The Nation Newspaper

Tag: Eric Ikhilae

  • Umar, Badeh’s predecessor arraigned over N7,382b fraud

    Umar, Badeh’s predecessor arraigned over N7,382b fraud

    Former Chief of Air Staff, Air Marshal, Mohammed Dikko Umar (Rtd.) was on Wednesday arraigned before the Federal High Court, Abuja on charges of money laundering, criminal breach of trust and corruption involving about N7.382billion.

    Umar was arraigned alone before Justice Binta Nyako on a seven-count charge marked: FHC/ABJ/CR/92/2016 dated and filed on April 22 this year.

    Justice Nyako is one of the wives of former Adamawa State governor, Murtala Nyako, who is currently standing trial with one of his sons (Abdul-Aziz, a serving Senator) before Justice Evoh Chukwu (also of the Federal High Court, Abuja) on corruption charges.

    When the charge was read to Umar, he pleaded not guilty, following which Justice Nyako granted him bail on self recognition, in the absence of objection from the prosecution lawyer, Sylvester Taihir, an in-house lawyer with the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).

    The judge ordered Umar to submit his travel passport to the court’s registrar and refrain from travelling out of the court’s jurisdiction while the trial lasted, except with the permission of the court.

    Upon request from Tahir, Justice Nyako adjourned to July 7 for the commencement of trial.

  • Imo election rerun: Court urged to restrain INEC

    Imo election rerun: Court urged to restrain INEC

    Can the Independent National Eelectoral Commission (INEC) conduct a re-run election after the 90 days ordered by a court? Did the Electoral Act 2010 make provision for INEC  to seek extension of time to conduct re-run election having failed to conduct the election within the time ordered?

    These, among others, formed issues to be determined by the Federal High Court, Abuja in a suit seeking to restrain INEC from further conducting the re-run election ordered in Imo North Senatorial District by the Court of Appeal, Owerri division.

    Defendants in the suit marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/23/2016, filed by Igwe Maduakolam, are INEC and Senator Athan Achonu Nneji, candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) in the last National Assembly Election for Imo North Senatorial District.

    Nneji was declared winner of the election for the Imo North Senatorial District held on April 28, 2015. The election was set aside by the Court of Appeal, Owerri in its judgment of December 11 last year on the ground that INEC failed to include the logo of Accord Party on the ballot papers.

    The appellate court ordered INEC to conduct a fresh election for the Senatorial District within 90 days from the date of the judgment.

    Maduakolam stated in a supporting affidavit, that the 90-day timeline handed INEC by the court to conduct fresh elections elapsed on March11 this year and that no election was conducted by INEC.

    “I have read sections 1 to 158 of the Electoral Act 2010 and cannot find any provision fro extension of time to comply with court ordered elections,” he said. Maduakolam noted that for the past five month the Imo North Senatorial District, from where he hailed, has been denied representation at the Senate as a result of INEC’s failure to conduct the re-run election as ordered by INEC.

    The plaintiff wants the court to declare that the INEC has no powers to conduct the said Imo North Senatorila District, Okigwe outside the 90 days as ordered by the Court of Appeal, Owerri pursuant to Section 140(2) of the Electoral Act.

    He seeks an order of perpetual injunction restraining the 1st defendant from conducting or attempting to conduct any further re-run/fresh election into the Imo north Senatorial District till 2019, having failed to conduct the re-run election within the 90 days orcered by the court of Appeal in suit: CA/OW/EPT/SN/52/2015.

    Maduakolam equally wants an order directing the 2nd defendant to continue in office as the Senator representing Imo North Senatorial District since INEC has failed to conduct the fresh election within the timeline as ordered by the Court of Appeal, Owerri delivered on December 11, 2015 in suit No: CA/OW/EPT/SN/52/2015.

    Although none of the defendants has responded, the suit has been assigned to Justice John Tsoho, who has fixed May 4 for preliminary hearing.

