The Nation Newspaper

Tag: Saraki

  • NASS budget process to be available for scrutiny – Saraki

    Senate president, Bukola Saraki, on Monday said the National Assembly is at the final stage of releasing its budget process for public scrutiny.

    Saraki also said the 8th National Assembly was determined to implement budget reforms that would open the budget process to greater scrutiny and openness.

    The Senate president stated these while inaugurating the committee on budget reforms in Abuja

    He noted that over the years the National Assembly and the Executive have expressed frustration and dissatisfaction with the outcome of our budgets.

    He said that Nigerians are equally unimpressed by the outcome and implementation of the budget because the exercise had come with more conflicts than results.

    He said, “For us in the 8th National Assembly we are ready to open a new chapter and lay a new foundation on which an effective budget process can be built. This is the task on our hands.

    “It is a notorious fact that our annual budgets are yet to be fully aligned with our development goals, from conceptualization, approval and implementation of our annual budget, there is need to converge our budgeting to national planning, continuity and efficiency, hence the need to revisit the process.

    “Government operations are less susceptible to corruption and abuse when they are predictable, transparent and accountable.”

     

     

  • Saraki must respect party supremacy, says Marafa

    Saraki must respect party supremacy, says Marafa

    The new Chairman of the Senate Committee on Petroleum Resources (Downstream), Kabiru Marafa (Zamfara), said yesterday that Senate President  Bukola Saraki owes it a duty to respect his party, All Progressives Congress (APC), on issues affecting the legislature.

    “We are in power.It is our own time and we should be accorded all the necessary cooperation. We should be seen to respect the party,” Marafa, spokesman for the anti-Saraki Unity Forum in the Senate told State House correspondents yesterday after a visit to President Muhammadu Buhari.

    He was responding to a question on whether  Thursday’s reshuffle of  some Senate Committees would now bring an  end to the bad blood generated by Saraki’s emergence as president contrary to the APC’s preferred candidate.

    He said though the exercise   was normal in the legislative arm, it was largely part of reconciliation between the All Progressive Congress (APC) and Saraki.

    His words: “I think reshuffling of committees is not new in any parliament. What made that of yesterday (Thursday) a little new is the circumstances of the emergence of this leadership and what followed.

    “What happened yesterday (Thursday) is a result of the efforts the party has been putting in for reconciliation in the last few days.”

    He said  peace has returned to the Senate.

    “Yes, as long as the party comes in and the will of the party is respected. We are not at loggerhead with anybody. It is not like we hate somebody.

    He described Saraki as  “one of my very close friends and seniors in the 7th assembly.”

    “What you saw happenis what I will describe as loyalty to the party. The constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria recognizes only the party, it doesn’t recognize any individual.”

    Asked whether the Unity Forum would now withdraw the suits its members filed against Saraki in the light of the committee reshuffle,Marafa said: “We didn’t go to court because we didn’t like the faces of those that emerged, but this is the will of our party.

    “During the 7th assembly, we accorded the ruling party at that time the utmost cooperation and we knew the committees that we were given that time.

    He likened  the relationship between the executive and legislative arms to that  between  a husband and his wife, and expressed  optimism  that the crisis between his state governor, Abdulaziz Yari and the State House of Assembly will soon be resolved.

    “So there is nothing new as far as I’m concerned. We belong to the same political party and we are one. We are on top of the situation and we are trying to calm the nerves and look at the problem from its root,” he said.

    “ We will resolve the issues amicably. By our tradition and culture, Zamfara has never had that kind of problem.”

    He ruled out any possibility of the Senate impeaching President Muhammadu Buhari,saying  no serving senator is even contemplating  any such move.

  • Alleged forgery: Can Saraki enter a nolleprosequi ?

    SIR: Fair comment on a matter of compelling public interest propels this intervention on the ongoing trial of the Senate President, BukolaSaraki and his deputy, Ike Ekweremadu.

    It is public knowledge that both presiding officers, along with two others, have been docked for their alleged complicity in purportedly doctoring the Senate Rules or Standing Orders 2015. The Hon. Attorney-General of the Federation, Abubakar Malami is the prosecutor.

