The Nation Newspaper

Tag: Justice Walter Onnoghen

  • NJC abstains from considering allegations against Onnoghen, Muhammad

    The National Judicial Council on Wednesday abstained from considering allegations relating to assets declaration that were levelled against the suspended Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Walter Onnoghen.

    The decision which is contained in a statement, issued by Mr Soji Oye, Director, Information, NJC.

    Oye said the council took the decision at an Emergency Meeting to consider the Report of the Five-Man Committee constituted to investigate the allegations of misconduct made against Onnoghen and Justice Tanko Muhammad.

    “Council decided that the allegations relating to assets declaration that were levelled against Onnoghen, were subjudice and therefore abstained from considering them.

    “Council reached a decision on the petitions written by economic and Financial Crimes Commission and others and conveyed its decision to President Mubammadu Buhari, GCFR.

    Read also: Breaking:NJC concludes probe of Onnoghen, Muhammad, silent on findings

    “Council also resolved that, by the nature of the decision reached, it would be inappropriate to publicise it before conveying it to President”, Oye said in the statement.

    NAN reports that on Feb 11, the council set up a preliminary complaints assessment committee to review the responses given to it by Onnoghen, and Muhammad who is acting in his stead.

    Onnoghen is accused of failing to fully declare his assets, while Muhammad is facing allegations of misconduct.
    The NJC said it reconvened and resolved to constitute into the Preliminary Complaints Assessment Committee in accordance with Regulation 17 of the National Judicial Council Judicial Discipline Regulations, 2017. (NAN)

  • Assets decalaration: Onnoghen opens defence with driver as 1st witness

    THE suspended Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN) Justice Walter Onnoghen opened his defence yesterday by calling his driver, Lawal Busari, as his first defence witness.

    Justice Onnoghen is being tried on a six count charge in which he is accused of breaching the code of conduct for public officers for allegedly failing to declare his assets.

    Led in evidence by lead defence lawyer Adegboyega Awomolo (SAN), Busari gave details of how he drove his boss, the defendant, to the Code of Conduct Bureau (CCB) Office on July 28, 2010, to obtain the assets declaration form and how he paid N200 for the defendants’ assets declaration on November 3, 2010.

    Busari, who said he is 60 years old, described himself as the Chief Driver/Mechanic at the Supreme Court.

    When Awomolo moved to tender the receipt issued Busari for the N200, lead prosecution lawyer, Aliyu Umar (SAN), objected to it, being admitted by the tribunal.

    Umar doubted the authenticity of the receipt on the grounds that the “revenue number did not appear on it.”

    He added that since the witnesses was not the maker of the document, he was not the proper person to tender it.

    REad also: Onnoghen’s travail shows Judiciary is not independent, says Awomolo

    Tribunal Chairman Danladi Umar overruled Umar’s objection by admitting the document in evidence, promising that his court would determine the weight to be attached to it.

    The defence said by the witness’ testimony, it sought to puncture the prosecution’s charge that the defendant did not declare his assets from 2005 and 2016.

    Busari added that while with Onnoghen at the CCB office on July 28, 2010, the suspended CJN also asked him to obtain his own assets declaration form, which he did.

    The witness said he submitted his completed form and that of his boss at the CCB office in Asokoro, Abuja on November 4, 2010.

    Busari added: “I don’t know the name of the person who collected the forms from me, but I know she was a woman, who was light in complexion.

    “She received my form and that of my lordship. I was not given any acknowledgment copy that day. I was asked to come for it when it is ready.”

    Busari said he later went back and received the acknowledgment slip for his own submitted form.

    Awomolo sought to tender the acknowledgment slip issued to the witness by the CCB, a move the prosecution lawyer objected on the grounds that the document was not relevant to the proceedings.

    The tribunal Chairman agreed to Umar’s objection and rejected the document.

    While being cross-examined by the prosecution lawyer, Busari admitted being the defendant’s driver since 1999 while he was still a Justice of the Court of Appeal.

    Buhari said he drove him to obtain his asset declaration form in 2010, but that he did not go with the defendant to the CCB office when he obtained the form for the assets declaration which the judge did after his appointed to the Supreme Court bench.

    About his educational qualification, Busari said he obtained his West African Examination Council’s certificate in 2004.

    At a point, the lead prosecution lawyer asked Busari if he was reading from a piece of paper.

    The witness admitted the he has a piece of paper in his hand, following which the tribunal chairman directed that the paper be retrieved from the witness for the tribunal’s examination.

    An official of the tribunal took the paper from the witness and handed it to the tribunal chairman. After he read through the paper, the prosecution lawyer applied that it be returned to the witness.

    When asked who wrote what was contained in the paper, the witness said: “My Lord, I wrote it myself. It is my hand writing and it contained facts about me”.

