Tag: Tribunal

  • Tribunal upholds Lalong’s election

    Tribunal upholds Lalong’s election

    •’PDP fails to prove rigging allegation’

    The Plateau State Election Petition Tribunal in Jos yesterday upheld the election of Governor Simon Bako Lalong of the All Progressives Congress (APC).

    It dismissed the Peoples Democratic Party’s (PDP’s) petition.

    The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) declared Lalong as the winner, but the PDP candidate, Senator Gyang Pwajok, challenged the result, alleging fraud, irregularity and non-compliance with the electoral guidelines.

    INEC and APC argued that the party’s (APC’s) victory was well deserved.

    The tribunal held that the petitioner failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt.

    In the judgment, which lasted six hours, the Chairman, Justice Johnson Candide, said: “The petitioners, PDP and Senator Pwajok, have failed to produce credible evidence to prove their allegations.

    “The petitioners abandoned their criminal case and relied on the civil aspects to substantiate their petition. However, the evidence they provided was not substantial to convince the tribunal to invalidate the result declared by INEC.

    “The tribunal, therefore, has no option but to affirm the result declared by INEC, following the April 11 governorship poll.

    “In other words, the petition of the PDP and its governorship candidate is dismissed for lack of merit and the election of Governor Lalong is upheld, having substantially complied with the electoral guidelines.”

     

     

  • Plateau tribunal rules today

    The Plateau State chapter of the All Progressives Congress (APC) is set for another victory dance, as the election petition tribunal in Jos will today deliver judgment on the governorship election.

    Security agencies have tightened security in Jos and restricted movement on the court premises.

    The Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) challenged APC’s victory, alleging the election was marred by malpractices.

    But the APC said its victory as declared by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) was in accordance with the electoral guidelines.

  • PDP: Tribunal judgment biased, cannot stand

    PDP: Tribunal judgment biased, cannot stand

    A furious Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) yesterday alleged bias in the tribunal judgement that sacked its flagbearer, Mr. Nyesom Wike, as Rivers State governor. It said the judgment cannot stand.

    National Publicity Secretary of the PDP, Chief Olisa Metuh, slammed  the verdict as “completely bizarre and unacceptable,” and said it was part of the script by the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) to manipulate the will of the people.

    His party, he claimed, had been hinted  several months ago about  “this spurious judgement,”  and that it accordingly alerted the nation and the international community to the plot by the APC government to use the judiciary and various security agencies to reverse the victory of the PDP in Rivers, Delta, Akwa-Ibom, Taraba and Abia states.

    “We invite Nigerians and the international community to recall various reprehensible steps taken by the APC government that culminated in this ruling as well as the ridiculous Wednesday’s verdict of the Akwa-Ibom State governorship election tribunal, also sitting in Abuja”, the PDP said.

    The party listed what it described as the curious and controversial relocation of the election tribunals from their states to Abuja without any justification; the constant juggling of judicial officers and members of governorship election tribunals in PDP controlled states, especially, Rivers and Akwa-Ibom.

    It also alleged constant harassment of judicial and electoral officers involved in the governorship election cases in these state, using agencies of government, particularly, the Directorate of State Services (DSS) under the direct command of a known APC member, Alhaji Lawal Daura.

    The PDP similarly alleged constant threats, intimidation and coercing of witnesses against the party in the tribunals.

    He added: “the recent mass transfer of security operatives, especially the DSS and police personnel that actually participated in the conduct of the elections in Rivers and Akwa-Ibom, ostensibly to frustrate the course of genuine evidences in the process.”Also curious is the fact that after both the petitioner and respondent agreed before the tribunal that both card reader and manual accreditations were used for the election, the tribunal still went ahead to base its decision on issues of card reader.

    “While it is convenient for them to use legal technicalities to deny PDP victory in Imo, Lagos, Ogun and Yobe states, the same rules are misapplied to wickedly favour APC petitioners in Rivers and Akwa-Ibom states.

    “It is therefore evinced that these contradictions are direct fall-out of compromises as well as boasts by the APC of being in direct and remote control of the tribunals.

    “If not, how can one explain the fact that while governorship elections are being upturned in PDP states, in APC states, where similar claims and facts are in contention, elections are being upheld.”

    The party called on its members “particularly in Rivers and Akwa-Ibom state not to be daunted, as these judgments will not stand the test of the law and the will of the people.”