  • FG plans massive review of electoral laws

    FG plans massive review of electoral laws

    The Attorney General of the Federation (AGF) and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami (SAN) said on Tuesday that the Federal Government will soon unveil plans for a major reform of the nation’s electoral laws.
    The AGF said this yesterday in Abuja while speaking at a stakeholders forum organised by the Nigeria Civil Society Situation Room, led by the Policy and Legal Advocacy Centre (PLAC).
     “This administration intends to carry out a comprehensive legal reform to address the challenges posed by some of our outdated electoral laws. My top priority as Attorney General of the Federation is to lay a solid foundation for a sustainable reform of the judicial sector where rule of law takes pre-eminence over and above rule of man.
    “We have also identified as top priority, the amendment of the Electoral Act and other laws in order to empower INEC and other similar bodies to deal with perpetrators of serious offences. We cannot rule out the possibility of the imposition of sanctions to restrain those found guilty of electoral violence from participating in the electoral process,” Malami said.
    Malami noted that the establishment of Electoral Mobile Court is equally a major electoral reform being considered by the President Buhari government, stressing that some of the gaps in the electoral laws have manifested in the recent decisions of the Supreme Court on some of the election petitions.
    “Also of concern to this administration are the increasing levels of electoral violence as seen in some of the recent held elections. It is my expectation that this stakeholders’ forum will come up with suggestions and proffer solutions to several of the challenges posed to the achievement of credible elections in Nigeria.
    “I have begun consultations with the leadership of the National Assembly and the judiciary to identify key laws and priority areas for reform. “Our priority areas will be clearly outlined in our justice sector reform that we will propose to the National Assembly and align it with their agenda in order to achieve reform within the tenure of this administration and in record time.
    “Taking from the gains of the 2015 general election, it will be important for us as a country to entrench a culture of democratic values that will strengthen our nation,” Malami said.
    He insisted that elections in the country must be conducted in a transparent and democratic manner as to be a source of inspiration to the African continent and show us as worthy example to be emulated by all.
    In this regard, it is our plan to ensure that our elections are competitive, inclusive, free and fair, for all to see”, adding that; “a democracy thrives and endures when the laws guiding the conduct of elections are well known and the citizenry are well informed of it.”
    Malami disclosed that the governing party as well as opposition parties must enjoy a level playing ground, so that competitive elections can be organised and all parties and candidates enjoy all of the democratic rights and freedoms contained in the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended) including the rights of freedom of speech, assembly, and movement.
    He explained that the nation’s democracy can only work and deliver accountable government, where elected officials see themselves as servants of the people who must subject themselves to credible periodic elections.
    In her opening remark, Chairman, House of Representatives Committee on Electoral Matters, Hajiya Aisha Dukku recalled that even though Nigeria conducted one of the most successful and credible polls in 2015, which represented a milestone; there is still room for a lot of improvements in the nation’s electoral process.
    She explained that this will ensure that the gains made in previous elections are consolidated, hinting that, “just before the elections, several amendments aimed at improving the legal framework were proposed, but the National Assembly could not complete the amendments process before the elections were conducted.”
    “The bills seeking to amend the Constitution and the Electoral Act were passed and forwarded to the President for assent only few days before the elections. It was also unfortunate that the country waited until the last months of the 7th Assembly to pass these amendments” she regretted.
    Also speaking, Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Professor Mahmoud Yakubu revealed that as at the last count, his Commission has conducted about 50 elections after the 2015 general polls, saying that sixty more elections would be held this weekend.
    He said sixty-eight of the elections will be held in the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) Area Council polls, while one State House of Assembly seat will be contested for in Osun state due to the death of its former occupant.
    The INEC boss commended the Situation Room for hosting over sixty civil society groups sharing ideas and experiences on election matters and proffering solutions.
  • Judge’s absence stalls ruling on legality of Dasuki’s detention