    The defence did not object to the application by the prosecution to tender the paper in evidence, following which the tribunal admitted it in evidence and marked it as Exhibit 7.

    Busari told the tribunal that he also has Trade Test Certificates, Grade 1, 2, and 3. He described the defendant as a good man, saying he was attached to the defendant as a driver when he was still a Justice of the Court of Appeal.

    The witness added: “He has done so many things I can’t forget. When we went to Jos for tribunal, I wanted to go to the mosque and I told him, he asked me to take his official car, I was shocked.

    “Some of the policemen standing by him said your driver? He said yes, let him go, he is going to pray for me and everybody. I took the car and went to mosque and came back.

    “The second thing, anytime I am praying and he needs me. If he is informed that I am praying, he will say please don’t disturb him”.

    Earlier, upon an application by Awomolo, the tribunal summoned a director at the CCB, Mrs. Theresa Nwafor in relation to the ongoing trial

    The CCT chairman issued a subpoena on Mrs. Nwafor to appear before the tribunal tomorrow by 10am.

    The tribunal had, on March 29, 2019 rejected Onnoghen’s no-case submission and adjourned till yesterday for him to open his defence.

    At the resumption of proceedings yesterday, Awomolo informed the tribunal that the defence intends to call between two and three witnesses.

    He said one of the proposed witnesses is Mrs. Nwafor. He proceeded that an order be made for the issuance and service of a subpoena on Mrs. Nwafor, summoning her to appear before the tribunal to testify in the case of the defence.

    The lead prosecution lawyer did not object to Awomolo’s application, following which the tribunal chairman granted it and ordered that Mrs. Nwafor appear before the tribunal at its sitting tomorrow.

  • Defence team kicks as conduct tribunal orders Onnoghen to open defence Monday

    Proceedings ended abruptly and on a rowdy note yesterday at the resumed hearing in the trial of suspended Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Walter Onnoghen, before the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) as his lawyers protested what they viewed as the highhandedness of the tribunal Chairman, Danladi Umar.

    Adegboyega Awomolo (SAN), who led the team of lawyers for Onnoghen, accused the CCT Chairman of oppressing the defendant and his lawyers when, shortly after delivering a ruling on the no-case submission made by the defendant, Umar insisted that the suspended CJN must open his defence on Monday (April 1, 2019).

    Awomolo told Umar: “Stop oppressing us. This is not justice.” He repeated the statements about three times when the CCT Chairman refused to yield to his appeals that the defendant be afforded sufficient time to prepare for his defence and be allowed to return next week Friday.

    While Awomolo was still on his feet, pleading with the tribunal Chairman to reconsider his position, Umar stood up, announced that the proceedings had been adjourned till Monday and walked away, leaving the two other members of the tribunal to scamper after him.

    As Umar and the other members of the tribunal walked out of the tribunal’s sitting venue, many lawyers in the defence team shouted in protest, saying: “This is not how to do justice.”

    A dejected Awomolo, who appeared to have been taken aback by Umar’s conduct, said: “If this is justice, then, God bless Nigeria,” a statement he repeated about four times.

    Proceedings had commenced earlier in the day on a friendly note, with the tribunal Chairman exchanging pleasantries with lawyers to both the prosecution and defence when the case was called.

    Shortly after, Awomolo argued the defendant’s no-case submission and urged the tribunal to discharge and acquit his client on the grounds that the prosecution was unable to establish a prima facie case against the defendant.

    Read also: Protest as CCT orders Onnoghen to open defence on April 1

    Awomolo faulted the entire evidence led by the prosecution and exhibits tendered and urged the tribunal to hold that it is not worth it calling on Onoghen to defend himself.

    He said the entire proceedings had become a nullity because the process leading to the commencement of the trial did not comply with the procedure provided for in the CCB’s Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) 2017.

    Awomolo made a lengthy submission, during which he cited many decided cases, including a 2013 ruling by the tribunal (a copy of which he later offered the tribunal), urged the tribunal to be guided by past decisions.

    At the conclusion of his submission, the CCT Chairman commended Awomolo for his brilliant and “well-articulated” argument.

    Prosecution lawyer, Aliyu Umar, offered a counter-argument and urged the tribunal to reject Onnoghen’s no-case-submission and order him to enter defence.

    The prosecution lawyer said the prosecution’s case was simple and relates mainly to the defendant’s failure to declare his assets.

    He said: “We are not accusing him of having $300m in his accounts. What we are saying is that he failed to declare his assets on his appointment as Justice of Supreme Court and that he operated domiciliary accounts since 2009 and 2010 without declaring them.”

    After listening to the arguments by parties, the tribunal Chairman, to the dismay of most of those at the proceedings, announced that ruling would be delivered in two hours’ time.

