The Nation Newspaper

Tag: Code of Conduct Tribunal

  • CJN: Court orders service of processes on CCT chairman

    The National Industrial Court, Abuja, on Monday ordered the service of an interim order and hearing notice on the Chairman of the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT), Malam Danladi Umar.

    The orders follow the suit seeking to restrain the tribunal from persecuting the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Mr. Walter Onnoghen.

    At the hearing, counsel to the claimant, James Igwe (SAN), informed the court that originating processes and interim order had been served on all parties except the tribunal’s chairman and the Senate President.

    Igwe said it was the secretary to the tribunal’s chairman that received the document and not the chairman personally.

    He, however, said the Senate president was not served as an oversight that should be corrected immediately.

    The judge, Justice Sanusi Kado, therefore ordered that the processes and interim order be served on the tribunal’s chairman through substituted means.

    He equally ordered that notice should be placed on the wall of the tribunal’s office.

    He held that hearing notices should be served on all parties.

    He also gave the order that the interim order made on Jan.14 restraining the defendants from further proceeding with the trial against the CJN should subsist.

    The judge adjourned the matter until Jan. 30 for hearing of motion on notice of the interlocutory injunction in the substantive suit.

    The CJN is facing a six-count charge before the CCT over an alleged non-declaration of assets.

    Read Also: Court restates order stopping CCT from forcing CJN to vacate office

    The trial is based on a petition filed by a group, the Anti-corruption, Research and Data-based Initiative.

    The claimant in the suit, one Mr Peter Abang, therefore, filed an ex-parte motion before the court seeking an order to suspend the trial at the tribunal.

    Joined as co-defendants in the suit are Code of Court Bureau, CCB, CCT chairman, Danladi Umar; Attorney General of the Federation and The National Judicial Commission.

    Others are The Federal Judicial Service Commission, the Inspector General of Police, the Justice Minister, Abubakar Malami, Senate President, Bukola Saraki, and National Judicial Council.

    Mr Garba Tetengi, Defence Counsel to NJC was the only defence counsel in court.

  • JUSUN faults planned trial of CJN before CCT

    The Judiciary Staff Union of Nigeria (JUSUN) has faulted the decision by the Executive to insist on trying the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN) before the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) on allegation of non-asset disclosure

    JUSUN urged the Executive to direct its complaints against the CJN to the National Judicial Council (NJC) as provided by the Constitution rather than deliberately working to discredit the Judiciary.

    JUSUN’s President, Comrade Marwan Adamu, noted in a statement that the way the issue was being politicised, revealed that there was more to the case.

    He warned against a repeat of the last mass arrest of judges by security agents, who at the end of the day, could not prove their allegations against the effected judges.

    Marwan said: “Even if such offence is committed, that is not the process. The position is that since there is an Appeal Court judgement that said any serving judicial officer, who erred can only be prosecuted after the NJC has investigated and found him or her guilty, those behind this case should go to NJC.

    “Most people are raising suspicion because of the timing of the general elections and also, the speed at which the petitioners filled the petition and the urgency with which the matter is being pursued.

    “This has also shown that something is fishy. Also, we may wish to ask, when did the petitioner realised the anomalies.

    “The CJN was appointed based on merit and not because he is from the South or anywhere in the country. So, any regional and political sentiment will only put the CJN on a bad light.

    “The Judiciary, as an institution, has the capacity to handle the matter. Even though we recognise their concern, the rule of law must be observed.

    “JUSUN is also watching and monitoring the development with keen interest and has put her members on red alert, not only on this matter, but on any other issue that has to do with the independence of the Judiciary.

    “We are not in anyway shielding anybody, but the position of the law must be followed.

    “We should also avoid a repeat of the scenario that played out recently where some of our judicial officers were embarrassed, arrested and prosecuted but in the end, they were found not guilty.”

