The Nation Newspaper

Tag: Saraki

  • Buhari, Saraki, Dogara, Lasun shocked

    Buhari, Saraki, Dogara, Lasun shocked

    President Muhammadu Buhari and the National Assembly leadership yesterday expressed shock at the death of Prince Abubakar Audu.

    Buhari said he heard the news with an enormous sense of shock.

    The President, who is attending the Third Gas Exporting Countries Forum in Tehran, Iran, spoke through a statement yesterday by his Senior Special Assistant on Media and Publicity, Garba Shehu.

    The President was quoted as saying: “We are obviously devastated at the loss.”

    He described the late Audu as a talented politician, a loving family head and a respected community leader.

    “He was immensely courageous,” the President added.

    The statement added: “President Buhari condoles with the family of the late governor, the government and people of Kogi State as well as our party members, men and women, who stood with Audu in his bid to return as governor. He ran as the favourite in the election as the early results have clearly shown.”

    Buhari prayed to Allah to repose his soul and give his family, the people of Kogi State and APC members the fortitude to bear this loss.

    Also yesterday, Senate President Abubakar Bukola Saraki, House of Representatives Speaker Yakubu Dogara and Deputy Speaker Yussuff Lasun described Audu’s demise as painful and shocking.

    They said the late politician died as a dogged and visionary leader.

    Saraki, in a statement by his Special Adviser (Media and Publicity), Yusuph Olaniyonu, “condoled with the family of the deceased, the government and people of Kogi State and the national and state executives as well as members of the APC on the irreparable loss”.

    He noted the tenacity of purpose and unwavering loyalty of the deceased, who, he said, remained committed to the course of his people and his party to the last moment of his life.

    Dogara, in a statement by his Special Adviser on Media and Public Affairs, Turaki Hassan, said APC lost one of its strong pillars, who helped built the party in Kogi State.

    The statement reads: “His death is a major setback for the APC family. But as people of faith, we cannot question the work of the Almighty God, who gives life and only Him can take it away.

    “Dogara regretted that Audu could not live to celebrate the imminent victory of the APC in the governorship election for which he was the leading candidate.

    The Deputy Speaker, Yussuff Sulaimon Lasun, said the sudden death of Abubakar was a rude shock to him.

    In a statement by his Chief Press Secteatary, Wole Oladimeji, the Deputy Speaker said Audu was a true party man, who fought till the last breath to see that APC was rooted in Kogi State.

     

  • Saraki warns Senators on oversight functions

    Senate President, Abubakar Bukola Saraki, on Monday asked Senators to ensure the highest ethical standards in the discharge of their oversight functions.

    Saraki warned that any Senator found engaging in unethical behaviour would not be spared by the Senate.

    He also cautioned Senators to avoid anything that would bring ethical question to the hallowed chamber.

    The Senate President spoke during the inauguration 11 standing committees of the upper chamber in Abuja.

    He said,”This 8th Senate takes ethics very seriously. It is my expectation that in your dealings with government agencies, you will observe highest ethical standards in discharging your duties.

    “You must realize that you are a mirror that citizens will continuously cast their gaze upon. Your behaviour will determine to a large extent how the larger society will perceive every one of us.

    “You must take care that you do not bring ethical questions upon this hallowed chamber. You must bear that in mind as you make your ethical choices while carrying out your duties. Any committee member found in an ethically doubtful behaviour will be sanctioned by this Senate.

    “I have also enjoined management and clerks to observe high standards of ethical behaviour in all their engagement with and for the committees especially on all oversight functions.”

    Saraki, who assured that the Senate leadership is willing and ready to support the committees with all that is needed to carry out their assignments, added that the committees are expected to be innovative and broadminded, learn and bring on board any relevant ingredient from outside jurisdictions that will enrich the quality and content of  law-making.

  • Saraki and stay of proceedings debate

    The “considered” ruling of the Supreme Court of Nigeria granting stay of proceedings in the celebrated case of Federal Republic of Nigeria vs. Dr. Bukola Saraki has dominated public discourse since it was handed down on Thursday November 12. Understandably the legal community has had a fair share of this debate provoked most logically by Femi Falana SAN who critically intervened by making the following clear points:

    That, it was wrong for the Supreme Court to have reversed the gains painstakingly made with the combined provisions of Sections 306 & 396(2) of the ACJA 2015 which oust the jurisdiction of the courts to entertain applications for stay of proceedings in criminal trials.