    When the tribunal resumed around 2pm, Umar read his ruling, in which he rejected the submission by Awomolo.

    He rejected Awomolo’s argument that the process leading to the filing of the charge was not in accordance with the procedure provided in the CCB’s SOP.

    Umar noted that the SOP, which was a creation of the former board of the CCB, led by Sam Saba, was no longer in use because it had been abused by that board.

    CCT Chairman said the operations of the CCB was currently being guided by the Constitution since it has discarded the SOP, which he said the former board abused.

    The CCT Chairman accused the defendants of deploying technicalities to prevent the hearing of the case despite the glaring evidence, suggesting that the defendant has a case to answer.

    Umar said the tribunal was not bound by technicality, but was interested in always ensuring justice.

    He refused the no-case submission and said the tribunal was convinced that the prosecution had established a prima facie case, warranting the defendant to enter his defence if he has any.

    The tribunal Chairman added: “The defendant himself made a written admission, without duress, that he forgot to declare the domiciliary accounts maintained in Standard Chartered Bank. That is, the euro account, the dollar account, the pound sterling account and the two naira accounts.

    “His confessional statement is more than enough to warrant the defendant to enter defence, if he has any.

    “The tribunal shall never be swayed from exercising justice, no matter whosoever appeared before it, irrespective of his/her status in life. After all, all of us are from the same source – dust.”

    Umar added that by the evidence led by the prosecution through its three witnesses, and the documents tendered, including the statement by the defendant, “where he confessed that he forgot the accounts and that he made mistakes in not declaring the accounts,” are sufficient to make the tribunal demand that the defendant defend himself against the charges.

    He said the need for the defendant to defend himself was “to clear his name, because the name has been tainted so much.” He proceeded to reject the no-case submission and ordered the defendant to “enter a defence.”

    At the conclusion of the ruling, Awomolo applied that a certified true copy (CTC) of the ruling be made available to the defendant to enable him prepare for his defence. Awomolo prayed the court to allow the defendant return next week Friday for his defence.

    The tribunal Chairman assured Awomolo that the tribunal’s registry will make the ruling available to him before the close of work yesterday. He directed the defendant to return on Monday for his defence; a decision the defence lawyer pleaded with Umar to reconsider.

    Awomolo pleaded with the tribunal Chairman to remember that the Constitution provides that a defendant was entitled to adequate time and materials to prepare for his defence.

    While Awomolo was still on his feet, appealing to the tribunal Chairman to reconsider his position in relation to the next adjourned date, Umar, who appeared unmoved by all that the lead defence lawyer was saying, sprang up from his seat and said: “That is the decision of the tribunal. Come and open your defence next Monday. The case stands adjourned to Monday.”

    At that point, Awomolo stopped begging the tribunal Chairman and told him to stop oppressing the defendant and his lawyers.

    Umar did not respond to Awomolo. He simply turned away and walked straight out of the tribunal’s sitting venue, leaving everyone dazed.

    As Umar walked away and other members of the tribunal in toe, a dejected Awomolo said: “If this is justice, I pray for Nigeria.”

    He later had a little altercation with the lead prosecution lawyer, Aliyu Umar, who he accused of not intervening when the tribunal Chairman was imposing a date on the defendant. Umar shot back at Awomolo, saying he did nothing wrong.

    The suspended CJN is being tried on a six-count charge of non-disclosure of assets. He has however appealed yesterday’s ruling of the tribunal rejecting his no-case submission.

    In the notice of appeal filed at the registry of the CCT, shortly after the ruling, the defendant raised five grounds of appeal, in which he faulted the tribunal’s decision and urged the Court of Appeal to, among others, set aside the ruling.

  • Defence team kicks as conduct tribunal orders Onnoghen to open defence Monday

    Proceedings ended abruptly and on a rowdy note yesterday at the resumed hearing in the trial of suspended Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Walter Onnoghen, before the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) as his lawyers protested what they viewed as the highhandedness of the tribunal Chairman, Danladi Umar.

    Adegboyega Awomolo (SAN), who led the team of lawyers for Onnoghen, accused the CCT Chairman of oppressing the defendant and his lawyers when, shortly after delivering a ruling on the no-case submission made by the defendant, Umar insisted that the suspended CJN must open his defence on Monday (April 1, 2019).

    Awomolo told Umar: “Stop oppressing us. This is not justice.” He repeated the statements about three times when the CCT Chairman refused to yield to his appeals that the defendant be afforded sufficient time to prepare for his defence and be allowed to return next week Friday.

    While Awomolo was still on his feet, pleading with the tribunal Chairman to reconsider his position, Umar stood up, announced that the proceedings had been adjourned till Monday and walked away, leaving the two other members of the tribunal to scamper after him.

