencement of trial

    • Again, Senate President queries tribunal’s jurisdiction

     

    The scheduled commencement of trial in the case involving Senate President, Bukola Saraki was stalled Friday by a new motion he filed challenging the tribunal’s jurisdiction.

    Saraki was arraigned before the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) last year on a 13-count charge of alleged false declaration of assets.

    After the Supreme Court’s decision on February 5 this year, dismissing Saraki’s appeal, the tribunal fixed March 10 for the commencement of trial.

    Saraki’s new lawyer, Kanu Agabi (SAN) later sought a shift in the date, prompting the tribunal to fix Friday for trial.

    When parties arrived the tribunal Friday, prosecution lawyer, Rotimi Jacobs (SAN) told the tribunal that his client was ready for the commencement of trial, and that his witnesses were in court.

    Responding, Agabi informed the court about a fresh motion he filed, challenging the tribunal’s jurisdiction.

    He said the motion was served on the Federal Ministry of Justice and not personally on the prosecution lawyer.

    Jacobs protested what he described as the wrong service of the new motion by the defence, arguing that it was part of the ploy by the defence to prevent the commencement of trial in the case.

    He noted that, while Agabi effected personal service on him of his letter requesting the rescheduling of the resumption of proceeding, he (Agabi) chose not to serve him the fresh motion.

    Jacobs noted that the issue raised in the new motion had been decided earlier by the tribunal, and up to the Supreme Court.

    He said the Supreme Court’s judgment in the similar motion by Saraki has since been report and cited as ” Saraki vs FRN: SC 2016 NWLR at page 531.

    “The Supreme Court even said the conduct of the counsel was to harass and intimidate this warrant. I was not served with any motion until now. When he sought and adjournment, he copied me. Then, he now filed a motion and decided to serve it on the Ministry of Justice, who is my client.

    “I submit that this is a deliberate attempt to scuttle this trial and prevent the prosecution from proceeding to trial in this case.

    “This is the same person, who is saying that he is being persecuted and that there is no case against him. He is telling the whole world that there is no case against him. He is saying the state is persecuting him, yet he does not want us to present our case.

    “Justice is not for the defence alone. The defendant is attacking us and claiming that there is no case against him, yet he does not want the case to go on,” Jacobs said.

    Jacobs, who said he was unduly being harassed and subjected to pressure in relation to his involvement in the case, noted that the defence’s decision to hire Agabi, who he described as his mentor, was part of the defendant’s strategy to keep him under pressure.

    Jacobs said:” I have integrity. My integrity is at stake. I have been involved in the past, in the prosecution of former governors and a former Inspector General of Police (IGP). I have not received this kind of attack, pressure and trouble.

    “The strategy of pulling down institutions and people is an issue this tribunal must address,” Jacobs said.

    He urged the tribunal to allow the prosecution open its case, noting the under Section 368 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA) the defence could raise objection at any stage in the case, but that the tribunal was empowered to reserved its decision which it could give with the judgment.

    Responding, Agabi apologised for the service of his fresh motion on Jacobs’ client.

    He blamed the error on the fact that he was new in the case.

    He sought a date for the hearing of the motion, arguing that it was the law that once a motion was filed, even if it was frivolous, the court must hear it and pronounce on it.

    Tribunal Chairman, Danladi Umar adjourned to March 18 for the hearing of Saraki’s now motion and possible commencement of trial.

    He directed Jacobs and Agabi to file all necessary papers before then. He also directed that henceforth, all processes should be served on the prosecution lawyer in person.

    Saraki, in the new motion filed on March 4, wants the court to quash the charge against him or strike it out and discharge him of the offences on the ground, among others, that the tribunal lacked the jurisdiction to try him.

    He argued that the process leading to his arraignment was wrong and that he was denied fair hearing.

    “The facts relating to these matters are no longer fresh in my memory, quite apart from the fact that I have lost many of my records pertaining to them. The charge does not serve that public interest and constitutes a gross abuse of the legal process,” Saraki argued.

    These are mainly issues he had exhausted in his appeal, which the Supreme Court dismissed on February 5 and ordered him (Saraki) to submit himself for trial, before the CCT.

    Although the tribunal commenced sitting Friday by 10.05am, Saraki and his supporting Senators arrived the tribunal around 9.50am.

    Some of the members of the Senate at the proceedings include Stella Oduah, Dino Melaye, Sameul Anyanwu, Ike Ekweremadu, Danjuma Goje, Tayo Alasoadura, Ben Bruce and Ali Ndume.

  • CCT picks new date for Saraki’s trial

    CCT picks new date for Saraki’s trial

    The Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) on Tuesday fixed March 11 for resumption of the false asset declaration case involving the Senate President, Bukola Saraki.

    The tribunal had last month fixed March 10 for resumption of proceedings shortly after the Supreme Court dismissed Saraki’s appeal, challenging his trial at the CCT.

    The Nation gathered that the new date was at the instance of Saraki, whose new lawyer, Kanu Agabi (SAN) wrote the court and requested for a shift from the earlier date.

    CCT spokesman, Ibrahim Al-hassan, confirmed the new date.

    Agabi’s letter reads: ‘‘I write as lead counsel to the above defendant (Saraki) to apply that the matter, which is now scheduled to come up on the 10th day of March 2016, subject to the convenience of the honourable tribunal and learned counsel for the prosecution, be taken on the 11th day of March, 2016, due to my earlier and urgent commitments in other courts on the 10th.

    ‘‘I will sincerely appreciate the indulgence of the tribunal to accommodate me in this way.”

     

  • ‘Remove CCT from executive control’

    Rights group and judiciary watchdog, the Access to Justice (A2J) yesterday called for the removal of the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) from executive control.

    It said the CCT should no longer operate as an agency or institution under the executive, but should be made part of the judiciary.

    A2J said CCT’s role and functions are judicial, as such, it should be supervised by judicial bodies such as the National Judicial Council (NJC) or the Federal Judicial Service Commission rather than the presidency.

    The recommendation is part of a report presented yesterday by the group’s Executive Director Joseph Otteh, entitled: The Bump on a Log: Why the Code of Conduct Tribunal Malfunctions and How it can be Reformed.

    The group said the amendments should make clearer demarcation and allocation of powers between the members of the Board of the Tribunal consisting the Chairman and two members.

  • Saraki’s trial resumes March 10

    Saraki’s trial resumes March 10

    The Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) has fixed March 10 for the resumption of the trial of Senate President, Bukola Saraki.

    Saraki was arraigned before the tribunal last year on a 13-count charge of alleged false declaration of assets.

    Proceedings in the case were stalled by an appeal Saraki filed at the Supreme Court to challenge the tribunal’s jurisdiction.

    The apex court on February 5 dismissed the appeal and directed the Senate president to submit himself for trial.

     

  • AGF to CCT: Pick a date for resumption of Saraki’s trial

    AGF to CCT: Pick a date for resumption of Saraki’s trial

    The Office of the Attorney General of the federation (AGF) has asked the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) to pick a date for resumption of trial of the Senate President, Bukola Saraki.

    Saraki is facing a 13-count charge for allegedly falsifying his asset declaration when he was governor of Kwara State.

    The case was stalled by an appeal the Senate president filed at the Supreme Court to challenge the tribunal’s jurisdiction on the matter.

    However, the apex court on Friday last week dismissed the appeal for lack of merit.

    The AGF’s request for a trial date is informed by the court’s decision.