The Nation Newspaper

Tag: CCT

  • Breaking: Supreme Court to decide Onnoghen’s fate May 17

    The Supreme Court has fixed judgment for May 17 this year in a suit by Cross River State Government seeking to set aside the suspension of the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Walter Onnoghen.

    A seven-man panel of the court, led by Justice Olabode Rhodes-Vivour fixed the date on Thursday after taking arguments from lawyer to parties.

    Lucius Nwosu (SAN) argued on behalf of the plaintiff (Cross River State), while Dayo Apata, Solicitor General of the Federation (argued for the defendants – the Federal Republic of Nigeria and the Attorney General of the Federation).

    Read Also: Supreme Court affirms N2.5m verdict against Emirates

    It is the plaintiff’s contention that Onnoghen’s suspension or removal from office by President Muhammadu Buhari, based on an ex-parte order by a lay magistrate (the Chairman of the Code of Conduct Tribunal) violates the Constition, particularly Section 292(1).

    In a counter-argument, the defendants are of the view that the plaintiff lacks the locus standi to approach the Supreme Court on the issue, because Onnoghen’s suspension was personal to him and cannot be interpreted to amount to a dispute between the Federal Government and the Cross River State Government.

     

    Details shortly….

  • CCT: Appeal Court reserves judgments in Onnoghen’s cases

    THE Court of Appeal in Abuja has reserved judgments in the four appeals filed by the suspended Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Walter Onnoghen.

    A three-man panel of the court, led by Justice Stephen Adah, after taking arguments from parties, in respect of the appeals, said they would be informed when judgments are ready.

    Onnoghen is, by his first appeal, challenging the jurisdiction of the CCT to hear the charge against him, being a serving judicial officer.  He is, in the second appeal, querying the propriety of the CCT’s ruling of January 14 this year, in which it elected to hear all pending applications

    The third appeal is against the CCT ex-parte order directing Onnoghen to vacate office as CJN and for President Muhammadu Buhari to appoint an acting CJN.

    The fourth appeal challenges the competence of the warrant of arrest issued against the suspended CJN by the CCT.

    The arrest warrant, issued on February 13, this year, was vacated by the CCT on February 15, when Onnoghen voluntarily attended the sitting of the CCT, during which he was arraigned.

    Chris Uche (SAN), who argued Onnoghen’s appeals, urged the court to grant his client’s prayers and reject the notices of objection filed by the respondent (the Federal Republic of Nigeria).

    Umar, who is also the lead prosecution lawyer in the case before the CCT, urged the court to reject all the appeals and uphold the respondent’s notices of objection.

    He argued that there was no material before the court on which it could inquire into the circumstances surrounding the grant of the ex-parte order.

  • Breaking: Appeal Court reserves judgments in Onnoghen’s cases

    The Court of Appeal in Abuja has reserved judgments in the four appeals filed by the suspended Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Walter Onnghen.

    A three-man panel of the court, led by Justice Stephen Adah, after taking arguments from parties, in respect of the appeals, said they will be informed when judgments were ready.

    The appeals are CA/A/44c/2019; CA/A/CA/A/63c/19; CA:A/70c/2019 and CA/A/114c/2019.

    Onnoghen is, by his first appeal, challenging the jurisdiction of the CCT to hear the charge against him, being a serving judicial officer.

    He is, in the second appeal, querying the propriety of the CCT’s ruling of January 14 this year, in which it elected to hear all pending applications

    The third appeal is against the CCT ex-parte order directing Onnoghen to vacate office as CJN and for President Muhammadu Buhari to appoint an acting CJN.

    Read Also: Fed Govt, AGF ask Supreme Court to stay off Onnoghen’s case

    The fourth appeal challenges the competence of the warrant of arrest issued against the suspended CJN by the CCT.

    The arrest warrant, issued on February 13 this year, was vacated by the CCT on February 15 when Onnoghen voluntarily attended the sitting of the CCT, during which he was arraigned.