  • Tribunal judgement not a surprise, says LP candidate

    Tribunal judgement not a surprise, says LP candidate

    The governorship candidate of the Labour Party (LP) in Rivers State during the last elections, Prince Tonye Princewill, said yesterday that the nullification of the declaration of Mr. Nyesom Wike of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) did not come to him and many others as a surprise.

    He therefore told the PDP to forget about appealing the election petitions tribunal verdict on the matter.

    “Even PDP supporters, I’m sure in their heart of hearts, knew that this day would come. Like I said to my supporters on that election day, justice will prevail and the truth of this day will come out,” Princewill said in a statement.

    He added:”even as it may have come as a surprise to many neutral observers, it was no surprise to me, my supporters and many Rivers people who came out on that fateful day to try and cast their vote.”

    “If the APC legal team could not prove that there was no election in Rivers State, nobody could. It was that obvious.

    “I’d like to thank all the judges for upholding the law, the parties for conducting their briefs with civility and the people of Rivers state for surviving this period.”

     

  • Reading of Rivers guber election tribunal judgement on

    Reading of Rivers guber election tribunal judgement on

    Reading of judgement by the Rivers State Governorship Election Tribunal is on in Abuja.

    Proceedings started at about 10 am.

    More details soon.

  • Rivers governorship election: Anxiety in Wike’s camp as tribunal delivers judgment today

    Rivers governorship election: Anxiety in Wike’s camp as tribunal delivers judgment today

    There is palpable tension in the camp of the Governor of Rivers State, Chief Nyesom Wike, ahead of the delivery of judgment today in the state’s governorship election filed by the candidate of the All Progressives Congress (APC), Dr. Dakuku Peterside.

    The Rivers State Elections Tribunal is led by Justice Mohammed Ambrosa and has been sitting in Abuja.

    The exchange of addresses by counsel to the petitioners—Peterside and the APC—as well as the respondents—Wike, the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC)—took place on Thursday, with the tribunal adjourning indefinitely for judgment.

    Information, however, filtered out in Port Harcourt, the Rivers State capital yesterday afternoon that the tribunal would deliver judgment in the case at 10 a.m. today.

    Some international observers and other stakeholders who monitored the April 11 governorship election in Rivers State, as well as eminent personalities who testified before the tribunal had described the poll as a sham, saying that it was characterised by violence, massive rigging, intimidation of voters and snatching of ballot boxes.

    Wike, a former Minister of State for Education, and the Rivers State Chairman of the PDP, Chief Felix Obuah, however, maintained that the election was free, fair, credible, peaceful and violence-free, describing the turnout of the electorate as impressive, massive and unprecedented.

    The Publicity Secretary of the PDP in Rivers State, Samuel Nwanosike, said yesterday that he and other members of the PDP in the state were awaiting the tribunal’s judgment, stressing that the lawyers to the Rivers governor, PDP and INEC had done a good job.

    Asked what Wike and other members of the PDP in Rivers State would do if the judgment went in favour of the governorship candidate of the APC, he said that it would be subjudice to comment on a matter before a court or tribunal.

    On his part, the Publicity Secretary of the APC in Rivers State, Chris Finebone, said he had no comment.”

     

  • Jubilation in Ogun as tribunal affirms Amosun’s victory

    Jubilation in Ogun as tribunal affirms Amosun’s victory

    • Verdict is victory for Ogun people, says gov •Isiaka: we’re studying verdict

    After 180 days and five hours of sitting, including the four hours and few minutes spent in reading its judgment, the Governorship Election Petition Tribunal in Abeokuta, the Ogun state capital, yesterday  affirmed  Governor Ibikunle Amosun as the duly elected governor of the state  in the April 11, 2015 poll.

    Delivering the judgement amid tight security mounted within and outside the court premises by armed policemen, operatives of the Department of the State Security Service (DSS), and Nigeria Security and Civil Defence Corps (NSCDC), the Tribunal Chairman, Justice Henry Olusiyi, said the Petitioner “failed to prove his case against the respondent(Ibikunle Amosun).”

    He therefore dismissed it for lacking merit, saying there was a “yawning and unbridgeable gap between the allegations against the first respondent(Amosun) and evidenced adduced(by the petitioner) to prove them.”

    Continuing, he held further that the petitioner had also failed to satisfy the tribunal on why it should grant his prayers, adding that all the reliefs sought are therefore resolved in the negative against the petitioner as the “petition lacked merit and is accordingly dismissed.”