     

     

  • Resign, Onnoghen, resign

    With the head of the judiciary, Chief Justice Walter Onnoghen (CJN) charged before the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) for alleged disobedience of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), our constitutional democracy is on trial. The CJN is facing a six-count charge, for failing to declare bank accounts allegedly containing about three million dollars in his asset declaration form filed with the Code of Conduct Bureau (CCB).

    According to media reports, the CJN has admitted the infractions, pleading oversight while filing the returns as required by the constitution. Despite the reported admission, his defence lawyers have filed an application challenging the jurisdiction of CCT to hear the matter. Also, parties claiming public interest have obtained ex parte interim order from the Federal High Court, restraining the CCT from hearing the case pending the determination of an interlocutory application.

    On their part, four governors from the south-south met last week and advised the CJN to disobey the summons by the CCT. Also, some Niger Delta agitators have threatened to attack oil facilities if the trial is not discontinued by the Federal Government. In its own wisdom, the Nigeria Bar Association (NBA) and some senior lawyers have asked that the trial be discontinued, citing the case of Ngajiuwa vs Federal Republic of Nigeria.

    Conversely, others, including Professor Itse Sagay (SAN), have distinguished Ngajiuwa from the charges against the CJN. They argued that while the earlier case deals with professional misconduct in the performance of official duty, the case against the CJN deals with a breach of a constitutional imposition, which also provides the avenue for seeking redress. They argued that only the CCT has the exclusive jurisdiction to try the alleged infraction and definitely not the National Judicial Council (NJC), as canvassed by the opposing view.

    Of note, in Ahmed vs Ahmed & Ors (2013) LPELR 21143 (SC), a Supreme Court panel headed by the CJN held that the CCB has exclusive constitutional jurisdiction as in the present case. In the words of Justice Onnoghen: “Any allegation that a public officer has committed a breach of provisions of this code shall be made to the Code of Conduct Bureau.” The CJN was quoting Paragraph 12 of Part 1 of the 5th Schedule to the 1999 Constitution (as amended). The provision empowers the CCB to charge such breach before the CCT.

    In the face of the alleged constitutional infraction which the CJN has reportedly admitted, his lawyers are hinging their defence on procedural challenges. They raised the issue of personal service, even when the prosecution claimed the CJN directed his assistant to acknowledge service. They asked that the CJN should first be tried by the NJC, which he heads and has the prerogative to nominate many of its members. Clearly, the defence team is relying on technical obfuscations to defeat the trial of the CJN.

    Considering that the matter is before the courts, it will be improper to comment on the propriety of the applications pending before the tribunal and the cases filed to defeat the trial. This is more so as the courts are yet to rule on them. However without prejudice to the right of a citizen to defend himself in any manner he considers just, we feel justified in public interest because of the enormous responsibilities on the shoulder of the CJN, to exercise our right of holding an opinion on this grave national development.

    Since none of the cases filed to shield the CJN from trial contested the genuineness of the claims against the CJN, and considering that the CJN has admitted the alleged infractions, we urge him to immediately resign to save the image of the judiciary which he symbolises. Moreover, in Ahmed vs Ahmed (supra) he has upheld the exclusive jurisdiction of the CCB and consequently CCT to deal with similar issues as he is now involved.

    Were the circumstance different, the defence lawyers would have recourse to accelerated hearing, for the CJN to answer the substantive issues raised against him. But of note, both the defence lawyers at the tribunal, and those at the various high courts, and even the public commentators are all seeking to raise obstacles to forestall a hearing on merit of the charges raised against the CJN.

    We admit that the trial of the CJN few weeks to a general election, in which the arm of government he heads would play a major role, is untidy. We appreciate that the prosecutors may harbour bad faith, or even extraneous considerations. We are also scandalised that in clearing the CJN for the high office, these allegations were not raised during his confirmation. But then, all of these would amount to little if the CJN has admitted the alleged infractions, as widely published by the media. The question now is whether he has the moral authority to cling to technicality as a defence to the charges? Our answer is NO.