    Section 396 (2) is to the effect that any objection (including preliminary objections) shall only be considered along with the substantive issue.

    The philosophy and intendment of the legislature in enacting those provisions of the Act were aimed at stopping the endless trials of criminal cases in Nigeria through frivolous and interlocutory applications and appeals particularly as they relate to politically exposed persons (PEPs). In other-words, the attainment of justice in our courts must be through the rules of the court meant to be followed and complied with.

    It was the further contention of the learned silk that the Code of Conduct Burean Tribunal, erred when it entertained and ruled on the application for stay of proceedings before hearing the substantive issue as enjoined by Section 396(2). It was this error that occasioned the appeals from the Court of Appeal which refused it and then to the Supreme Court where it was unfortunately granted.

    First, it must be noted, and the impression must never be created out there that Supreme Court’s rulings, decisions and judgments should not and cannot be criticized. To insist on this will unwittingly compromise the prospect of legal advancement and creativity which is the only guarantee in the judicial process by which the judiciary can cope with the ever dynamic needs of the society. The very idea of approaching the Supreme Court or any other appellate court for that matter is not just a civilized act of protest but also criticism on the judgment appealed against. In this regard, we genuinely commend Femi Falana (SAN) who took the lead on this issue as well as other well-meaning Nigerians in balancing this apparent class struggle. Increasingly, we have seen a clear tendency by which the ruling class has found a way of shielding themselves from criminal prosecutions. How many “ordinary” Nigerians have successfully sustained an application for stay of proceedings in a criminal trial or obtained an interim or perpetual injunction pending determination of their substantive suits or trials? To drag the judicial into this “unholy contestation” is a recipe for chaos and anarchy.

    Secondly, even the practice of dissenting judgments in our appellate courts where justices differ with one another in their judgments reinforces the need for critical evaluation of every judgment even by the apex court. It is healthy and encourages the development of the law for the benefit of the society at large. For instance, in amending the Electoral Act 2006, Section 141 was inserted into the Electoral Act 2010 to deal with the deep concerns generated and thrown up by the dissenting Judgment of Supreme Court in Ameachi vs. INEC (2008) 5 NWLR (pt.1080) bordering on the capacity of the electorates to express their sovereign will and preferences through the electoral processes. Section 141 of the Electoral Act 2010 provides thus:

    “An election tribunal or court shall not under any circumstance declare any person a winner at an election in which such a person has not fully participated in all the stages of the said election “

    Thus, criticisms in that sense is very healthy and welcomed bearing in mind that even the panel of justices however profound in knowledge and principle are also human beings that are not beyond fallibility.

    Such criticism as Falana and other learned experts who concurred with him made must be encouraged once they are made in good faith and with a view to advancing the law and safeguarding the sanctity of society. Opinion leaders of both the Bar and society must not shy away from such constructive criticisms. We certainly can criticize judgments of the Supreme Court in the same manner that we can laud their judgment/rulings when necessary which is what Femi Falana (SAN), Gboyega Awolomo (SAN) and others have done. What we cannot do is to appeal against the judgment of the Supreme Court even if we disagree with it.

    In the inimitable words of the revered Hon. Justice Chukwudifu Oputa (of blessed memory), in the case of UTC vs. Pamotie

    “the Supreme Court is final not because it is infallible but it is infallible because it is final”   

    In supporting the stay of proceedings granted by the Supreme Court in the case of Federal Republic of Nigeria vs. Dr. Bukola Saraki, Mike Ozekhome (SAN) has criticized the stance of Femi Falana (SAN) and Chief Gboyega Awomolo SAN on the subject matter. While admitting that stay of proceedings has been prohibited by the Administration of Criminal Justice Act, 2015, Ozekhome says that it is only applicable to trials courts. In his view, the appellate courts can continue to stop or suspend criminal cases in trial courts by indiscriminately granting stay of proceedings. We consider his outing as an unfortunate intervention in the ongoing debate on the correct interpretation of the section which has prohibited the reckless suspension of the criminal cases involving privileged people in the country.