    Judge’s absence stalls ruling on legality of Dasuki’s detention

    The Absence of Justice Adeniyi Ademola of the Federal High Court, Abuja stalled the ruling scheduled fro yesterday on whether or not the continued detention of former National Security Adviser (NSA), Sambo Dasuki was legal.
    Dasuki, who is on trial before the court on charges of money laundering and illegal possession of firearms, had challenged his continued detention and urged the court to either quash the charge against him or halt proceedings indefinitely until he was released from detention.
    The ex-NSA, in a motion argued by his lawyer, Joseph Daudu (SAN), accused the prosecution of violating an earlier of the court, admitting him to bail. He urged the court not to further indulge the prosecution by allowing it to continue with proceedings in the case.
    Justice Ademola was expected to rule yesterday on whether or not Dasuki’s continued detention by the Department of State Services (DSS) was a violation of his earlier orders granting him bail and permitting him to travel abroad for medical reasons.
    When parties got to court yesterday, they were informed by court officials that the judge was not available.
    It was learnt that the judge’s absence was in relation to the court’s Easter vacation which was still on as at yesterday.
    No date has been fixed for the ruling as an official of the court said it was the prerogative of the judge only to determine when to schedule for judgement or ruling.
    Similar application by Dasuki had been rejected by two judges in earlier rulings.
    Justice Peter Affen of the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) had, in a ruling on March 4 this year, held thaT Dasuki’s application lacked merit.
    The judge further held that the order granting bail to the defendant (Dasuki) did not preclude him from being re-arrested by other agencies of the Federal Government in respect of other alleged crime.
    “Though, both the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) and the DSS are agencies of the Federal Government of Nigeria, they are established under separate enactments and vested with distinct legal persona, powers and responsibilities such that one is not liable for action or inaction of the other.
    “Even criminal prosecution is undertaken by them separately in the name of the Federal Government of Nigeria merely to facilitate the due administration of justice, which does not alter the mark of separate and distinct legal identities.
    “This being so, the inevitable conclusion to reach is that the applicant has not made out a proper case of disobedience of the order made by this court on December 21, 2015 and therefore there is no legal or factual basis upon which the court can prohibit the complainant from further prosecuting the instant charges not to mention any other charge before any other court as prayed by the second defendant.
    “The point has already been made that the order allegedly disobeyed or violated did not contemplate any government agency other than the EFCC and that this court did not restrain the arrest, the re-arrest or detention of the second defendant or any of the defendants for further offences when alleged against them,” the judge said.
    Justice Affen added that there was “no correlation” between the prayer sought by Dasuki to discharge him and the alleged disobedience of court order.
    “I have found no correlation whatsoever and none has been demonstrated between the alleged disobedience of court order and being discharged of the offences charged.
    “I take the considered view that even if the second defendant/applicant has succeeded in establishing the case of disobedience of the orders granted on December 21, 2015, and I have already held that he did not do so, that would not constitute valid grounds for discharging him of the offences preferred against him,” he said.
    On February 9 this year, Justice Hussein Baba Yusuf (also of the High Court of the FCT) held, in a ruling on   a similar application by Dasuki, held that the ex-NSA was in error in his argument that his continued detention was in breach of a subsisting order of the court.
  • FIRS director, mother of four arraigned over tax fraud

    FIRS director, mother of four arraigned over tax fraud

    • Granted N1m bail each
    A Deputy Director, Regional Tax Office of the Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS), Abumere Joseph Osagie and a mother of four, Jamila Ojora were arraigned on Thursday before the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Maitama.
    They were, in a 2-count charge filed against them by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) charged with criminal conspiracy and receipt of gratification.
    Osagie and  Ojora were said to have approached the Chancellor of Baze University, Abuja, Senator Datti with  a tax assessment of N20,029,496.00  on January 27, 2016,  through a letter of intent, which he paid.
    Senator Datti was said to have later requested for the assessment certificate, which the two allegedly  refused to issue him.
    The EFCC said rather than issue Datti with the assessment certificate, the defendants  allegedly demanded for N5million gratification.
    The commission said, in a bid to establish the legitimacy of of the defendants activities, marked N5million was delivered to Osagie through Ojora, in a sting operation, which led to her arrest. Ojora’s confession was said to have led to Osagie’s arrest.
    The offence contravenes Section 17(1)(a) and punishable under 17 (1) (c) of the Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Act, 2000.
    One of the counts reads:
    “Abumere Joseph Osagie and Jamila Ojora on or about January 27, 2016 in Abuja within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, corruptly accepted the sum of N5,000,000.00 (five million naira) from one Senator Ahmed Datti as a gift for having done a tax assessment for Baze University”.
    The two defendants pleaded not guilty to the charge yesterday when they were arraigned before Justice Olasunmbo Goodluck.
    Although prosecution lawyer, Joseph Uzoh opposed bail for the defendants, Justice Goodluck upheld the oral arguments for bail by defence lawyers – Mrs. J . O. Obono-Obla (for the 1st Osagie) and Samuel Monokpo (for Ojora) – and granted bail to the defendants.
    The judge ordered the defendants to be remanded in either in prison or the custody of the EFCC until they are able to perfect their bail.
    Justice Goodluck adjourned to April 27 for trial.
  • Supreme Court order: PDP seeks INEC’s compliance