  • Onnoghen: SANs demand respect for constitution, rule of law

    The Body of Senior Advocates of Nigeria (BOSAN) on Saturday called for respect for the Constitution in the trial of Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN) Walter Onnoghen.

    It made the call in a communique at the end of its meeting held at the Nigerian Law School in Lagos.

    The Federal Government filed charges of non-declaration of assets at the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) against Chief Justice Onnoghen.

    He has, however, filed an application to challenge the CCT’s jurisdiction on the basis that the matter ought to be determined by the National Judicial Council (NJC) first.

    The Federal High Court in Abuja had also restrained the CCT from arraigning Chief Justice Onnoghen.

    After considering issues of national importance, BOSAN said the issues must be resolved carefully in the Judiciary’s interest.

    The communique reads: “The Body of Senior Advocates of Nigeria deplores the situation that has arisen from the preferment of charges against the CJN and head of the Nigerian Judiciary before the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT).

    READ ALSO: Freezing CJN’s accounts contemptuous, say Agbakoba, Falana, Ozekhome

    “The Body urges respect for the Constitution, the rule of law, separation of powers, due process and the proper administration of justice.

    “In the prevailing circumstances, all parties are urged to consider the impact of their respective actions on the administration of justice in Nigeria and public confidence in our institutions.

    “The Body recognises that the matter is subjudice (before the CCT and other courts) and it is therefore not appropriate to comment on the merits or otherwise of any of the cases.

    “The Body considers that these issues must be resolved carefully and responsibly in the interest of the legal profession and the nation.

    “The Body of Senior Advocates of Nigeria continues to endorse the core values of good governance, public integrity and sustenance of democracy in the spirit of the Constitution.”

    The communique was signed by Prof Ben Nwabueze and Mr Seyi Sowemimo.

  • How Onnoghen’s judgments affirmed CCT’s powers

    Chief Justice Walter Onnoghen, who is challenging the jurisdiction of the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) to try him for alleged non-declaration of assets, had given judgments affirming the Tribunal’s powers.

    In one of the judgments delivered on July 12, 2013, he held that the CCT had exclusive jurisdiction to deal with all violations contravening any of the provisions of the Code of Conduct Bureau.

    He also held that the provisions “expressly ousted the powers of ordinary regular courts in respect of such violations.”
    Chief Justice Onnoghen’s lawyers are arguing that the charges against him should first be decided by the National Judicial Council (NJC). Can the NJC not be considered an “ordinary regular court” in the circumstance?

    The judgment was in a suit numbered SC.279/2012 before Justices Onnoghen, Christopher Mitchell, Chukwuma-Eneh, Olabode Rhodes-Vivour, Clara Bata Ogunbiyi and Kumai Bayang Aka’ahs.

    The case was between Ismaeel Ahmed and Alhaji Nasiru Ahmed, Congress for Progressive Change (CPC), CPC Kano State Chapter chairman and the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).

    Interpreting Paragraph 12 of the Fifth Schedule of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) as regards CCT’s jurisdiction, Justice Onnoghen held: “’…the said paragraph 12 provides as follows: ‘Any allegation that a public officer has committed a breach of or has not complied with the provisions of this Code shall be made to the Code of Conduct Bureau.’

    “The foregoing provisions are clearly unambiguous and so construed literally mean that any breaches of any provisions of the said 5th schedule or matters of noncompliance with any provisions of the Code shall, (meaning that it is mandatory i.e. must) be made to the Code of Conduct Bureau that has established its Tribunal with the exclusive jurisdiction to deal with any violations of any provisions under the Code.

    “If I may emphasise, any violations shall be made to Code of Conduct Bureau. The provisions have made it mandatory to take any matters so covered by the 5th schedule (supra) to the Code of Conduct Bureau and not to any ordinary regular Courts as has been done in this instance.