    The tribunal therefore affirmed that the respondent, Senator Ibikunle Amosun, was the duly elected governor in the April 11, 2015 governorship election conducted in Ogun state.

    The petitioner had sought among other things a court  declaration that he was the valid and duly elected governor in the governorship poll.

    The petition was filed by the governorship candidate of the People Democratic Party (PDP), Prince Gboyega Isiaka, and his party; PDP, against Governor Ibikunle Amosun and the  All Progressives Congress(APC).

    Isiaka had premised his case against Amosun’s election on nine grounds.

    But all the nine grounds were refuted stoutly during the trial by Amosun through his counsel, Lateef Fagbemi(SAN). The tribunal, yesterday, delivered its judgement in favour of Governor Amosun with no cost awarded to Gboyega Isiaka and his party – PDP.

    Reacting to the judgement which triggered wide jubilation in Abeokuta by supporters and members of the APC,  an elated Amosun said the tribunal’s  verdict was a victory for the good people of Ogun State.

    Governor Amosun in a statement by his Senior Special Assistant (Media), Adejuwon Soyinka, noted that the verdict of the tribunal affirming his victory at the poll and  the legal victory were further attestation of the fact that his election was only truly made possible by the good people of Ogun State.

    According to him, if the trial were to be conducted twenty times over, he and the All Progressives Congress(APC) would come out victorious because he was voted for massively by the people of Ogun State.

    He also hailed the judiciary and indeed members of the Justice Henry Olusiyi-led panel for the professional manner they carried out their duties without fear or favour.

    The governor however used the moment to also reiterate  that the ongoing, vital and all – important mission to rebuild Ogun State “is a task that should be embraced by all patriotic citizens of Ogun irrespective of political and ideological differences.”

    In his reaction, the petitioner, Prince Gboyega Isiaka  appealed to his teeming supporters to remain calm and not engage in any act that could breach the peace in the state.

    Isiaka said: “I am appealing to all and sundry to respect the decision of the court. Though the verdict did not go the way that would have gladdened the heart of many people in the state, but as law abiding and responsible citizens, we are duty bound to respect the verdict.

    “We shall carefully study the judgment as soon as possible and will make public our next line of action. But my appeal goes to all our supporters and those that might have been disappointed with the judgment to remain calm.  We still have many options available to us but that decision will be made very soon.”

  • Birth of Code of Conduct Bureau and Tribunal

    The Code of Conduct Bureau and the Code of Conduct Tribunal are both military inventions. They are part of the military legacy imposed on this nation by four military regimes-Murtala Muhammed, Olusegun Obasanjo, Ibrahim Babangida and Abdusalam Abubakar.

    If you look at the 1966 constitution, there is no reference to such two bodies. The nearest reference on oath is in section 96 of the 1963 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. When the idea of the Code of Conduct was adopted in the Constitution Drafting Committee in 1975, Nigeria was following the footsteps of Tanzania and Zambia. For, apart from Tanzania and Zambia and of late Ghana, there are no other countries in the world where such bodies exist.

    In 1967, the Tanzania leadership code was part of the Arusha Declaration during the tenure of Dr. Julius Kambarage Nyerere (1922-1999), the Mwalimu simply referred to as the ‘Teacher’. Originating therefore as a resolution, the Code of Conduct was adopted at a party meeting and became incorporated into the constitution and rules of the party binding on party members who are within the definition of a “leader”. To rest its binding force on a party resolution would have made it unenforceable against leaders who are not party officials or whose officers are not dependent on party membership. For this reason it was thought necessary to incorporate it into constitution of the country. This was done by means of a constitutional amendment. However the constitutional provisions have a limited application to persons; they apply only to members of the National Assembly, operating as a condition of eligibility for election or appointment to, and membership of, the assembly, subject however to certain exceptions and safeguards. For example, the consequences of breach of the code are not self-operating. They entail an action in the High Court instituted by the Attorney-General. Only if the court finds the allegation of breach established, does the sanction of disqualification or vacation of seat follow.

    The various regulations governing civil servants, councillors and officers of parastatal organizations were similarly amended to incorporate the code. Thus, the source of authority of the code differs for the various categories of leaders: for the M.Ps and ministers it is the constitution, for public servants the appropriate regulations, and for party officials the party resolution. The enforcement machinery is also different for each category of leaders.”