    I believe that it is imperative, in the public interest, to ask whether the said probe is just that i.e., in the public interest. This is because, in my view, by virtue of the doctrine of separation of powers under the Constitution, as well as the provisions of Legislative Houses (Powers & Privileges) Ordinance (now Act) in Cap. 102 of the Laws of the Federation and Lagos 1958, such proceedings are either ill-advised or subject to be terminated summarily at the instance, ironically, of the Senate President.

    Section 26 of the Legislative Houses (Powers and Privileges) Act provides that:

    “Any person, being a defendant in any civil or criminal proceedings instituted for or on account of or in respect of the publication by such person or by his servant, by order or under the authority of a Legislative House, or of any reports, papers, minutes, votes or proceedings, may on giving the plaintiff or prosecutor, as the case may be, twenty four hours written notice of his intention, bring before the court in which such civil or criminal proceedings are being held, a certificate under the hand of the President of the Legislative House stating that the reports, papers, minutes votes or proceedings in respect of which civil or criminal proceedings have been instituted were published by such person or his servant by or under the authority of a Legislative House together with an affidavit verifying such certificate; and such court shall thereupon immediately stay such civil or criminal proceedings and the same and every process issued therein shall be deemed to be finally determined.” (Emphasis supplied).

    Therein, in my view, lies the irony. In other words, by virtue of this provision, it appears that Saraki, in his capacity as the Senate President, can summarily terminate the said trial for alleged forgery of the Senate Standing rules by simply issuing a certificate and a verifying affidavit, affirming that the allegedly forged rules were published by or under the authority of the Senate. To that extent, I submit that this power is complementary to that of the Attorney General of the Federation to enter a nolleprosequi under Section 174(1)(a) of the Constitution. Assuming this view is correct, one might be forgiven if he wonders what the fuss is all about. Or is it little more than a storm in a tea-cup?

    In making this submission, I concede that only Senators Saraki and Ekweremadu – and not the entire Senate – are on trial. I, however, submit that, having regard to the provisions of Section 27(1)(a) of the Interpretation Act, Cap. 123, LFN 2004, that would be a distinction without a difference. This is because, by virtue of the said provision of the Interpretation Act:

    “Where a body established by an enactment comprises three or more persons, then any act which the body is authorized or required to do may be done in the name of the body by a majority of those persons or of a quorum of them.”

    I submit that to the extent that the Senate comprises of 109 Senators (vide Sections 48, 2(2) & 3 of the Constitution), coupled with the fact that the Senate is entitled, vide Section 60 of the Constitution, to regulate it own procedure, any challenge to the validity of those Rules, in my view, will not succeed unless it can be shown that they were enacted by a minority of Senators, or by a group of them which did not constitute a quorum.

     

    • Barrister Abubakar D. Sani,

    Abuja.

  • Court to hear Saraki’s, Dasuki’s appeals in Oct

    Court to hear Saraki’s, Dasuki’s appeals in Oct

    The Court of Appeal, Abuja Division, has rescheduled hearing to October in the appeals by Senate President, Bukola Saraki and former National Security Adviser (NSA), Mohammed Sambo Dasuki.

    The court announced its decision yesterday after the appeals were mentioned.

    When the appeal by Saraki was called, Kanu Agabi (SAN), his lawyer, told the court he was not ready. He suggested that hearing be shifted till after the court’s vacation later in the year.

    Respondent’s lawyer Rotimi Jacobs (SAN) expressed discomfort at Agabi’s request.

    He said yesterday was the third time Saraki’s lawyer would ask for adjournment, wondering why Saraki’s lawyer was reluctant to argue the appeal he filed earlier this year.

    Jacobs, however, agreed to an adjournment when the five-man panel, led by Justice Abdu Aboki, said it would hear the appeal after the court’s vacation.

    Upon an agreement between Agabi and Jacobs, the court adjourned to October 6.

    Saraki is challenging the jurisdiction of the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) to try him on the false asset declaration charge filed against him by the Office of the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF).