    Read also: Breaking: FG orders NFIU to freeze Onnoghen’s five accounts

    “If I may repeat, the Code of Conduct Tribunal has been established with the exclusive jurisdiction to deal with all violations contravening any of the provisions of the Code as per paragraph 15(1). This provision has expressly ousted the powers of ordinary regular courts in respect of such violations.

    “The Tribunal to the exclusion of other courts is also empowered to impose any punishments as specified under sub-paragraphs (2) (a), (b) & (c) of paragraph 18 as provided in sub-paragraphs 3 and 4 of paragraph 18 while appeals shall lie as of right from such decisions to the Court of Appeal.

    “Simply put, to tackle any violation of the Code starts before the Code of Conduct Bureau Tribunal to the Court below on appeal and on a further appeal therefrom to this Court.

    “As can be seen, the lower Court exercises appellate jurisdiction over the Code of Conduct Tribunal and no more.”

    In his contributory judgment in Ahmed V. Ahmed & Ors (2013) Lpelr-21143(SC), Justice Onnoghen said regarding breach of public conduct: “It is the contention of the cross appellants that the initiation of the appeal process etc by M.K. Dabo esq is in violation of the Paragraphs of the 5th Schedule thereby rendering the actions so taken and the processes null and void.

    “The real important question to ask at this stage is what is the consequences of the violation of the aforesaid paragraphs of the 5th Schedule to the 1999 Constitution?

    “The answer to the above question is to be found in Paragraph 12 of the said Part 1 of the 5th Schedule which enacts as follows: -‘Any allegation that a public officer has committed a breach of provisions of this code shall be made to the Code of Conduct Bureau.’

    “It is my considered view that the above provision is very clear and unambiguous. It provides a remedy in the event of any alleged breach of the provisions. The remedy lies with the Code of Conduct Bureau which has been clothed with the requisite jurisdiction to handle such matters.”

  • CJN inaugurates new CCT member

    The Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Walter Onnoghen said yesterday that efforts were ongoing to bring the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) under National Judicial Council (NJC) as an arm of the Judiciary.

    The CCT is currently an agency under the Presidency.

    CCT’s spokesman, Ibraheem Al-Hassan, in a statement, quoted Justice Onnoghen as saying that the move is intended  to enable the CCT function effectively and in accordance with the doctrine of separation of powers.

    The CJN spoke in Abuja at the Supreme Court complex, while administering oath of office on a new member of the CCT, Mrs. Julie Abieyuwa Amabor.

    He warned judges to avoid acts capable of rubbishing their name and that of the Judiciary.

    Read also: Walter Carrington to Buhari: Diversify Nigeria’s economy

    Justice Onnoghen urged the new CCT member to be above board in her decision and always abide by the judicial oath she took.

    He also admonished her to always be guided by the decisions of the appellate courts and learn to operate as a team player.

    The CJN urged the new CCT member to always be guided by her conscience, no matter whose ox is gored.

    Onnoghen said the delay in the appointment of a new member for the CCT was not that the NJC did not appreciate the important role the tribunal plays.

    He said the delay resulted from the resolve of the NJC to ensure that the right thing was done.

  • Ekweremadu: Reps tackle special presidential investigative Panel

    House of Representatives Thursday resolved to probe the activities of the Special Presidential Investigative Panel for the Recovery of Public Property to ensure that it is in tandem with the law and conforms to best practices.

    The panel is alleged to be interfering with the activities of the Code of Conduct tribunal.

    The resolution of the Green Chamber was sequel to the passage of a motion sponsored by Hon. Kingsley Chinda (PDP, Rivers)

    Recall that the SPIP recently filed an ex-parte motion through a legal practitioner, Festus Keyamo asking  the Federal High Court in Abuja to freeze all hidden assets belonging to the Deputy Senate President, Ike Ekweremadu.

    Chinda, while moving the motion noted the inauguration of the Special Presidential Investigative Panel (SPIP) pursuant to the Public Property Special Provisions Act, CAP R4 LFN, 2004 otherwise known as Decree No 3, 1984 with the commencement date of 31st December 1983.