    Supreme Court order: PDP seeks INEC’s compliance

    The Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) in Anambra State has written  the Chairman of Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Professor Mahmood Yakubu, demanding the issuance of certificates of return to all its candidates.
    The party’s Executive Committee led by Ejike Oguebego said it’s candidates include Chris Uba and others whose names were forwarded to INEC for different political offices in the state before the last general election.
    The Supreme Court, in its recent decision, upheld the Oguebego-led PDP as the authentic leadership of the party as against the Prince Ken Emeakayi-led faction.
    The Anambra PDP which accused INEC of being biased against the candidates it lawfully forwarded to it in the execution of various court judgments on the leadership matter of the party urged the electoral boss to do the right thing in accordance with the oaths of office he took to the effect that he would do “the right thing to all manners of people according to law without fear or favour, affection or ill-will”.
    The letter was written and endorsed by their lawyern A. C. Ozioko of the Law Rescue Chambers.
    The party anchored its request on the judgment of the Supreme Court delivered on February 14, 2016 which it said cleared the air on the fate of all the candidates whose names were forwarded to INEC by a factional leader of the party, Prince Ken Emeakayi and why the electoral umpire must issue certificate of return to Chief Chris Uba and others.
    It stated that should INEC chairman be in doubt as to the implications of its refusal to issue its candidates their certificates of return, it said that it had attached the ruling of the presiding justice of the Supreme Court on the day the issue of clarification of the apex court judgment was rested, Justice Nwali Sylvester Ngwuta to guide him.
    The eight-paragraph ruling signed by Justice Ngwuta specifically reads: “the judgment of this court delivered on 29th January, 2016 does not require any interpretation. This court allowed the appeal and set aside the judgment of the court below which had set aside the judgment of the Federal high court in favour of the appellants. The said judgment of the Federal high court was restored.
    “In any case, the reliefs sought in the motion did not relate to or emanate from the judgment of this court delivered on 29th January, 2016 in appeal no 37/2015.
    “When the Federal High Court granted the plaintiffs (now appellants) reliefs, the 2nd respondent (INEC) did not seek interpretation of the judgment of the High Court before it published the list submitted to it by the appellants as the candidates in the 2015 general election for the National Assembly.
    “The respondents then appealed to the court below and the said court set aide the judgment of the Federal high court. The 2nd respondent (INEC) did not seek interpretation of the judgment of the court below before it withdrew the appellants’ list which it had earlier published on the order of the Federal high court.
    “Why would the same 2nd respondent now applicant (INEC) ask for interpretation of the judgment that merely allowed the appeal which set aside the judgment of the Court of Appeal and restored the judgment of the Federal High Court delivered in favour of the appellants (now respondents in the motion?).
    “There is nothing to interpret in the judgment of this court. If the 2nd respondent (now applicant) needs interpretation, it is the restored judgment of the Federal High Court that it should interpret and not the judgment of this court which restored same.
    “From the above and the fuller reasons in the lead ruling, I also strike out the application for want of jurisdiction,” Justice Ngwuta said.
    The Anambra PDP therefore urged  INEC to obey the Supreme Court order as it relates to the authentic candidates of the PDP in the state the same way it obeyed the earlier orders given by both the Federal High Court and the Court of Appeal.
    It contended that INEC “cannot, at this moment, pick and choose which judgment of court it must comply with.”