    As Umar and the other members of the tribunal walked out of the tribunal’s sitting venue, many lawyers in the defence team shouted in protest, saying: “This is not how to do justice.”

    A dejected Awomolo, who appeared to have been taken aback by Umar’s conduct, said: “If this is justice, then, God bless Nigeria,” a statement he repeated about four times.

    Proceedings had commenced earlier in the day on a friendly note, with the tribunal Chairman exchanging pleasantries with lawyers to both the prosecution and defence when the case was called.

    Shortly after, Awomolo argued the defendant’s no-case submission and urged the tribunal to discharge and acquit his client on the grounds that the prosecution was unable to establish a prima facie case against the defendant.

    Awomolo faulted the entire evidence led by the prosecution and exhibits tendered and urged the tribunal to hold that it is not worth it calling on Onoghen to defend himself.

    He said the entire proceedings had become a nullity because the process leading to the commencement of the trial did not comply with the procedure provided for in the CCB’s Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) 2017.

    Awomolo made a lengthy submission, during which he cited many decided cases, including a 2013 ruling by the tribunal (a copy of which he later offered the tribunal), urged the tribunal to be guided by past decisions.

    At the conclusion of his submission, the CCT Chairman commended Awomolo for his brilliant and “well-articulated” argument.

    Prosecution lawyer, Aliyu Umar, offered a counter-argument and urged the tribunal to reject Onnoghen’s no-case-submission and order him to enter defence.

    The prosecution lawyer said the prosecution’s case was simple and relates mainly to the defendant’s failure to declare his assets.

    He said: “We are not accusing him of having $300m in his accounts. What we are saying is that he failed to declare his assets on his appointment as Justice of Supreme Court and that he operated domiciliary accounts since 2009 and 2010 without declaring them.”

    After listening to the arguments by parties, the tribunal Chairman, to the dismay of most of those at the proceedings, announced that ruling would be delivered in two hours’ time.

    When the tribunal resumed around 2pm, Umar read his ruling, in which he rejected the submission by Awomolo.

    He rejected Awomolo’s argument that the process leading to the filing of the charge was not in accordance with the procedure provided in the CCB’s SOP.

    Umar noted that the SOP, which was a creation of the former board of the CCB, led by Sam Saba, was no longer in use because it had been abused by that board.

    CCT Chairman said the operations of the CCB was currently being guided by the Constitution since it has discarded the SOP, which he said the former board abused.

    The CCT Chairman accused the defendants of deploying technicalities to prevent the hearing of the case despite the glaring evidence, suggesting that the defendant has a case to answer.

    Read also: Protest as CCT orders Onnoghen to open defence on April 1

    Umar said the tribunal was not bound by technicality, but was interested in always ensuring justice.

    He refused the no-case submission and said the tribunal was convinced that the prosecution had established a prima facie case, warranting the defendant to enter his defence if he has any.

    The tribunal Chairman added: “The defendant himself made a written admission, without duress, that he forgot to declare the domiciliary accounts maintained in Standard Chartered Bank. That is, the euro account, the dollar account, the pound sterling account and the two naira accounts.

    “His confessional statement is more than enough to warrant the defendant to enter defence, if he has any.

    “The tribunal shall never be swayed from exercising justice, no matter whosoever appeared before it, irrespective of his/her status in life. After all, all of us are from the same source – dust.”

    Umar added that by the evidence led by the prosecution through its three witnesses, and the documents tendered, including the statement by the defendant, “where he confessed that he forgot the accounts and that he made mistakes in not declaring the accounts,” are sufficient to make the tribunal demand that the defendant defend himself against the charges.

    He said the need for the defendant to defend himself was “to clear his name, because the name has been tainted so much.” He proceeded to reject the no-case submission and ordered the defendant to “enter a defence.”

    At the conclusion of the ruling, Awomolo applied that a certified true copy (CTC) of the ruling be made available to the defendant to enable him prepare for his defence. Awomolo prayed the court to allow the defendant return next week Friday for his defence.

    The tribunal Chairman assured Awomolo that the tribunal’s registry will make the ruling available to him before the close of work yesterday. He directed the defendant to return on Monday for his defence; a decision the defence lawyer pleaded with Umar to reconsider.

    Awomolo pleaded with the tribunal Chairman to remember that the Constitution provides that a defendant was entitled to adequate time and materials to prepare for his defence.

    While Awomolo was still on his feet, appealing to the tribunal Chairman to reconsider his position in relation to the next adjourned date, Umar, who appeared unmoved by all that the lead defence lawyer was saying, sprang up from his seat and said: “That is the decision of the tribunal. Come and open your defence next Monday. The case stands adjourned to Monday.”

    At that point, Awomolo stopped begging the tribunal Chairman and told him to stop oppressing the defendant and his lawyers.