    He is challenging the CCT jurisdiction on many grounds, saying, among others, that he was not invited to deny allegation of false declaration or clarify the discrepancies in the asset declaration form before he was charged before the CCT.

    Saraki also contended that the AGF cannot prosecute before the CCT, but only the Code of Conduct Bureau (CCB) can validly file charges and prosecute before the CCT.

    The court rescheduled Dasuki’s appeal for hearing after the court’s vacation yesterday after his lawyer, Adedayo Adedeji was allowed to regularise his brief of argument. It struck out the respondent’s brief filed by the AGF on the grounds that it was wrongly filed and directed it to re-file during the court’s vacation.

    The appeal is one of such appeals filed by Dasuki against the ruling of the Federal High Court and the High Court of the FCT, dismissing his complaint that his detention was a violation of the courts’ earlier ruling granting him bail.

    On June 15, this year, the Court of Appeal dismissed one of the appeals and held that his continued detention was not in violation of any subsisting order of a court.

     

  • Hearing on Saraki, Dasuki’s appeals fixed for October

    Hearing on Saraki, Dasuki’s appeals fixed for October

    The Court of Appeal, Abuja Division, on Monday  rescheduled hearing on the appeals filed by Senate President, Bukola Saraki and former National Security Adviser, Sambo Dasuki, to October.

    The court announced its decision after the appeals were mentioned on Monday.

    When Saraki’s appeal was called, his lawyer, Kanu Agabi (SAN), told the court he was not ready for it to be heard.

    He suggested that hearing on the matter be shifted to the end of the court’s vacation later in the year.

    The respondent’s lawyer, Rotimi Jacobs (SAN), expressed discomfort at Agabi’s request.

    He said Monday was the third time Saraki’s lawyer will ask for adjournment on the matter.

    He wondered why the Senate president’s lawyer was reluctant to argue the appeal he filed earlier this year.

    Jacobs, however, agreed to an adjournment when the five-man panel of the court led by Justice Abdu Aboki indicated its intention to hear the appeal after the court’s vacation.

    Upon an agreement between Agabi and Jacobs, the court adjourned the matter to October 6.

    Saraki is challenging the jurisdiction of the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) to try him on the false asset declaration charges filed against him by the office of the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF).

    The court also rescheduled hearing on Dasuki’s appeal after his lawyer, Adedayo Adedeji, was allowed to regularise his brief of argument.

    It struck out the respondent’s brief filed by the AGF on the grounds that it wrongly filed and directed it should be refiled during the court’s vacation.

     

  • Illegal detention: Court orders DSS, minister to pay Saraki’s aide N20m

    Illegal detention: Court orders DSS, minister to pay Saraki’s aide N20m

    An Abuja Federal High Court has ordered the Department of State Services ( DSS) and Minister of Youth and Sports, Mr. Solomon Dalung, to pay the sum of N20 million to the Special Assistant to the Senate President on youth matters, Mr. Ikenga Imo Ugochinyere, as penalty for his illegal arrest and detention.

    The court presided over by Justice J. T. Tsoho also ordered the DSS and the minister to tender unreserved apology to Ugochinyere in two national dailies for what he described unconstitutional detention.

    The ruling was in pursuant of sections 34, 35(1) 36, 40 of the 1999 Constitution.

    Ugochinyere who is also President of the National Youth Council of Nigeria (NYCN) had in a suit, FHC (ABJ) (CS) 342/2016 prayed the court to declare his arrest and detention by DSS for about a month was a violation of his fundamental human right.

    The Court also barred DSS or similar agencies from re-arresting or detaining the youth leader.

    The Tsoho declared the arrest and detention of the applicant as “unlawful, unconstitutional, oppressive, malicious and a gross violation” of Ugochinyere’s freedom of movement.

    The Judge ordered Dalung and DSS to tender public apology to Ugochinyere in two national dailies.

    The legal team of Ugochinyere however claimed that they were informed that DSS has perfected plans to re-arrest Ugochinyere and charge him with a trumped up charges.

    The team urged the DSS to obey the rule of law by abiding by the judgment of a competent court of law rather than being used as instruments to settle political goals.

    The judgment was delivered on Thursday, July 7th, 2016.