    Ozekhome has carefully ignored the effect of Section 396 of the Act to the effect that ruling on all preliminary objections filed by accused persons shall be delivered together with the judgment in the substantive case. Is Ozekhome saying that the section has not effectively banned the filing of interlocutory appeals? If interlocutory appeals cannot be filed pending the conclusion of criminal trials, on what basis then is Ozekhome saying that the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court are empowered to grant stay of proceedings? Assuming without conceding that he is right, can a party be allowed to file a stay of proceedings in the appellate court when it cannot be filed in the trial court? Was he allowed to file a similar application in the case of FRN vs. Lawan Farouk in which he is representing the defendant? Surely, we do not buy that argument because that has not been his practice including a recent similar application he made in the case of FRN vs. Farouk Lawan where he exhibited the certified copy of the ruling of the lower court in his application before the court of appeal.

    Ozekhome says that “where the provisions of any law are in consistent with the provisions of the constitution, such law will be void to the extent of such inconsistency. Certainly, this is a trite constitutional provision yet, he has failed to point out what section of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act that contravenes any provision of the constitution. Is Ozekhome not aware that stay of proceedings is not provided for by the constitution but by the rules of courts which are inferior to the constitution and all Act of the National Assembly? Indeed, every law student is aware that a motion for stay of proceedings can only be filed in the Court of Appeal after it has been dismissed by a trial court. It is trite law that motion for stay of proceedings in the Court of Appeal is not ripe for hearing without exhibiting the ruling of the trial court. Since the filing of stay of proceedings has been prohibited in the trial court, it cannot be disputed that neither the Court of Appeal nor the Supreme Court can entertain same as a court of first instance. We therefore urge the Supreme Court to discountenance the highly misconceived and irrelevant submissions of Chief Ozekhome as he has not succeeded in controverting the points of law well argued by Mr. Falana.

    • Ugwummadu Esq. is National President, Committee for the Defence of Human Rights.
  • Saraki’s toxic case

    Saraki’s toxic case

    Since his emergence as Senate President, it is difficult not to admire the dexterity with which Dr Bukola Saraki has been deftly but maximally utilising the enormous influence and resources of his office to consolidate his position in the Senate and strengthen his hand within the APC. At the same time he enjoys tremendous goodwill within the PDP to which he has made key political concessions, including the strategic position of Deputy Senate President.

    Ever since his travails with the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) over alleged false assets declaration began, the vast majority of Senators have passed two motions in Saraki’s support. As far as they are concerned, Saraki is the innocent victim of political harassment and persecution by those opposed to his continuing in office as Senate President. When he appeared before the CCT on October 21, Saraki was accompanied by 80 senators who turned up to exhibit solidarity with their embattled leader. And when he turned up to keep a date with the court on Thursday, November 5, at least 30 senators were on hand to identify with Saraki.

    Yet, the dignity, integrity and image of the Senate have been steadily devalued and eroded since Dr Saraki’s emergence as Senate President. It is bad enough that the head of Nigeria’s National Assembly has to appear frequently in the dock to defend himself against alleged serious criminal infractions. It is even worse that neither Saraki nor his colleagues see the need for him to step aside until his innocence is established at least to protect the image and integrity of the National Assembly as an institution. Of course, this is without prejudice to the fact that Senator Saraki like every other Nigerian is deemed innocent of any alleged crime until found guilty by a competent court of law.

    On Thursday, 5th November, Saraki’s defence counsel abruptly withdrew from the case in protest against the CCT’s ruling that the trial must commence that day. The defence counsel had applied for a stay of proceedings in the case until the determination by the Supreme Court of an appeal by the Senate President against the 2-1 split decision of the Court of Appeal, which upheld the jurisdiction and competence of the CCT to entertain the case. The Saraki case is evidently also having a toxic effect on the dignity and integrity of the judiciary. The action of Saraki’s defence counsel, including very senior lawyers, whether described as a ‘walk out’ or not constituted an affront on the CCT judges and reflected unflatteringly on the image of the court.

    Even more disturbingly, the decision of the Supreme Court on Thursday, November 12, granting a stay of proceedings in Saraki’s trial before the CCT has elicited very strong reactions with serious implications for the credibility of the judiciary. Describing the apex court’s ruling as flagrantly contravening sections 306 and 369 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA), which expressly prohibit granting of stay in criminal proceedings, very senior and credible lawyers including Chief Adegboyega Awomolo (SAN), Professor Itse Sagay (SAN) and Mr Femi Falana (SAN) have strongly and uncharacteristically condemned the decision of the Supreme Court panel.