    “The said panel is alleged to have received petitions from Nigerians and its mode of operation is to proceed to invite citizens to fill asset declaration form which is by law the exclusive mandate of the Code of Conduct Bureau under the Code of Conduct and Tribunal Act CAP T 15, LFN 2004”.

    “Following the activities of the Panel, the Honourable Attorney General of the Federation has received several complaints from the general public on the need to take an in-depth look at the law viz-a viz the various anti-corruption agencies that are now established, particularly the Code of Conduct Bureau and the Code of Conduct Tribunal”, the lawmaker said.

    Chinda further said Section 153 of the 1999 Constitution captures the Code of Conduct Bureau as a federal executive body and that the 5th Schedule to the 1999 Constitution provides greater details of the act amounting to a breach of the code of conduct of public officers and established the Code of Conduct Tribunal.

    His words: “Part II of the Schedule defined a public officer in the context of the constitutional provision.

    “The Public Property (Special Provision) Act codified as CAP R4 LFN, 2004 predates the Code of Conduct and Tribunal Act CAP T15 LFN 2004, whereas the Act commenced 31st Dec, 1983, the Code of Conduct Bureau and Tribunal Act commenced on 1st January, 19991, (8 years later).

    “The Public Property (Special Provision) Act CAP R4 LFN 2004 is a spent law by virtue of the Code of Conduct Bureau and Tribunal Act, CAP T15 LFN 2004, the functions specified by the Act to be performed through panels established by the President are now performed by the Code of Conduct Tribunal which serves as a special court headed by a qualified Judge of a superior court of record in Nigeria to try the offences regarding the breach of the Code of the conduct of public officers. Beside the Code of Conduct Act being a newer law on the subject matter, has made specific provisions on the matter.

    “It is a trite law that the court would construe a later act as repealing an earlier one if the two provisions cannot stand together or if they both make the same provisions dealing with a similar subject matter as established in Trade Bank Plc Vs. Lagos Island Local Govt (2003) FWLR (Pt 161) 1734”, Chinda added.

    According to him, “there cannot be two parallel agencies of government no matter the manner of operation undertaking the same functions in whatever guise or form.

    “This more so where the functions are so similar that the public are meant to go through repeated processes and procedures which may infringe on their rights and give rise to series of litigation and the consequential loss of revenue both in overheads and the execution of awards in the damages”.

    “Special Presidential Investigation Panel (SPIP) ought not to have been set up in view of the existence of such institutions as the EFCC, ICPC and especially the Code of Conduct Bureau and the Code of Conduct Tribunal both created by law and supported by the 1999 constitution.

    “Mindful that the Code of Conduct Tribunal is a special court whose Chairman is a qualified Judge of a superior court of record dealing with matters related to the subject whereas the Public Property (Special Provision) Act, CAP R4, LFN, 2004 gives jurisdiction to the Federal High Court under Section 2(2)b which is not only inconsistent with the Code of Conduct Bureau and Tribunal Act but inconsistent with section 251 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria which did not include the code of conduct matters under the jurisdiction of the Federal High Court – Trade Bank plc Vs Lagos Island Local Govt (2003)”, the lawmaker said.

    He added that there are economic implications of setting up multiple agencies with its ravaging effects on the revenue of government.

    Speaker Yakubu Dogara in his ruling said the House will set up an ad-hoc committee to investigate the modus operandi and legality of the Special Presidential Investigation Panel (SPIP).

    Read Also: Reps seek implementation of free education for Nigerian children

  • Ten reasons Saraki was acquitted by CCT

    Ten reasons Saraki was acquitted by CCT

    The Senate President, Dr. Bukola Saraki was on Wednesday at the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) cleared of the false assets declaration charge preferred against him.

    Below are the major reasons the Code of Conduct Tribunal acquitted the Senate President.