  • Ahmed, Saraki absent at Ilorin Eid Prayers

    •One dead, three injured in Kwara

    Kwara State Governor Abdulfatah Ahmed and Senate President, Dr Bukola Saraki as well as top government functionaries were conspicuously absent at the Eid-el-Fitri prayers on yesterday in Ilorin.

    The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that both the governor and Saraki were usually present at the Eid praying ground during Sallah celebrations.

    No reason was given for their absence although a top Government House source told NAN that the governor prayed at a private mosque in the state capital.

    NAN also reports that the duo usually paid the traditional homage to the Emir, Alhaji Sulu Gambari, immediately after the Eid prayers.

    They were, however, absent for the traditional homage and the accompanying Durbar which often followed the Eid prayers.

    NAN reports that Ahmed last year stayed away from the Eid praying ground while those who attended with the Senate President were pelted with stones and sachet water by angry workers whose salaries were not paid.

    NAN also reports that there was a fracas at the palace of the emir who was hosting this year’s traditional “ night of prayers’’ on Sunday.

    A palace source confided in NAN that mid way into the programme, a cleric rose to defend government’s inability to pay workers’ salaries and this drew the anger of the people.

    The source told NAN that the crowd went berserk, disconnecting the electricity supply to the venue and freely throwing chairs at dignitaries at the event.

    The Secretary of Sheikh Alimi Foundation, Abdulazeez Arowona, in a statement confirmed there was fracas at the palace during the programme.

    Post Eid-el-fitri fracas occasioned by age-long chieftaincy tussle yesterday claimed one life in Jebba, Moro Local Government of Kwara State.

    Also, three persons were wounded by gunshots and properties worth millions of naira burnt in the process. The deceased was identified as ‘Pastor.’

    Eyewitnesses said that the dispute was a renewal of an age-long disagreement between factions loyal to the traditional ruler of the town ,Oba Abdulkadir Alabi Adebara and members of an opposing camp simply identified as Okedares.

    It was gathered that pandemonium broke out moments after the Eid el Fitiri prayers when some indigenes said to be loyal to the Okedare group allegedly began making some sinister displays at the frontage of Adebara’s palace.

  • Saraki, Ekweremadu forgery case: AGF is partisan, says Senate

    Saraki, Ekweremadu forgery case: AGF is partisan, says Senate

    The Senate yesterday described Attorney General and Minister of Justice Abubakar Malami (SAN) as partisan, in the forgery case he is prosecuting against Senate President Bukola Saraki and Deputy Senate President Ike Ekweremadu.

    Chairman, Senate Committee on Media and Public Affairs, Senator Aliyu Sabi Abdullahi, in a statement accused Malami of having “personal and pecuniary interest in the case as he was a counsel to the aggrieved Senators who decided to externalise the issue of election of the leadership of the upper chamber of the National Assembly after they failed in their bid to get their preferred candidate elected.”

    Abdullahi described Malami as “the one who advised his clients to report the matter to the Police and now that he has become AGF, he decided to use his constitutional powers to pursue private interest by filing a criminal case in the FCT High Court against the subsisting ruling of a court of co-ordinate jurisdiction.”

    The statement added: “When the Senate invited the AGF to come and throw light on the forgery case, it was not to challenge his right to file, take over or discontinue any criminal case but for him to explain the issues of conflict of interest, abuse of office, disrespect of a subsisting order of  a court and violation of the principle of Separation of Powers which are being raised against him.

    “When his supporters jumped up and started abusing the Senate over the invitation, we know our position that an Attorney General and indeed any public officer for whose office public funds are appropriated can be invited by the Senate and the House of Representatives to explain certain issues, is on firm, constitutional ground.

    “That is in spite of the fact that the AGF is responsible to the President who appointed him.

    “It should be noted that Malami’s name is still on the list of lawyers defending Senator Suleiman Hunkuyi and others in the Federal High Court.

    “We invite all Nigerians, including those shouting over whether it was right for the Senate to invite the AGF or not, to read the ruling of Justice Kolawole and conclude whether Malami is still fit to be AGF in a government which canvasses change and rule of law.