    According to Professor Sagay, “What the Supreme Court has done is illegal and it is shocking that the Supreme Court would indulge in illegalities”. Mr Femi Falana was no less scathing when he stressed that “It is unfathomable that the Supreme Court decided to return the country to the status quo ante in a rather brazen and bizzare manner”. Other lawyers such as Mr Mike Ozekhome (SAN) and Prince Ajibola Oluyede have stoutly defended the decision of the Supreme Court. In Ozekhome’s view, the ACJA contradicts Section 6 (6) and 36 of the 1999 constitution, violates the principle of Separation of Powers and is thus unconstitutional and illegal. He avers further that Section 306 of the ACJA does not apply to the Supreme Court or any other appellate court but only to the trial court.

    Prince Oluyede in his case curiously commended the Supreme Court “for daring to do the unthinkable by scuttling the politically motivated stampede to remove Bukola Saraki from his position as Senate President through a wholly unconstitutional trial at the Code of Conduct Tribunal”. Really? So the Supreme Court has decided that Saraki’s trial before the CCT is ‘politically motivated’ and ‘wholly unconstitutional’? It cannot get more interesting. Oluyede certainly knows something the rest of us do not.

    Yet, Neither Oluyede or Ozekhome, in my view, logically or credibly controverts Falana’s lucid and rigorous critique of the Supreme Court decision. I do not think that Ozekhome can simply sit leisurely in his chambers and cavalierly declare as illegal and unconstitutional a legislation that has been duly enacted by the National Assembly and signed into law by the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria and one which has not been challenged and consequently nullified by any court of competent jurisdiction.

    Falana’s argument is water tight. According to him, “…it has been judicially decided that statutes that oust the jurisdiction of courts to stay proceedings are constitutionally valid. In FRN v Nwude (2006) 2 EFCCLR 149 at 161 it was held by Justice Oyewole J. (as he then was) that section 40 of the Economic and Financial Crimes Act, 2004 which abolished stay of proceedings is not an infraction of powers of the court…Similarly in Ajiboye v FRN (2013) 17 WRN 127 at 145 the Court of Appeal (per Justice Ogbuniya JCA) struck out the application for stay of proceedings on the ground that it was incompetent “in the face of the sacrosanct prescription of section 40 of the Act which clearly ousted the jurisdiction of the court over it”.

    It is on this basis that Falana submits emphatically that “It is trite in law that jurisdiction oxygenates all proceedings in our courts. Accordingly, the exercise of judicial powers by any court without jurisdiction is a nullity, regardless of the industry invested in it. With the enactment of the ACJA, the suspension of criminal cases by all accused persons has been effectively stopped in Nigeria. Therefore, any judge who orders a stay of proceedings in any criminal trial does so illegally and is liable to be sanctioned by the National Judicial Council”.

    With the Supreme Court’s decision, Saraki’s defence team has succeeded splendidly at least for now in its too obvious strategy of stalling the case as much as possible, which has been its principal objective since the entire saga commenced. Now the CCT’s decision to commence Saraki’s trial on November 19 has been rendered impracticable. It is surprising that Dr Saraki is more concerned about preventing the case from proceeding than seizing the opportunity to demonstrate his innocence and thereby forever silencing his political opponents and giving a phenomenal, possibly unstoppable, boost to his political career.

    Earlier, in continuation of his increasingly desperate politics of survival, Senator Saraki had personally submitted the list of 36 confirmed ministerial nominees to President Buhari at the Presidential Villa. Ordinarily, this menial task should have been performed by the President’s Senior Special Assistant on National Assembly matters for the Senate, Senator Ita Enang. By opting to personally take the list of cleared ministers to President Buhari at Aso Rock, Saraki only reinforced the perception that he ensured that all the ministerial nominees were cleared to pacify the presidency and facilitate a political resolution of his CCT trial dilemma.

    Ironically, many of his colleagues support Saraki because they see him as symbolising the independence of the National Assembly as a separate arm of government autonomous both of the executive and the political parties. Yet, it is clear that as long as the CCT case remains an albatross around his neck, Saraki and by implication the Senate as an institution will be a pliant and servile tool at the beck and call of the executive.

    The only way Saraki can offer bold, courageous and effective leadership to the Senate and help strengthen the independence of the National legislature is for him to convincingly and clearly prove his innocence of the charges against him before the CCT. A political solution that offers relief to the Senate President will not only irreparably damage President Buhari’s anti-corruption onslaught, it will render Saraki and the Senate he leads continuously vulnerable to external threats and blackmail if he does not kowtow  to the wishes of his benefactors.