  • 2010 bombing: FG discloses victims’ identity at Okah’s trial

    About six years after they were killed in the 2010 Independence Day bomb explosion in Abuja, the Federal Government yesterday disclosed the identity some of those killed in the incident.
    They are  Onnah Alfred‎, Romanus Alumonah, John Arua‎, Verty Bala‎, Joshua Umaru, Onyema Ozioko‎ and Haruna Tijani.
    The identity of the deceased are contained in a bundle of documents tendered on Thursday by ead prosecution lawyer, Alex Iziyon (SAN) at the resumed hearing in the trial of Charles Okah and Obi Nwanbueze, accused of being behind the bomb explosion.
    The documents tendered included certified true copies of contact details of the bomb blast victims,  official receipts issued by the National Hospital, a document titled, ‘Form B -Death report to coroner, particulars of coroner and particulars of deceased.
    ‎Others are certified true copies of post mortem examination, order for post-mortem examination, report of medical practitioner and warrants to bury the deceased persons.
    The prosecution tendered the documents through a witness: Dr. Jubrin Paul, identified as the Chief Pathologist of the National Hospital in Abuja. He testified as a subpoenaed witness.
    Led in evidence by Iziyon, Paul  tendered a list of victims of the incident, including the dead and survivors.
    Defence lawyers, Samuel Zibiri (SAN) and Oghenenovo Otemu, did not oppose the court’s admission of the documents as exhibits.
    Paul, who testified as the 10th prosecution witness, put the number of those who died at seven.
    He said although the corpses were brought in at the National Hospital on the day of the incident, the autopsy examination was conducted on them on October 12.
    At Cross-examination Pauls denied participating in the evacuation in the corpses.
     Paul also  said, “Investigative police officer came with a request for  autopsy which bore the names of the deceased persons”.
    The witness said  the corpses could still be identified when they were brought to the hospital as they were not burnt beyond recognition.
    ‎The prosecution also called Fatai Adeyinka,  who sold the Mazda 626 Salon car which was allegedly used to convey the bombs to the scene of the incident on October 1, 2010.
    Adeyinka, who testified as the 11th prosecution witness, described himself as an auto-electrician, and  said he also sells fairly used cars.
    The witness said the Mazda car used for the October 2010 belonged to one Mr. Ogundimu.
    Adeyinka said he sold the car on behalf of Ogundimu to the second accused person (Obi)‎ on September 17, 2010.
    At cross-examination, Adeyinka confirmed that the change of ownership document of the car was not signed by the alleged buyer (Nwabueze).
    Justice Gabriel Kolawole has adjourned further proceedings to March 14.
  • Dasuki’s aide begs Abuja court for bail

    Dasuki’s aide begs Abuja court for bail

    • Court to rule Monday

    A High Court of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) in Jabi has fixed March 14 for ruling on an application for bail brought by Colonel Nicholas Ashinze, former Special Assistant (SA) to ex-National Security Adviser (NSA), Sambo Dasuki.

    Justice Yusuf Halilu gave the date on Tuesday after listening to Ashinze’s lawyer, Mike Ozekhome (SAN) argued his client’s application. The respondents, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), the Chief of Army Staff (CAS) and Nigeria Army were not represented.

    Ashinze, in his fundamental rights enforcement application, wants the court to, among others, declare illegal, “his arrest and continued detention from 23rd December, 2015 till date, by combined operatives of the EFCC and the Nigeria Army, without being given any reason and without granting him administrative bail within 24 hours, or 48 hours of his arrest and detention.

    He wants the court to order the respondents to release him, his personal effects, including documents and other items, which he claimed were unlawfully seized from him without any warrant, during his arrest and continued detention since 23rd December.

    Alternatively, Ashinze is seeking an order granting him bail on self-recognizance or in the most liberal terms as the court may deem fit in the peculiar circumstances of this case. He also wants the court to direct the respondents to tender a public apology to him and pay him N500million as exemplary damages for the alleged violation of his rights.

     

  • Why we sanctioned Wike’s election – Supreme Court

    Why we sanctioned Wike’s election – Supreme Court

    The Supreme Court on Friday gave reasons for its January 27 judgment upholding the election of Rivers State Governor, Nyesom Wike.

     The apex court said the decision was informed by its findings that the petitioners at the tribunal – the candidate of the All progressives Congress (APC) in the election, Dakuku Peterside and his party – failed to prove their case of malpractices and non-compliance as required.