    “Our position as a law making chamber is that the Office of AGF is a sensitive and strategic one being the only other office in the executive arm apart from that of President and Vice President to which the constitution specifically assigns some roles and powers.

    “It must therefore be occupied by a sober, law abiding, brilliant, mature, broad-minded and less partisan lawyer.

    “Mr. Malami is yet to convince us with his handling of this case that he possesses these attributes.

    “We call on him to respect the ruling of the court and to redeem the integrity of his office.

    “In conclusion, the Senate is calling on all parties, Mr. Malami, the Attorney General inclusive, to heed the wise, timely and apt advice of former Vice President Atiku Abubakar that “it is time to move on.”

    “Truly, Nigeria needs our collective energy to address the various challenges – notably increasing poverty, hunger, youth unemployment, general insecurity and kidnapping, among others – which are time bombs that we can only ignore at our own collective peril.”

  • Between Saraki and Buratai

    Since the last one week or so, no less thanthree key government functionaries have been in public domain for one alleged infraction or the other. The period saw the arraignment of Senate President Bukola Saraki and his deputy, Ike Ekweremadu in court for allegedly forging senate standing rules, 2015.

    Before then, Saraki had been standing trial at the Code of Conduct Bureau(CCB) over allegations of false assets declaration. The duo has since drawn public attention to their plight alleging it was apolitical contrivance to settle old scores by getting them out of their offices.

    They contend that Justice Gabriel Kolawole of the Abuja High Court had adjudicated on the matter, affirming that it is an internal affair of the Senate. For this, they view their arraignment not only as an imminent threat to democracy but a declaration of war against the senate.

    But the federal government feels otherwise. It sees the matter as personal to the two presiding officers of the Senate and asked them to bear their cross. The government would even want them resign from their respective offices to allow justice run its full course. In all, their arraignment is rationalized as part of the anti-graft war of the Buhari administration that does not seemingly differentiate between persons, no matter how highly placed.

    At another level also arose controversy over the allegation that the Chief of Army Staff, Lt-GeneralTukurBuratai bought two properties in Dubai estimated at $1.5 million. The allegation which was first published by an online medium with documents to prove drew quick defence from the Nigerian Army. Acting Director of Army Public Relations, Col. Sani Usman admitted the Buratai family had two properties in Dubai but claimed they were bought with personal savings in 2013.

    He saidBuratai had consistently declared the properties along with other properties in his assets declaration forms and described the report as mere smear campaign as the properties were not bought in one single transaction.

    Soon after came another defence from the Defence Minister, Mansur Dan-Ali claiming the allegation was an attempt by some persons to distract the Armed Forces from successful prosecution of the heightened campaign against terrorism in the North-east.

    Apparently following the same line of argument, Buratai claimed that the insurgents and terrorists they defeated on the land have migrated to the cyberspace, internet and other electronic media. “We want to assure them that these terrorists, the Boko Haram terrorists, who have migrated to the cyberspace, we will follow them to that cyberspace and equally defeat them and clear their doubt”.

    By the logic of this argument and the catchphrase of the Buhari government, the general was in effect saying:‘terrorism is fighting back’. By this also, we are being told to ignore the weighty issues that have been raised, part of which have been admitted with the explanation that the assets were properly acquired and declared.

    But then, the role terrorism is being ascribed to in this matter is as confounding as it is unbelievable. It is curious how terrorism could be reasonably factored into allegations that seek to hold a public officer accountable. This is more so, for a government that has sought to build its legitimacy around the war against corruption? Are we now implying that dislodged and defeated terrorists are behindthe allegation so that the war against terrorism will lose steam?It is difficult to fathom the nexus between the two.

    At best, the linkage is guilty of the fallacy of argumentum admisericordiam. It is an argument designed to whip up sentiments with the aim of obfuscating the weighty issues raised against Buratai that ordinarily should require serious investigation. By drawing puerileparallel between the allegation and the successes being recorded against the Boko Haram insurgency, a covert attempt is being made to persuade the public to ignore the allegation.Or is it being suggested that Buratai cannot be subjected to the laws of the land because he is making progress in the war against terrorism?