     

  • AGF, IGP, EFCC, others ask Saraki not to politicize trial

    AGF, IGP, EFCC, others ask Saraki not to politicize trial

    The Attorney General of the Federation (AGF), Abubakar Malami, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), the Inspector General of Police (IGP), Solomon Arase and others have asked  Senate President, Bukola Saraki  not to politicize his trial before the Code of Conduct Tribunal.

    They advised him to direct his energy at defending the charge against him rather than imputing political motive to his trail.

    They faulted Saraki’s claim that his trial was politically motivated.

    In a counter affidavit they filed at the Federal High Court, Abuja in response to a fresh suit by Saraki, they denied being influenced by any political consideration to initiate the 13-count false asset declaration charge against him (Saraki) before the CCT.

    The AGF, EFCC, IGP, the Director of Public Prosecution of the Federation (DPPF), Mohammed Diri and Muslim Hassan (a Deputy Director in the Federal Ministry of Justice) said Saraki’s trial was informed by the outcome of a joint investigation conducted by the EFCC, Department of State Services (DSS), the Code of Conduct Bureau (CCB) and the Independent Corrupt Practices and other related offences Commission (ICPC) between 2003 and 2015.

    They said the investigation revealed among others, that Saraki lied in the information he presented in the CCB Forms he completed between 2003 and 2011 in Ikoyi and Ikeja, Lagos, using third party companies, in which he had interest, with the intension of concealing his interests in such property.

    They gave the name of the companies as: Tiny Tee Limited, Vitti Oil Limited, Skyview Properties Limited and Carlisle properties.

    The AGF, EFCC, IGP, Diri and Hassan added that the Senate President lied in his claim that an official of the Federal Ministry of Justice, Bulus Micheal informed him that his trial was politically motivated. They said no official of the ministry bears such name.

    “The charges preferred against him before the CCT were based on the conviction that a prima facie case was disclosed after investigation and not on any political consideration. The 1st, 2nd, 4th, 10th and 11th respondents (AGF, EFCC, IGP, Diri and Hassan) are not politicians and they have no interest in who becomes the Senate President.

    “The 1st, 2nd, 4th, 10th and 11th respondents do not take instructions from any politician, but are public officers and public offices, who are only interested in the performance of their statutory and constitutional duties.

    “No one has made or is making any effort to trump up allegations against the applicant, but the charges that were preferred against him were preferred upon being satisfied that a prima facie case was disclosed against him.”

    They denied Saraki’s allegation that his rights were being violated with his trial before the CCT, arguing that aside that the charges were validly preferred, the Court of Appeal, Abuja has, in its judgment of October 30, 2015 upheld the CCT’s position that it possessed the jurisdiction to try Saraki based on the charge.

    In their notice of objection, they challenged the court’s jurisdiction to hear Saraki’s fresh suit, noting that the reliefs he was seeking in the new suit are contained in a similar suit marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/775/2015, which he earlier filed before the court, and which has now been assigned to Justice Evoh Chukwu of Court 8 for hearing.

    Saraki is, by the new suit, seeking to stop all the respondents, including the CCT, CCB from proceeding with his trial. He accused them of violating his rights.

    Last Monday, Justice Abdukadir Abadulkafarati heard an ex-parte motion for interim restraining order filed along with the new fundamental rights enforcement suit by Saraki.

    The judge declined to grant the applicant’s prayer, but instead, directed that the respondents be served with the motion and other processes in the case for them to show cause Friday (November 20) why the order sought by Saraki should not be granted.

    Justice Abdulkafarati found that not all the defendants were served by the applicant as ordered by the court. He refused argument by Saraki’s lawyer, Ajibola   Oluyede that he take further steps in the case.

    The judge insisted that every respondent in the case must be served before any further steps could be taken in the case.

    He consolidated the originating summons and preliminary objection, in view of his decision to hear all the processes simultaneously, and adjourned to December 2for hearing.

    The judge ordered that hearing notices be issued on the 3rd, 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th and 9th respondents (ICPC, CCB, CCT, CCT Chairman, Danladi Umar, Atadaeze Agu Azda –CCT member, and Sam Saba – Director General, CCB), who are yet to be served as earlier ordered by the court.

     

  • Court rejects Saraki’s new application against CCT

    Justice Abdulkadir Abdulkafarati of the Federal High Court, Abuja, has rejected a new application filed by Senate President, Bukola Saraki, for an order of interim injunction stopping the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) from trying him.