    Upholding Saraki’s “no-case submission”, the tribunal made up of two men, the Chairman and a member said:

    1. The prosecution failed to discharge the burden of proof placed on it under the law.
    2. The CCT Chairman Justice Danladi Yakubu Umar said the prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case against Saraki to warrant his being called to defend himself.
    3. Umar faulted the evidence of the third prosecution witness, Samuel Madojemu (Head of Investigation at the Code of Conduct Bureau, CCB) that he received oral instructions to join a team from other agencies to investigate Saraki.
    4. He said Madojemu was unhelpful to the prosecution when he (Madojemu) claimed that all information in the affidavit in support of the 18-count charge was based on information supplied to him by an undisclosed team of investigators.
    5. Umar said what the EFCC tendered before the tribunal was more of a product of  intelligence gathering than of conventional investigation.
    6. It is wrong of the investigators not to have invited the defendant to make a statement so that the truth can be unearthed.
    7. Agwadza noted that while the prosecution alleged that Saraki was earning salary from the Kwara State government even as a Senator, it (prosecution) failed to call the state’s Accountant-General to prove that allegation.
    8. The prosecution failed to produce material evidence including the defendant’s statement and the original copies of his assets declaration forms.
    9. In criminal prosecution, he said, the onus was on the prosecution to prove its case, adding that where it fails in that duty, the defence could not be called to prove its innocence.
    10. The prosecution, he said, failed to call vital witnesses to “effectively link the defendant to the offences charged”.

    The CCT noted that the evidence was so discredited, unreliable that no reasonable court will attach probate value to them.

    He said the team referred to by Madojemu comprising operatives of the EFCC, DSS and CCB is unknown to law, adding that the team has no constitutional or statutory backing to have done what it did.

    The tribunal’s sole member, Williams Atedze Agwadza.

    “My humble conclusion is that the defendant in this case has no case to answer and he is accordingly discharged and acquitted,” Agwadza said.

  • Jubilation in Ilorin as CCT acquits Saraki

    Jubilation in Ilorin as CCT acquits Saraki

    Scores of Kwara All Progressives Congress (APC) stalwarts, supporters, loyalists and party members on Wednesday went on a wild jubilation in Ilorin over the discharge and acquittal of Senate President Bukola Saraki at the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT).

    Amidst drumming, singing and dancing at the APC secretariat in the state capital, the jubilant crowd women wore multicoloured customised T-shirts to celebrate the moment.Addressing reporters the state

    Addressing reporters the state chairman of the APC, Alhaji Isola Balogun Fulani, expressed happiness, saying the ability that the allegations were politically motivated.

    “The entire APC members and all peace loving people of Kwara State are very happy. We knew that this is a politically motivated charge, but God has vindicated us, and it is a plus to democracy. This also allows us to have confidence in the judiciary of Nigeria.

    “We are very happy. We thank everybody and well-meaning Nigerians who had supported us from the first time this thing (trial) started up to the end of this case. We are very happy and that is why you see us
    rejoicing.

    “We are going to the Emir of Ilorin to rejoice with him and thank him for supporting our leader, the Senate President. From there, we will move to the Governor of Kwara State to thank him for his support from the onset up to the end of this time and to also pray for him that with him in the helm of affairs,
    Kwara State is progressing and we hope that Insha Allah with the end of this case, Kwara State will continue to progress.

    We are very happy and words cannot express our happiness,” he added. The APC chair said that the Senator Saraki’s victory would spur for more performance in office.

    “Even without settled mind, he has been performing credibly. We are sure that with his settled mind he will do more and perform credibly to the interest of all Nigerians at large,” he said.Also speaking, former APC women leader and

    Also speaking, former APC women leader and chairperson, Kwara state local government service commission, Alhaja Sarat Adebayo, said the judgement was a welcome development.