    Umar did not respond to Awomolo. He simply turned away and walked straight out of the tribunal’s sitting venue, leaving everyone dazed.

    As Umar walked away and other members of the tribunal in toe, a dejected Awomolo said: “If this is justice, I pray for Nigeria.”

    He later had a little altercation with the lead prosecution lawyer, Aliyu Umar, who he accused of not intervening when the tribunal Chairman was imposing a date on the defendant. Umar shot back at Awomolo, saying he did nothing wrong.

    The suspended CJN is being tried on a six-count charge of non-disclosure of assets. He has however appealed yesterday’s ruling of the tribunal rejecting his no-case submission.

    In the notice of appeal filed at the registry of the CCT, shortly after the ruling, the defendant raised five grounds of appeal, in which he faulted the tribunal’s decision and urged the Court of Appeal to, among others, set aside the ruling.

  • BREAKING: CCT: Tribunal orders Onnoghen to defend charges

    The Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) has rejected the no-case submission made in his trial by suspended Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Walter Onnoghen.

    CCT Tribunal Chairman, Danladi Umar, in a ruling, said the prosecution has provided sufficient evidence to establish a prima facie case against the defendant to warrant his being called to enter his defence.

    Umar referred to a confessional statement made by the defendant in which he admitted omitting to declare the five domiciliary accounts he has been operating in Standard Chartered Bank since 20009.

    The CCT Chairman said the confessional statement was sufficient to warrant the tribunal to ask the defendant to enter his defence if he has any.

    Umar rejected the no-case submission and ordered the defendant to enter a defence against the six-count charge of non-declaration of assets brought against him by the Code of Conduct Bureau (CCB).

    Proceedings in the tribunal later went rowdy when after concluding his ruling, Umar adjourned to Monday (April 1, 2019) for the defendant to open his defence.

    Many lawyers in the defence team shouted in protest when Umar ignored appeals by lead defence lawyer, Adegboyega Awomolo (SAN) that April 1 was too short for the defendant to adequately prepare for his defence.

    While Awomolo was still on his feet, asking the tribunal Chairman to allow the defendant sufficient time to prepare, Umar stood up and walked away, leaving other members of the tribunal to scamper after him.

    A dejected Awomolo accused Umar of oppressing the defence.

    As Umar and the two other members of the tribunal walked away, Awomolo said: “If this is justice, then, God bless Nigeria.”

    Detail shortly…

  • Breaking: Onnoghen likely to face fresh criminal charges

    The suspended Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Walter Onnoghen, may face two fresh trials on alleged huge deposits on his accounts.

    There were indications that Onnoghen might be tried for alleged several breaches of the criminal and anti-corruption laws, including money laundering, bribery and tax evasion.

    The latest cases also border on alleged strange deposits in his accounts and cash gifts from some Senior Advocates of Nigeria( SANs).

    It was learnt that the Federal Government has delayed the arraignment of the CJN in deference to the constitutional provisions on the National Judicial Council (NJC).

    The constitution stipulates that such allegations against a judicial officer should first be presented to the NJC.

    The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) has submitted a petition and a comprehensive report on Onnoghen’s accounts to the NJC.

    A top government official, who spoke in confidence with select newsmen, said there are three dimensions to the allegations against Onnoghen.

    He said apart from the trial of Onnoghen at the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT), there might be two other cases against him.

    The source said the suspended CJN might be arraigned before a High Court of Justice very soon.

    The source said: “When President Muhammadu Buhari decided to suspend Chief Justice Walter Onnoghen on the 25th of January, 2019, it was in response to serious allegations of irregularities, illegalities and criminal conduct contained in petitions submitted against the top judicial officer, and indeed some findings of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), which not only substantiated those petitions but threw up even more damning facts.

    “Since then, there have been several public revelations and judicial proceedings which are sometimes confusing to members of the general public.”

     “For clarity, there are two different cases currently ongoing before constituted panels and a separate ethical issue in the public domain,

    “The first point of focus has been the failure of the Chief Judge to declare his assets immediately after taking office and every four years thereafter, as required by the 1999 Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land, and the Code of Code of Conduct Bureau and Tribunal Act.

    “This particular illegality has been admitted in writing by the Chief Justice himself and is a matter for criminal prosecution now before the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT).

    “But we must note that because of its specialised nature, CCT has a narrow jurisdiction and the case before it is confined to the issues of asset declaration, failure to declare assets as required by law and false declaration of assets.

    “That is what the CCT had been hearing since charges were first filed against the CJN on the 10th of January, 2019.

    “The prosecution recently closed its case and lawyers to the suspended CJN are now to open the defence or make a no case submission. Just for clarity, it is worth emphasizing that the CCT will only treat issues relating assets declaration.”