    The judge, in a ruling on Monday, a certified true copy (CTC) of which The Nation sighted on Wednesday, refrained from granting the prayer sought by Saraki through an ex-parte application argued by his lawyer, Raphael Oluyede.

    Instead, the judge ordered Saraki to put the respondents on notice by serving them with the motion.

    He directed them to appear before the court on Friday to explain why the reliefs sought by the applicant should not be granted.

  • Saraki urges banks to support anti graft campaign

    The President of the Senate, Dr. Bukola Saraki, has called on commercial banks operating in the country to partner with the Federal Government to effectively tackle corruption in the system.

    Saraki stated this on Thursday when the management of Fidelity Bank Plc, led by its Managing Director and Chief Executive Officer, Mr. Nnamdi Okonkwo, visited him at the National Assembly.

    He reminded the bankers that they were at a vantage position to disclose suspicious transactions to the relevant authorities.

    A statement issued by his media office also stated that the banks have a major role to play in stamping out corruption from all aspects of the economy.

    The statement said, “I think also that the area that is key in the fight against corruption. The banks must play a role in knowing your customers.

    “You must also be accountable for the activities of your customers because in developed societies, banks know that if their customers are being questioned in any activity, they too are responsible for either not bringing it to the attention of the government.

    “This is because there is nothing that happens that does not go through the banking system.

    “So, if the banking system is tight, it will bring the greatest contribution in fighting corruption even more than anywhere else because at the end of the day, it must come through the banking system.

    “But I think when the banks turn a blind eye saying it is not our business, that does not help. I think we need to start looking at that in supporting the government in addressing this area.”

    He urged the banks to ensure that they lend needed support to farmers in order to boost food production and stimulate the growth of agriculture in the country.

  • Supreme Court directs CCT to suspend Saraki’s trial

    Supreme Court directs CCT to suspend Saraki’s trial

    The Supreme Court on Thursday directed the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) to suspend proceedings in the trial of Senate President, Bukola Saraki.

    The apex court asked the CCT to “tarry awhile” and await its decision in the appeal filed by Saraki.

    The directive by a five-man panel, led by Justice John Fabiyi, followed an undertaking by respondents’ lawyer, Rotimi Jacobs (SAN), to the effect that since the court has granted accelerated hearing in the appeal, he will prevail on the CCT not to proceed with trial until the apex court rule on Saraki’s appeal.

    “The appellant’s brief of argument was filed yesterday (November 11, 2015). The respondents’ brief of argument shall be filed within seven days from today. If need be, the appellant’s reply shall be filed within seven days thereafter.

    “All these point to the fact that both parties are interested in expeditious hearing of the main appeal before this court.

    “Learned counsel for the respondents has given an undertaking that no unusual steps would be taken on behalf of the respondents. It is imperative to say that parties, as well as the Chairman of the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT), should tarry awhile.

    “In effect, further proceedings before the Code of Conduct Tribunal should be stayed pending the hearing of the main appeal. Hearing date shall be communicated to the parties in due course,” Justice Fabiyi said in a ruling that was adopted by other members of the panel.

    Earlier, Jacobs and Saraki’s lawyer, Joseph Daudu (SAN), argued the Senate President’s application for stay of proceedings pending the determination of the appeal.

    While Daudu prayed the court to order a stay of proceedings at the CCT, Jacobs argued otherwise, contending that Saraki was only interested in frustrating his trial before the tribunal by filing multiple applications in various courts.

     

  • Falana to Saraki: stop attending CCT with senators

    Falana to Saraki: stop attending CCT with senators

    Lagos lawyer, Femi Falana (SAN), has urged Senate President Bukola Saraki to stop attending the sittings of the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) with other senators.

    The frontline lawyer noted that it was illegal and unlawful for the Senate President to suspend Senate’s sittings whenever his case was to be heard at the CCT.

    Besides questioning the political will of President Muhammadu Buhari’s administration to fight corruption and impunity in the country, Falana said the action of the Senate and its President was an assault on the nation’s collective morality.

    In an address, titled: As Corruption Fights Back, delivered on Monday at the investiture of Mr. Dare Oseni as the 2015/2016 President of the International Association of Lions Club, Lagos Isolo Lions Club, at Samkoll Graden, Idimu, Lagos, Falana noted that Saraki violated Paragraph 1 of the Code of Conduct for Public Officers.

    The paragraph states that ”a public officer shall not put himself in a position where his personal interest conflicts with his duties and responsibilities”.