    A seven-man panel of the court, led by the Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Mahmud Mohammed, held that the election petitions tribunal and Court of Appeal, which earlier voided the election, were wrong to have based their decisions on the petitioners claim that the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) officials’ failed to adhere to the commission’s manual, guidelines and directives on the exclusive use of the card reader for accreditation and the hearsay evidence presented by the petitioners.

    The court reiterated its position that card reader was not a sufficient replacement for manual accreditation. It further held  non-compliance with INEC’s manual and guidelines by its officials in the conduct of election was not a sufficient ground to void the election.

    The apex court also believed that Peterside and his party failed to discharge the burden of proof placed on them having listed alleged misconduct including violence, disenfranchisement and non-compliance with election guidelines.

    The court held that the tribunal denied Wike and his party, the right to fair hearing by allowing a wrong panel to deliver ruling on an application they filed, challenging the competence of the petition.

    Justice Kudirat Kekere-Ekun, while giving reasons for the position she took in the lead judgment, held that it was wrong for Justice Suleiman Ambrosa, the later chairman of the tribunal, to have chaired the panel that delivered the ruling on the application by Wike and PDP when he was not the chairman when the application was argued.

    Of the 11 issues considered in the appeal, Justice Kekere-Ekun resolved seven in favour of Wike and the PDP and four in favour of Peterside and APC who were listed as respondents in the appeal marked: SC/1002/2015.

    The issues resolved in favour of Peterside and APC were those related to preliminary issues of service and locus standi.

    [news_box style=”2″ display=”tag” link_target=”_blank” tag=”Nyesom Wike, Dakuku Peterside” count=”8″ show_more=”on” show_more_type=”link”]

  • CCT: Saraki knows fate today

    CCT: Saraki knows fate today

    [dropcap]C[/dropcap]an the chairman and  a member of the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) conduct proceedings where the Constitution says it must be constituted by two members and a chairman?

    Was the CCT wrong to have assumed jurisdiction over the trial of Senate President, Bukola Saraki, charged with false asset declaration, without one of its members?

    These are some of the issues to be decided today by the Supreme Court as it delivers judgment in the appeal brought before it by Saraki.

    Saraki appealed the October 30, 2015, judgment of the Court of Apeal, Abuja, which dismissed his appeal challenging the jurisdiction of the CCT to try him for alleged false declaration of assets.

    Saraki was arraigned before the CCT on September 22, last year on a 13-count after initial resistance, prompting the tribunal to issue a bench warrant for his arrest.

    Although he pleaded not guilty to the charge, he not only challenged the power of the CCT to try him, but the composition of the tribunal and the legality of the charge, which he said was not endorsed by the attorney general of the federation (AGF).

    In its October 30 judgment, a three-man panel of the appellate court, in a split decision of two-to-one held that Saraki’s appeal lacked merit.

    Justices Moore Adumein and Mohammed Mustapha resolved the six issues in favour of the respondents, including the CCT, while Justice Joseph Ekanem dissented on one issue, which was whether an official of the Federal Ministry of Justice was competent to endorse a charge in the absence of the AGF.

     While Justices Adumein (who read the lead judgment) and Mustapha dismissed the appeal, Justice Ekanem upheld the appeal, discharged and quashed the Senate president’s trial before the CCT.

    Justice Adumein rejected Saraki’s arguments, including his contention that the CCT, being an inferior body to the Federal High Court, ought not to have proceeded with his trial despite an order by the court.

    He held that Saraki’s complaint about not being personally served with the charge “was of no consequence having appeared and taken his plea before the tribunal.”

    On whether two of the CCT’s three members formed a quorum, Justice Adumein, noted a “lacuna”  in the law,  but held that the Interpretation Act provided that a member of the tribunal and its chairman could sit and conduct proceedings.

    Justice Adumein upheld the argument by the respondents’ lawyer, Rotimi Jacobs (SAN),  that by Section 28 of the Interpretation Act, two members of the tribunal (including the chairman) form a quorum to validly conduct its proceedings

    He also held that by Section 174(1) and (2) of the Constitution, where there is no substantive AGF, any law officer in the Office of the AGF could validly file charges.

    On the tribunal not being a court, Justice Adumein held that “there is no inherent difference between the tribunal and the court.”