    Read also: Onnoghen: No allegations of $3m, 55 houses before tribunal – Prosecutor

    The source gave insights into the new cases against the suspended CJN.

    He added: “The more interesting aspect of the suspended CJN’s dilemma involves allegations of several breaches of the criminal and anti-corruption laws, including money laundering, bribery and tax evasion.

    “It is alleged, for instance, that the suspended CJN is the owner of some domiciliary accounts primarily funded through US dollar cash deposits made by himself.

    “More disturbing is the pattern of deposits which, according to EFCC, were made in a manner inconsistent with financial transparency and the code of conduct for public officials.

    “These include instances of repeated cash deposits of 10,000 US dollars each, totaling close to two million dollars.

    “These serious allegations would ordinarily have gone to the High Court for prosecution, but for a case precedent which stipulates that such allegations against a judicial officer should first be presented to the National Judicial Council, more or less an internal disciplinary panel for erring judicial officers, before being prosecuted in a criminal court.

    “The allegations of unexplained wealth, huge cash deposits being made into the suspended CJ’s Naira, dollar and pound sterling accounts directly from the court and well beyond his estacode and other allowances; unexplained payments into the suspended CJN’s account by lawyers who at the same time were appearing before him for adjudication, etc, are currently being handled by the NJC and would be filed in court after the NJC has made its decision on them.”

    Responding to a question, the top source said: “We must not miss the point that EFCC is also a petitioner against the suspended CJN.

    “After carrying out an extensive investigation, some of the findings submitted by the Commission are truly shocking.

    “For instance, there are findings to the effect that the CJN allegedly received a Mercedes Benz car and dollar cash deposits from Joe Agi, appearing, who is a Senior Advocate.

    “Worse still, the CJN is shown to have received cash gifts directly into his bank accounts from several other senior advocates.

    “These implicating cash transactions were going on, in dollar and Naira, even up to 2017 and 2018.

    “Even as the world eagerly awaits the decision of NJC on these matters, it is pertinent to emphasize that the conclusion of the cases before the CCT and NJC is not likely to be the end of the matter. Criminal charges are still to be filed in court.”

  • Onnoghen: No allegations of $3m, 55 houses before tribunal – Prosecutor

    Mr. Aliyu Umar (SAN), the lead prosecutor in the trial of the suspended Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Walter Onnoghen, said yesterday that the Federal Government did not table allegations of undeclared $3million against Onnoghen before the Code of Conduct Tribunal.

    He also said all the six charges against Onnoghen made no references to 55 houses.

    Government, he said, only accused Onnoghen of breaching the Code of Conduct Act with his failure to declare and disclose five Standard Chartered Bank’s Statement of Accounts in his Asset Declaration Form.

    He said the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) wrote a separate petition to the National Judicial Council (NJC) on some accounts and issues on inflows into Onnoghen’s accounts.

    The Nation gathered yesterday that the EFCC had quizzed the driver to the CJN, Mr. Emmanuel Essien as part of its ongoing probe.

    Essien was released after his interrogation by the operatives of the anti-graft commission.

    Umar, who spoke exclusively with our correspondent, said: “There is a lot of falsehood in the public space which I need to correct. The government did not file complaints bordering on $3million and 55 houses against Onnoghen before the Code of Conduct Tribunal.

    “I am aware that the EFCC wrote a separate petition to the NJC on some alleged infractions, including the accumulated $3million in Onnoghen’s accounts but those allegations are not before the CCT. The NJC is handling this matter separately.

    “There is a deliberate attempt to mislead the public by using the proceedings at the tribunal to address the petition before the NJC. They are even alleging that the prosecution could not prove its case. There was a distortion of the proceedings of the tribunal to fit a propaganda focus.

    “The case before the tribunal is just about failure to declare five accounts and alleged violation of the Code of Conduct Act. The same figures being twisted in the public space were the exhibits presented to the tribunal by the prosecution to prove its case against Onnoghen.

    “The Exhibits the government presented to the tribunal were as follows:

    • CCB4o, CCB4p, CCB4q for Onnoghen’s Euro Account No. 93001062686 with NUBAN No. 5001062686 with a balance of $10, 187.18(USD) as at 11th January 2019
    • CCB4r, CCB4s, CCB4t and CCB4u for Onnoghen’s Pound Sterling Account No. 285001062679 with NUBAN No. 5001062679 with a balance of £13, 730.70 as at 11th January 2019
    • CCB4v, CCB4w, CCB4x, CCB4y and CCB4z, CCB4za, CCB4zb, CCB4zc, CCB4zd, CCB4ze, CCB4zf for Onnoghen’s Dollar Account No. 0001062650 with a balance of $63, 832.99 USD as at 11th January 2019.
    • CCB4zg, CCBzh, CCB4zi, CCB4zj and CCB4zk for Onnoghen’s Naira NUBAN Account No. 0001062667 with a balance of N2, 556, 019. 25 as at 11th January 2019.
    • CCB4zl, CCB4zm, CCB4zn, CCB4zo and CCB4zp and CCB4zq, for Onnoghen’s Nigerian Naira NUBAN Account No. 5000162693 with a balance of N12, 852, 580.52 as at 11th January 2019.