     

     

  • Fed Govt, AGF ask Supreme Court to stay off Onnoghen’s case

    •Cross River seeks court’s intervention

    THE Federal Government and Attorney General of the Federation (AGF) have asked the Supreme Court to decline jurisdiction over a suit seeking its intervention in the trial of suspended Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Walter Onnoghen before the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT).

    The FG and the AGF contended that Onnoghen’ trial was personal to him and could only involve the  Supreme Court, where an appeal arises from the Court of Appeal on a decision reached either during or after the trial at the CCT.

    Their position is contained in a notice of objection they filed against a suit instituted at the Supreme Court by Cross River State.

    The state government, in their originating summons, queried the propriety of Onnoghen’s trial before the CCT and urged the Supreme Court to declare it illegal on the grounds that it was only the National Judicial Council (NJC) that could exercise disciplinary powers over a serving judge.

    In their objection, the FG and AGF (listed as defendants in the suit), argued that the subject of the case did not qualify as a dispute between the Cross River State and the Federal Government, as envisaged under Section 232(1) of the Constitution.

    They added: “The subject matter of this suit is personal to Hon. Justice Onnoghen Nkanu Walter Samuel and does not, in any way, affects the Cross River State Government as to confer it with the locus to institute this suit.

    “The reliefs and claims made herein by the plaintiff are not for the benefit of Cross River State, but personal to Justice Onnoghen Nkanu Walter Samuel.

    “The alleged cause of action in the subject matter of this suit is not one that creates the existence or extent of a legal right between the Cross River State Government, in its capacity as a state and the defendants in this suit as stated under Section 232(1) of the Constitution.

    “The Honourable Justice Onnoghen Nkanu Walter Samuel, being an indigene of Cross River State and the highest judicial officer from the state does not confer on the plaintiff the locus to institute this suit.

    “The fact that the suit partly relates to the interpretation of the Constitution does not confer on the plaintiff the locus to invoke the original jurisdiction of this honourable court.”

    The plaintiff, in their originating summons, want the court to among others, declare that, by the provisions of sections 4, 5, and 6 of the Constitution, there a clear recognition of the doctrine of separation of powers and checks and balances in relation to the operations of the three arms of government.

    The Cross River State wants the court to declare that, by virtue of the provisions of sections 153(1), 158(1(, Paragraph 21(b) of Part 1 of the Third Schedule to Constitution, it is the NJC that is exclusively empowered to recommend to the President or Governor the appointment/removal of any judicial officer.

    It also seeks a declaration that the CCT, not being the NJC, is not vested with the jurisdiction over any judicial officer for an alleged official misconduct on the part of a judicial officer, without a formal complaint of such official misconduct being first made to and investigated by the NJC.

    The plaintiff equally wants the Supreme Court to declare that the filing of the charge, before the CCT, against Onnoghen, being a judicial officer, without any formal complaint having been made against him to the NJC, robbed the CCT of jurisdiction to try the charge and all the proceedings relating thereto, amount to a nullity.

    It, therefore, urged the court to grant an order of injunction, restraining the defendants and their agents from further initiating or proceedings with any similar charge or charges against Onnoghen or any judicial officer of the superior court created by the Constitution, until a formal report of misconduct is first, made to and investigated by the NJC.

    At the Supreme Court yesterday, lawyer to the defendants, Dayo Apata (who is the Solicitor General of the Federation), told the court that his clients have just filed some processes, including a memorandum of appearance, notice of preliminary objection and a counter affidavit to the originating summons.

    Apata said he was able to serve the processes on the plaintiff’s lawyer shortly before the court began sitting yesterday.

    Lawyer to the plaintiff, Lucius Nwosu (SAN), acknowledged the service of the defendants’ processes on him.

    Nwosu said, in view of the importance of the case, he would urge the court to grant a short adjournment to enable him respond to the defendant’s processes.

    Justice Olabode Rhodes-Vivour, who presided over a seven-man panel of the court, adjourned to February 28 for the hearing of the defendants’ objection along with the substantive suit.