    We are being told wittingly or otherwise that the fight against insurgency takes higher premium over any other matter including that against corruption. The impression is also being conveyed that the fight is all about Buratai and without him all the gains will be reversed. That is my reading of the issues being bandied on the non-existing correlation between the success in the war against terrorism and corruption allegations.

    There is also the rationalization that the army chief bought the properties with his personal savings; the investments were based on capital market shareholding principles and such other trite explanations. One has no sufficient basis to disprove these claims. But their veracity or otherwise can only be proven through thorough investigations which the situation demands.

    This is more so as the same online medium has literally gone on rampage displaying another list of properties allegedly owned by Buratai in parts of the country. If he really owns these investments, the thing to establish is how he came about them. His salaries are known and the amount of savings he can make out of them can be reasonably computed.

    So it is not sufficient to claim that he bought them with personal savings. It is equally not enough to state that the assets were declared in his assets declaration forms. The purpose of assets’ declaration is for the CCB to match claims with the income of the declaring officer. And where wide discrepancies exist, that officer is made to account for the sources of such assets.

    It will therefore stand as a huge indictment on the CCB if public officers declare assets that are out of tune with their income without such people asked to account for such wealth. If it can arraign people for not declaring some of their assets, it is curious that it could opt to maintain sealed lipsover those who declare in excess of their legitimate income. That renders nugatory the high minded ideas for the setting up of that Bureau.

    Be that as it may, we are here concerned with issues of integrity and probity especially given governments’ commitment to the war against corruption. From the way the two issues are being handled, it is not difficult for oneto establish a case of double standard. The Senate leadership claims that in both the petitions and the recommendations of the police which investigated the forgery allegation, neither Saraki nor Ekweremadu was specifically either mentioned or indicted.

    They therefore query the motive for their arraignment. And since it is a well-known fact that the presidency has not been comfortable with their emergence in the Senate leadership, they may not be completely out place in the way they perceive their current travails. They have also queried what the nation stood to achieve by arraigning them over a matter they considered an internal affairs of the Senate.

    These are some of the issues to ponder. But if the government wants them to step aside for justice to run its full course, no less would have been permissible in the case of the Buratai. Instead, what we get is a cacophony of voices from sundry government quarters each competing to defend and absolve him of the allegations. That alone speaks volumes.

    But hard as they try, the signals are that varying standards exist for treating those accused of one infraction or the other within the corruption ladder. Such a tendency is all that is needed for the corruption battle to lose complete relevance.

  • Senate Orders forgery: Judge refuses to stop IGP, AGP on Saraki, others’ prosecution

    Senate Orders forgery: Judge refuses to stop IGP, AGP on Saraki, others’ prosecution

    •Says charge against them is ‘abuse of court process’
    •Faults AGF’s role

    Justice Gabriel Kolawole of the Federal High Court, Abuja has refused an ex-parte motion for injunction to restrain the Inspector General of Police (IGP) and the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF) from proceedings with the charge filed against Senate President Bukola Saraki and three others over the alleged forgery of the Senate Standing Orders 2011 based on the police report issued on the case.

    The judge, however, described as ‘an abuse of court process’ the decision of the AGF to file the charge marked  CR/219/2016 during the pendency of a suit filed by a member of the Senate, Gilbert Emeka Nnaji, challenging the competence of the police report.

    Justice Kolawole queried the motive of the AGF, Abubakar Malami (SAN), who he noted had participated in the Nnaji case before his appointment as the AGF.

    He wondered why Malami was in ‘desperate haste’ to proceed with the charge when he was aware of a suit challenging the report on which the charge was based.

    The judge, in a ruling on June 28 on the motion ex-parte by a Gilbert Nnaji, a Senator, said, having found that the filing of the charge amounted to an abuse of court process, he would have proceeded to dismiss it, but because the charge is pending before the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), with a coordinate jurisdiction with his court.

    A copy of the certified true copy (CTC) of the ruling was sighted in Abuja yesterday.

    Nnaji had filed the substantive suit on July 23, 2015 on learning that the police was about to publish its investigation report on the forgery reported to it through a petition by Senator Suleiman Othman Hunkuyi of the Unity Forum.