    “Any Nigerian is free to apply for a copy of the charges against Onnoghen at the CCT and he or she will know that they were explicit.

    Quoting from “Further affidavit and Better Affidavit before the tribunal, Umar said: “We submit that there are two important reasons to be observed from this case against the defendant.

    “These reasons are as follows:  (1) The complainant no doubt is the body responsible for code of conducts of the public servants in Nigeria. (2) That the depositions and exhibits attached to the further affidavit glaringly show that the allegations of breach of code of conduct against the defendant are strong, cogent and compelling.

    “We submit that by the strength of the allegations of the breach of Code of Conduct Act, the defendant was alleged to have failed to declare and  disclose his five Standard Chartered Bank Statement of Accounts in his Asset Declaration Form of Public Officer Exhibit CCB 3 and Exhibit CCB5 deposed to in paragraphs 5-11 of the Further Affidavit.”

    Umar dismissed allegations that the prosecution chickened out by closing its case when it had no fact.

    He added: “The prosecution also did not close its case abruptly as being insinuated by some commentators. We listed six witnesses including the petitioner, a staff of Standard Chartered Bank and four from the Code of Conduct Bureau.

    “Two staff of the Code of Conduct Bureau testified as PW 1 and PW2 and a staff of the Standard Chartered Bank testified for the prosecution. Those who came for the Code of Conduct Bureau were investigators and at a point during cross-examination, it was the defence which asked one of them that their testimony was likely to be the same.”

    Meanwhile, the EFCC has interrogated a driver of the CJN, Mr. Emmanuel Essien.

    A source said: “As part of our investigation, we interrogated Essien and released him afterwards. We will still need to interact further with him,” a top source added.

    The Coalition of United Political Parties (CUPP) alleged yesterday  that Essien was abducted.

    The coalition, in a statement by its spokesman, Ikenga Imo Ugochinyere, also condemned the interrogation of Essien.

    It said: “The CUPP sees this new offensive against Onnoghen as one too many.

    “We note that the government, having seen from yesterday’s proceedings at the Code of Conduct Tribunal that the trump up charges filed against him may not fly, has resorted to hunting for evidence to further indict him.

    “We reiterate our position that President Muhammadu Buhari is desperate to see Onnoghen resign without any justifiable reasons.”

     

  • ‘Onnoghen down with high BP, toothache’

    SUSPENDED Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN) Justice Walter Onnoghen is suffering from high blood pressure and toothache, his lawyer, Adegboyega Awomolo, SAN, told the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) yesterday.

    The embattled CJN is standing trial before the CCT in relation to his alleged breach of code of conduct for public officers.

    He was arraigned by the Code of Conduct Bureau (CCB) over alleged infractions in his asset declaration forms.

    Justice Onnoghen, who attended proceedings on Monday when the tribunal ordered a day-to-day hearing in the case, was absent at the resumption of proceedings yesterday.

    His lawyer, Adegboyega Awomolo, (SAN), told the tribunal that he (Awomolo) was informed Monday night that Onnoghen has developed tooth-ache.

    Adegboyega tendered a medical report in support of his claim.

    Lead prosecution lawyer, Aliyu Umar, (SAN), also said he got a copy of the medical report, which was signed by one Dr. Francis Uche, the Medical Director of Ideal Medical Services.

    Umar said he could not make any observation in view of what the doctor said about the blood pressure of the defendant, which was said to have risen to 410/121.

    The prosecution lawyer added: “As an old man, I know how dangerous that could be.”

    He said the medical report suggested that Onnoghen was given 72 hours bed rest.

    Umar said, though prosecution witnesses were present, the trial could not be conducted in the defendant’s absence.

    He added: “Under the circumstance, I will concede that there is a justification for the defendant to be absent.

    “Taking into consideration the order of the court yesterday (Monday) on day-to-day proceedings and the health condition of the defendant, I urge the court to adjourn the matter till Monday when we can have five days straight.”

    Ruling, tribunal Chairman Danladi Umar, said: “In view of the medical report, explaining the absence of the defendant in court and in consideration of the level of his blood pressure, and with the prosecution having agreed for an adjournment till Monday, the tribunal concede to the adjournment of the matter to Monday, March 18 for hearing.”