    “We appreciate President Buhari for doing justice to the whole issue. The judgement is a welcome development to Kwarans as a whole. We appreciate everyone that stood by us when the case lasted.

    ‘We appreciate particularly the NASS, the executive and judiciary arms as well as Nigerians for standing by us during our time of trial. We believe that justice has been done today. We salute everyone, we are confident that with the judgement tremendous achievements would be achieved in the remaining two years ahead,” she said.

    ‎The ABS Mandate Constituency office of Dr. Bukola Saraki also expressed gratitude to God and humanity for the outcome of the CCT judgement which discharged and acquitted the President of the Senate Dr Bukola Saraki of the 18 count charge against him as lacking in proof and evidence.

    ‎A statement issued by Hon. Kayode Omotose on behalf of the Director General ABS Abdulwahab Oladimeji paid glowing tribute to the Governor Abdulfatah Ahmed and members of the state executive council, the  Speaker Kwara House of Assembly Dr Ali Ahmad  and members of the legislature, the Emir of Ilorin Alhaji Ibrahim Sulu – Gambari and all traditional rulers, the Chief Imam of Ilorin, Chairman of
    the Christian Association Nigeria and all clerics and clergymen, the State Chairman of APC Hon. Ishola Balogun Fulani and members of the party.

    While calling for continuous prayer in the task ahead, the ABS mandate office assured Kwarans that the
    President of the Senate Dr Bukola Saraki shall remain focused in the development of every nook and cranny of the state

  •  Constitution Amendment: CCT now on First Line Charge

     Constitution Amendment: CCT now on First Line Charge

    …Judges increased from 3 to 40

     

    The House of Representatives Special Ad-hoc Committee on the review of 1999 constitution has moved to insulate the Code of Conduct Tribunal from political influence and enhance its efficiency and effectiveness.

    To this end, Members of the committee unanimously agreed that Code of Conduct Tribunal should not only become full-fledged ‎court, but be listed among the courts that benefit from the first line charge meant for judiciary.

    The committee also agreed that there should be more than one tribunal to handle breach of code of conduct considering the size of nation and baglog of pending cases. For this reason, the committee is proposing an increase in the number of judges of the Code of Conduct Tribunal from three to at least 40.

    The committee chaired by the Deputy Speaker of the House of Representatives, Hon Sulaimon Lasun Yussuff  after a robust debate at the last Monday meeting of the committee, consultants and PLAC Representatives concluded that only cases involving death penalty, enforcement of human rights and interpretation of the constitution would be entertained at the supreme Courts.

    All matters relating to pre-election matters or election matter and any other cases would be terminated at the Appeal Courts, the committee said.

    The committee so far has treated 40 Bills and at the last meeting, considered the Judiciary ‎Reform Bill. The Bill is a consolidated Bill prepared by heads of courts and judicial bodies in Nigeria.

    The Bill was forwarded to the National Assembly on 26th of January 2017 by the then Acting Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice W S N Onnoghen (CFR) and was sponsored by Hon Aminu Shehu Shagari, chairman House committee of judiciary.

    Some of the highlights of the Bill indicated that the judiciary is trying to review the composition of members of Supreme Court from 21 prescribed by the constitution to 16.

    On the other hand, the proposed law seeks to increase the prescribed minimum membership of the court of Appeal from 41 to 100 justices.

    Similarly, another proposal by the judiciary seeks to reduce in a radical manner the type of cases that goes on appeal to Supreme Court to only three.

    The purpose of this, according to a statement from the committee, is to reduce the workload of the Supreme Court and also increase the capacity of the court of Appeal to shoulder additional responsibilities, including entertaining appeals from the National Industrial Court of Nigeria.

    Members of the committee retained the 20-man composition of the Supreme Court but increase the minimum membership of court of appeal to 100.

    The committee also agreed that cases from the National Industrial court should terminate at the court of Appeal, for this reason, a special division for Industrial matter would be created in line with the existing ones for customary law and Islamic law.