    On July 27, 2015, the judge refused the plaintiff ex-parte prayer for an order directing parties to maintain status quo pending the determination of the substantive suit, but instead directed the 1st defendant – IGP- (because a substantive AGF was yet to be appointed) to show cause why such order should not be granted and adjourned to August 4, 2015.

    On the next date, the IGP and the Solicitor General of the Federation (SGF), Taiwo Abidogun (who represented the AGF), did not show cause as ordered by the court, but filed a notice of objection, challenging the jurisdiction of the court to hear the suit.

    Hunkuyi,  represented by a team of lawyers including Mamman Osuman (SAN), Dele Adesina (SAN) and Abubakar Malami (SAN), applied to be joined as party to the suit.

    Hunkuyi’s motion for was later struck out when his lawyers did not attend court to move it.

    While the substantive case by Nnaji and the notices of objection by IGP and AGF were pending, Malami was appointed AGF, shortly after which Justice Kolawole fixed hearing of the suit and all pending objections for July 6, 2016 at 11.45am.

    Before the hearing date fixed by Justice Kolawole, the office of the AGF filed a charge against Saraki and three others before the High Court of the FCT based on the police investigation report, which formed the subject of the suit before Justice Kolawole.

    To stop the arraignment of Saraki, Deputy Senate President Ike Ekweremadu and two others named in the charge, Nnaji returned to the court with the ex-parte motion for restraining orders against the IGP and AGF.

    The motion was heard on June 27 by Justice Kolawole, who fixed June 28, for ruling. Saraki and others were also arraigned before the High Court of the FCT on the charge filed by the AGF June 27.

    In his ruling on June 28 Justice Kolawole faulted the decision of the AGF to proceed to file a charge based on the police report when the suit challenging the report was still pending.

    He held that although as the AGF, he has the constitutional powers to institute and discontinue criminal proceedings on behalf of the federal government, he must exercise such powers in public interest.

    Justice Kolawole noted that, although the charge was filed by a lawyer in the Federal Ministry of Justice, the official acted as an agent of the AGF, who was listed as one of the leading senior lawyers who filed an application for joinder on behalf of Hunkuyi, who until his (Malami’s) appointment, was his client.

    “Having regard to the peculiar facts which I have analysed, the said criminal charge dated 10th June 2016, attached as Exhibit B to the plaintiff’s motion ex-parte dated 23rd June 2016, given the course of these proceedings as I had, in detail, highlighted, can only be seen a one that constitutes an abuse of court legal process to use the very words in Section 174(3) of the Constitution.

    “In all these facts and issues, having regard to the pendency of this suit in which the defendants have both filed processes, one question that did not cease to resonate in my thoughts is why this desperate haste to prefer the criminal indictments in Exhibit B – the investigation of which is at the heart of this suit and of the parallel suit in Exhibit 2, and the indictments, by law are not time barred as the substantive suit before this court, has by consent of both the plaintiff counsel and defendants counsel, been scheduled for 6th July 2016 for hearing.

    He, however, refused that applicant’s request to quash the police report on the grounds that the report was not attached to the motion and that it was not placed before the court.

    Justice Kolawole also refused to void the charge before the FCT High Court on the grounds that the charge was before another court of equal jurisdiction.

    The judge also said: “In terms of the restraining orders which the plaintiff seeks in the prayer one of his motion ex-parte, I am unable to grant the prayers because the plaintiff has not been able to overcome the issue of his locus standing, which i had raised at the proceedings of 27 July 2015.

    “It is not sufficient, when the Supreme Court’s decision in Senator Abraham Adesanya v. President of Nigeria & another (1981) 5 SC 112 is applied,  for the plaintiff, who has not shown that he is one of the defendants listed in the criminal charge attached as Exhibit B to this motion ex-parte, to be conferred, in the context of the provision of Section 6(6)(b) of the Constitution 999 (as amended) with the cloak of an ‘aggrieved’ person who ought to be granted access to ventilate his grievance and to seek the interim orders in his motion ex-parte,” Justice Kolawole said.