  • Onnoghen appeals CCT’s refusal to deliver ruling in his applications

    Suspended Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Walter Onnoghen has appealed Monday’s decision by the Code of Conduct Tribunal to delay ruling in his applications challenging its jurisdiction  and its impartiality in the criminal case against him

    CCT Chairman, Danladi Umar, in a ruling on March 11, ordered a day-to-day trial in the charge of non-declaration of assets against Onnoghen and said ruling in the two applications by the defendants would be delivered at the time of judgment.

    Onnoghen, in a three-ground notice of appeal filed on Tuesday, argued that the CCT erred in law in its interpretation of Section 369(2) of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA) when it ruled that its decision in the applicant’s applications shall be given at the point of judgment.

    The suspended CJN argued that it was wrong for the CCT to refuse to deliver ruling after hearing the application challenging “constitutional jurisdiction” of the tribunal to hear and determine the charges filed against him.

    He also faulted the tribunal for withholding its decision on the other application which challenged the “independence and impartiality of the chairman of the tribunal as his conduct in the proceedings showed bias and prejudiced against the appellant”.

    Onnoghen argued that Section 396(2) of ACJA could only be the basis for adjourning rulings on such interlocutory applications till the conclusion of trial if the applications had to do with the validity of the charges filed against the defendant.

    He stated that his applications “raised a threshold issue of jurisdiction which should not wait until the conclusion of trial” adding that it “did not relate to the validity of the charges”.

    “The decision (deferment of rulings) is a violation of the right of the appellant to fair hearing,” the notice of appeal also stated.

    Onnoghne noted that the same CCT, had in an earlier proceedings in the case of Justice Sylvester Ngwuta, delivered ruling in similar application.

    He added that the CCT erred in the interpretation of Section 396(3) of the ACJA when objections of the appellant to impartiality and independence of the tribunal, particularly the Chairman, whose conduct in the proceedings gave indication of bias and absence of independence in the determination of the right of the appellant.

    Onnoghen argued that the application he filed “is not one of the interlocutory applications covered by Section 396(4) of the ACJA. The decision is a violation of the right of the appellant to fair hearing.”

    He urged the Court of Appeal to allow his appeal and “set aside the order of the tribunal made on March 11, 2019”.

    Onnoghen also urged the Court of Appeal to proceed to invoke the provisions of Section 16 of the Court of Appeal Act, which he noted, empowers the court to hear and determine the applications in respect of which the CCT declined to rule.

  • Suspended CJN appeals CCT’s refusal to deliver ruling in applications

    The suspended Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Walter Onnoghen has appealed the decision by the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) to delay ruling in his applications challenging its jurisdiction and impartiality in his trial.

    CCT Chairman Danladi Umar, in a ruling on Monday, ordered a day-to-day trial in the charge of non-declaration of assets against Onnoghen, saying that ruling in the two applications by the defendants would be delivered at the time of judgment.

    Justice Onnoghen, in a three-ground notice of appeal filed yesterday, argued that the CCT erred in law in its interpretation of Section 369(2) of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA) when it ruled that its decision in the applicant’s applications shall be given at the point of judgment.

    The suspended CJN argued that it was wrong for the CCT to refuse to deliver ruling after hearing the application challenging “constitutional jurisdiction” of the tribunal to hear and determine the charges filed against him.

    He also faulted the tribunal for withholding its decision on the other application which challenged the “independence and impartiality of the chairman of the tribunal as his conduct in the proceedings showed bias and prejudiced against the appellant”.

    The Justice argued that Section 396(2) of ACJA could only be the basis for adjourning rulings on such interlocutory applications till the conclusion of trial if the applications had to do with the validity of the charges filed against the defendant.

    He stated that his applications “raised a threshold issue of jurisdiction which should not wait until the conclusion of trial” adding that it “did not relate to the validity of the charges”.

    “The decision (deferment of rulings) is a violation of the right of the appellant to fair hearing,” the notice of appeal also stated.

    Justice Onnoghen noted that the same CCT, had in an earlier proceedings in the case of Justice Sylvester Ngwuta, delivered ruling in similar application.

    He added that the CCT erred in the interpretation of Section 396(3) of the ACJA when objections of the appellant to impartiality and independence of the tribunal, particularly the chairman, whose conduct in the proceedings gave indication of bias and absence of independence in the determination of the right of the appellant.

    Arguing further, he said that the application he filed “is not one of the interlocutory applications covered by Section 396(4) of the ACJA. The decision is a violation of the right of the appellant to fair hearing.”

    He urged the Court of Appeal to allow his appeal and “set aside the order of the tribunal made on March 11, 2019”.

    Justice Onnoghen also urged the Court of Appeal to proceed to invoke the provisions of Section 16 of the Court of Appeal Act, which he noted, empowers the court to hear and determine the applications in respect of which the CCT declined to rule.