  • FG, AGF ask Supreme Court to stay off Onnoghen’s case

    …Cross River seeks court’s intervention

    The Federal Government and Attorney General of the Federation (AGF) have asked the Supreme Court to decline jurisdiction over a suit seeking its intervention in the trial of suspended Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Walter Onnoghen before the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT).

    The FG and the AGF contended that Onnoghen’s trial was personal to him and could only involve the Supreme Court where an appeal arises from the Court of Appeal on a decision reached either during or after the trail at the CCT.

    Their position is contained in a notice of objection they filed against a suit marked: SC/45/2019 instituted at the Supreme Court by the government of Cross River State.

    The Cross River State Government, in their originating summons, queried the propriety of Onnoghen’s trial before the CCT and urged the Supreme Court to declare it illegal on the grounds that it was only the National Judicial Council (NJC) that could exercise disciplinary powers over a serving judge.

    In their objection, the FG and AGF (listed as defendants in the suit), argued that the subjected of the case did not qualify as a dispute between the Cross River State and the Federal Government, as envisaged under Section 232(1) of the Constitution.

    They added: “The subject matter of this suit is personal to Hon. Justice Onnoghen Nkanu Walter Samuel and does not, in any way affects the Cross River State Government as to confer it with the locus to institute this suit.

    “The reliefs and claims made herein by the plaintiff are not for the benefit of Cross River State, but personal to Hon. Justice Onnoghen Nkanu Walter Samuel.

    “The alleged cause of action in the subject matter of this suit is not one that creates the existence or extent of a legal right between the Cross River State Government, in its capacity as a state and the defendants in this suit as stated under Section 232(1) of the Constitution.

    “The Honourable Justice Onnoghen Nkanu Walter Samuel, being an indigene of Cross River State and the highest judicial officer from the state does not confer on the plaintiff the locus to institute this suit.

    “The fact that the suit partly relates to the interpretation of the Constitution does not confer on the plaintiff the locus to invoke the original jurisdiction of this honourable court,” they said.

    The plaintiff, in their originating summons, want the court to among others, declare that, by the provisions of sections 4, 5, and 6 of the Constitution, there a clear recognition of the doctrine of separation of powers and checks and balances in relation to the operations of the three arms of government.

    The Cross River State wants the court to declare that, by virtue of the provisions of sections 153(1), 158(1(, Paragraph 21(b) of Part 1 of the Third Schedule to Constitution, it is the NJC that is exclusively empowered to recommend to the President or Governor the appointment/removal of any judicial officer.

    It also seeks a declaration that the CCT, not being the NJC, is not vested with the jurisdiction over any judicial officer for an alleged official misconduct on the part of a judicial officer, without a formal complaint of such official misconduct being first made to and investigated by the NJC.

    The plaintiff equally wants the Supreme Court to declare that the filing of the charge, before the CCT, against Onnoghen, being a judicial officer, without any formal complaint having been made against him to the NJC, robbed the CCT of jurisdiction to try the charge and all the proceedings relating thereto, amount to a nullity.

    It therefore urged the court to grant an order of injunction, restraining the defendants and their agents from further initiating or proceedings with any similar charge or charges against Onnoghen or any judicial officer of the superior court created by the Constitution, until a formal report of misconduct is first, made to and investigated by the NJC.

    In a supporting affidavit sworn to by an official of the Cross River State Ministry of Justice, Ibi Mboto, the plaintiff stated that Onnoghen is an indigene of the state and the highest judicial officer from the state.

    It argued that Onnoghen’s suspension and trial before the CCT, without first, being subjected to the NJC’s process, as dedicated by the Constitution, was unlawful and unconstitutional.

    Read Also: Court of Appeal fails to hear Onnoghen’s suits

    At the Supreme Court on Thursday, lawyer to the defendants, Dayo Apata (who is the Solicitor General of the Federation), told the court that his clients have just filed some processes including a memorandum of appearance, notice of preliminary objection and a counter affidavit to the originating summons.