    Falana stressed that Saraki violated the paragraph by suspending Senate’s sittings to enable him to attend court sittings in company of fellow senators.

    He said: “If this morally despicable behaviour is not halted, the distinguished senators may soon resolve to appear in the various courts in the country in solidarity with other members who are facing terrorism and corruption charges.

    “As the Senate President, Dr Bukola is required to preside over the affairs of the legislative house in the discharge of its constitutional duty of making laws for the country. Attendance at court sittings in solidarity with any criminal suspect is certainly not part of the constitutional responsibilities of the senate.”

    The frontline lawyer averred that it was wrong to allow public servants facing corruption allegations to remain in office in the course of the trial.

    He said the proper thing was for such officers to step aside, pending when they would be cleared of such allegations.

    According to him, paragraphs 303, 404 of the Federal Government Public Service Rules (Corrected Version 2008) stipulates that when a public officer is charged to court with a criminal offence he/she shall be interdicted and cease to report for duty until the determination of the case.

    Falana noted that this contradicted what he called the misleading impression by some lawyers that public officers accused of corruption could not be asked to step aside.

    He said: “During the period of interdiction the public officer concerned shall be entitled to 50 per cent of his/her entitlements provided that if he/she is discharged or acquitted, the officer shall be immediately reinstated and receive his/her full entitlements which have been denied him/her during the period of interdiction.”

     

  • N10m alleged bribe: Group petitions Saraki, Dogara

    N10m alleged bribe: Group petitions Saraki, Dogara

    A group, Human Rights Writers Association of Nigeria (HRWAN), yesterday submitted a petition to the two chambers of the National Assembly, demanding probe of N10million alleged bribe involving the Chairman of the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT), Justice. Danladi Umar.

    The petition was endorsed by the group’s National Coordinator, Emmanuel Onwubiko.

    It was addressed to Senate President Bukola Saraki and the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Yakubu Dogara and dated November 10.

    The date of the receipt of the petition in the Office of the Senate President is also November 10.

    HRWAN claimed that the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) had started an investigation into the alleged bribery allegations levelled against Umar and his personal assistant, Mr. Ali Gambo Abdullahi.

    It noted that as a civil society group, whose main objective is advocacy and protection of human rights, the probe of the CCT boss would send a strong signal to those still doubting President Muhammadu Buhari’s anti-corruption war.

    The petition reads: “We write to bring to your attention for further investigation and necessary action, a report of likely conspiracy by the EFCC, Office of the Attorney- General of the Federation and the Code of Conduct Tribunal to remove the Senate President from office, using the instrumentality of their public offices to achieve their aims.”

    HRWAN claimed that the EFCC, through the CCT,  launched a counter-attack on Saraki, following the decision of the Senate to probe the former Chairman of the anti- graft agency, Mr. Ibrahim Lamorde, in August.

    It said that “the Senate  recently launched an investigation against the activities of the chairman of the EFCC. The EFCC as a counter-attack initiated and launched the prosecution of the Senate President as a retaliatory measure, using the offices of the Attorney-General of the Federation and a highly compromised Code of Conduct Tribunal to achieve their aim of removing the Senate President from office.

    “The EFCC is aware that a compromised Code of Conduct Tribunal will always do its bidding because it has already concluded investigation into a N10 million bribery allegation against the Chairman, Code of Conduct Tribunal, Justice Danladi Umar and his personal assistant, Mr. Ali Gambo Abdullahi.”

    The group claimed that the former Attorney-General of the Federation, Mohammed Adoke, had given a written directive to the EFCC to proceed to prosecute the accused, but that the anti- graft agency, for reasons best known to it, decided to file charges against only Abdullahi, the personal assistant.

    It said both chambers of the National Assembly should note that the so- called investigation report in the trial of the Senate President at the CCT was probably prepared by the EFCC and that the prosecutor, Mr. Rotimi Jacobs, is a well-known EFCC counsel.

    Part of the petition reads:  “The Senate and the House of Representatives should further note that the chairman, Code of Conduct Tribunal is still standing on EFCC administrative bail of N5,000,000.00 (Five Million Naira).

    “The Senate of the Federal Republic of Nigeria in collaboration with their counterpart in the House of Representatives have the constitutional powers to recommend to Mr. President to remove any person found culpable in the above abuse of offices for inability to discharge the functions of that office on the grounds of misconduct or for contravention of the laws.”