    Apata said he was able to serve the processes on the plaintiff’s lawyer shortly before the court began sitting on Thursday.

    Lawyer to the plaintiff, Lucius Nwosu (SAN) acknowledged the service of the defendants’ processes on him.

    Nwosu said, in view of the importance of the case, he would urge the court to grant a short adjournment to enable him respond to the defendant’s processes.

    Justice Olabode Rhodes-Vivour, who presided over a seven-man panel of the court, adjourned to February 28 this year for the hearing of the defendants’ objection along with the substantive suit.

  • Court of Appeal fails to hear Onnoghen’s suits

    THE Court of Appeal in Abuja has postponed its planned hearing of the three appeals filed by the suspended Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Walter Onnoghen, to February 27.

    It was the third time, in one month, that the court will postpone hearing in the appeals filed against the decisions of the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT), before which the suspended CJN is standing trial for alleged breach of code of conduct for public officers.

    Justice Onnoghen is, by his first appeal, challenging the jurisdiction of the CCT to hear the charge against him, being a serving judicial officer.

    He is, in the second appeal, querying the propriety of the CCT’s ruling of January 14, this year, in which it elected to hear all pending application.

    The third appeal is against the CCT ex-parte order directing Onnoghen to vacate office as CJN and for President Muhammadu Buhari to appoint an acting CJN.

    The court had, in late January, scheduled hearing in the appeals for February 12.

    When parties got to court, the court could not form a quorum for the purpose of hearing the appeals. Two of the three justices required to form a quorum were said to be attending a seminar.

    The court subsequently adjourned to the next day. It could also not hear the appeals on February 13, owing to a request by the Federal Government to be allowed to engage a new lawyer.

    Oyin Koleoso, who represented the Minister of Justice and Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF), told the court that the AGF has instructed that Aliyu Umar, SAN, (who is prosecuting the charge at the CCT) to take over the case of the respondent.

    Koleoso noted that Umar was, at the moment the Court of Appeal proceedings were on, at the CCT.

    Koleoso sought an adjournment to enable Umar take over the case of the respondent.

    Lawyers to the appellant, Chris Uche (SAN), objected to an adjournment, but he was overruled by a three-man panel of the court presided over by Justice Abdul Aboki.

    The court further adjourned hearing in the appeals till February 20.

    When parties got to court on Tuesday, Umar, who appeased the respondents, said he has filed an application, in which he, among others, sought to be afforded time to familiarise himself with what had been filed in the appeals so far.

    Appellant’s lawyer, Uche, did not object to a request for a brief adjournment, following which the court adjourned till February 27.

  • Again, Appeal Court fails to hear Onnoghen’s appeals

    · Reschedules hearing for Feb 27

     

    The Court of Appeal in Abuja on Tuesday postponed its planned hearing of the three appeals filed by suspended Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN) Justice Walter Onnoghen to February 27.

    This is the third time, in one month, the court will postpone hearing in the appeals filed against the decisions of the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) before which Onnoghen is standing trial for alleged breach of code of conduct for public officers.

    Onnoghen is, by his first appeal, challenging the jurisdiction of the CCT to hear the charge against him, being a serving judicial officer.

    He is, in the second appeal, querying the propriety of the CCT’s ruling of January 14 this year, in which it elected to hear all pending application.

    The third appeal is against the CCT ex-parte order directing Onnoghen to vacate office as CJN and President Muhammadu Buhari to appoint an acting CJN.

    The court had, in late January this year, scheduled hearing in the appeals for February 12 thus year.

    When parties got to court, the court could not form a quorum for the purpose of hearing the appeals. Two of the three Justices, required to form a quorum, were said to be attending a seminar.

    The court subsequently adjourned to the next day. It could also not hear the appeals on February 13 owing to a request by the Federal Government to be allowed to engage a new lawyer.

    Oyin Koleoso, who represented the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of the Federation (AGF), told the court that the AGF has instructed that Aliyu Umar – SAN – (who is prosecuting the charge at the CCT) should take over the case of the respondent.

    Kolaoso noted that Umar was, (at the moment the Court of Appeal proceedings were on), at the CCT.

    Koleoso sought an adjournment to enable Umar take over the case of the respondent.

    Lawyers to the appellant, Chris Uche (SAN) objected to an adjournment, but he was overruled by a three-man panel of the court presided over by Justice Abdul Aboki.

    The court further adjourned hearing in the appeals till February 20.

    Again, when parties got to court on Tuesday, Umar, who appeased for the respondents, said he has filed an application, in which he, among others sought to be afforded time to familiarise himself with what had been filed in the appeals so far.

    Appellant’s lawyer, Uche did not object to a request for a brief adjournment, following which the court adjourned till February 27 this year

  • Onnoghen: SAN backs CCT on warrant of arrest

    A Senior Advocate of Ni-geria (SAN), Babatunde Fashanu, has said the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) was right to have issued a warrant for the arrest of suspended Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN) Walter Onnoghen.

    He said the tribunal’s ruling was in order since the Court of Appeal has given it the nod to try Onnoghen.

    “Technically, having been given the go ahead by the Court of Appeal to continue with the trial of the CJN, the CCT is right to go on and make any order to ensure it goes on with the case,” Fashanu said.­­

    The tribunal has since vacated  the order following Onnoghen’s appearance on Friday. He pleaded not guilty to the charge of non-asset declaration.

    But Fashanu advised the CCT to clear the issue of jurisdiction raised against its competence to try the case first before any other thing.

    Fashanu recalled that Onnoghen, through his counsel, had objected to his trial and challenged the tribunal’s jurisdiction to hear the case.

    “One would have thought the CCT would first determine it’s jurisdiction before issuing warrant of arrest especially as it is common knowledge that the matter is now being considered by the NJC.

    “Secondly, the suspended CJN has objected to the competence of the Tribunal Chairman to try him. The Tribunal needs to rule on that first before going into any other thing,” he argued.

    Fashanu did not agree with the tribunal on the suspension of Justice Onnoghen.

    “Rightly or wrongly (wrongly in my view), the Tribunal has suspended the CJN for the time being, so, what’s the rush in going on without first determining the competence of the Tribunal Chairman to sit in the case and to determine it’s jurisdiction?” he queried.

     

  • Breaking: Trial at CCT: Onnoghen granted bail on self-recognition

    Trial at CCT: Onnoghen granted bail on self recognisance
    *Tribunal vacates arrest warrant issued against suspended Cjn

    The Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) has granted bail, on self recognisance, to the suspended Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Walter Onnoghen.

    The CCT Chairman, Danaldi Umar, in a ruling, also discharged the bench warrant issued against Onoghen.

    Umar said since he voluntarily submitted himself, the bench warrant was no longer necessary.

    Onnoghen, who stood in the dock all through the about one-hour long proceedings, pleaded not guilty to the six-count charge on which he was arraigned.

    Details shortly…

  • UPDATED: CCT: Onnoghen pleads not guilty to charge

    Rejects chair given him to sit
    *Preferred to stand in the dock

    Proceedings commenced on Friday at about 10.30am in the case involving the suspended Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Walter Onnoghen before the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) in Abuja.

    An official of the tribunal, who called the case, informed the tribunal that the defendant (Onnoghen) was in court.

    Tribunal Chairman, Danladi Umar insisted that Onnghen, who had sat on the front seat by the left of the tribunal sitting venue, must enter the dock, a directive the suspended CJN obeyed and went straight into the dock.

    Read Also: Justice Onnoghen enters the dock

    Onnoghen rejected a chair given to him to sit on.

    He insisted on standing and said he preferred to stand for now.

    Upon the request by the prosecution, the tribunal Chairman ordered that the charge be read to the defendant.

    An official of the tribunal read the charge to him, to which he pleaded not guilty.

    Details shortly…