    In Zambia, on the other hand, the constitution is the source of the authority of the code for all categories of leaders. The constitution establishes a Leadership Committee, and authorizes it to draw up a code in the form of regulations which are to have effect as if enacted in the constitution. Compliance with the code is a condition for election, nomination, or appointment to offices specified therein, though the President may, if of the opinion that to do so would be necessary or desirable in the public interest, authorize the nomination or appointment of a person otherwise disqualified, on condition that he complies within three months. Breach of the code by the holder of a specified office (other than the office of the President, judge of the Supreme Court, judge of the High Court, investigator-general, director of public prosecutions and auditor-general) operates to vacate the office, if it is established either on a written admission or by the decision of a tribunal established by the constitution with a right of appeal to the Supreme Court. The tribunal consists of a chairman appointed by the Chief Justice and two other persons appointed by the President; the chairman must be a judge or a person qualified to be a judge of the High Court. (The exemption of the President, Judge, etc. from the sanctions of the code is because the constitution provides other machinery for their removal from office).

    In both Tanzania and Zambia the code applies only to leaders, defined so as to cover wide categories of persons: ministers, M.Ps, all party officials, senior officials of organization affiliated to the party and of parastatals bodies and the universities, councillors and civil servants in high and middle cadres.

    The purpose of the code is that a leader should not put himself in a position where his personal interest conflicts with his responsibility as leader, or which enables him to exploit others. With certain exceptions, the code therefore forbids a leader or his spouse to draw more than one salary, to employ workers in connection with any trade, business, profession or vocation, including the running of a hotel, boarding house or like establishment for gain or profit; to own a house let out on rent to others; to be shareholders or director in a privately-owned enterprise.”

    These were the prayers of the sub-committee on National Objectives and Public Accountability under Professor Ben Nwabueze in 1975. The committee also made provision for the Ombudsman. General Olusegun Obasanjo implanted the Code of Conduct Bureau and the Code of Conduct Tribunal into the 1979 constitution but jettisoned the creation of Ombudsman.

    If you look at the fifth schedule of the 1979 constitution from section 1 to section 21, they contain the recommendations of Professor Nwabueze. In 1980, President Shehu Shagari appointed Alhaji Isa Keita (1912-1994), the Waziri of Katsina as chairman of the Code of Conduct Bureau but Alhaji Shagari did not appoint the members of the Code of Conduct Tribunal, hence the non-functioning of the bureau.

    In 1988, General Ibrahim Babangida appointed a 10-man Code of Conduct Bureau with Reverend Cannon Mohammed as its chairman and Dr. Rex Akpofure as its secretary. In 1998, a constitutional panel review under Justice Niki Tobi was appointed by General Abdusalam Abubakar.

    Justice Niki Tobi panel lifted word for word, line by line, the contents of the 1979 constitution on the Code of Conduct Bureau and Code of Conduct Tribunal to be part of 1999 constitution and they are contained in the fifth schedule of the constitution from section 1- section 19. The present members of the Code of Conduct Bureau are Sam Shaba as chairman. The tenure of the board of Shaba has expired since April this year. President Muhammadu Buhari is yet to reconstitute new members of the bureau. Other members are Dr. Christy Ekoja, Dr. Ademola Adebo, Alhaji Disha Muhammed, Alhaji Ibrahim Mazo, Okechukwu Nwadinobi, Chief Stephen Bekefala while Choo Tony Salle Kyanni is the secretary.

    The question now is, are the punishment contained in the Code of Conduct too wide or too narrow? Should public servants of the middle and lower cadres be included? Is the restriction on the individual freedom of enterprise and of acquisition too severe? What is to be the reasonable balance between the need for individual initiative and the prevention of exploitation? Is the loss to the nation resulting from the exclusion of “leaders” from entrepreneurial initiative a reasonable price to pay for the prevention of exploitation?

    In 2003, the Code of Conduct Tribunal and the Independent National Electoral Commission were put under the office of the Secretary to the Government of the Federation in other to guarantee their independence. The tribunal was designed to function hence it was implanted in the constitution. It was not set up as a joke. The tribunal is not under the Supreme Court. It is totally independent. It can bark and bite. The earlier the tribunal makes a scapegoat, the more will it be taken seriously.

    • Teniola, a former director at the presidency, stays in Lagos.
  • Abia happy with tribunal

    Abia State government has expressed satisfaction with the performance of the Governorship, National and State House of Assembly election petition tribunal in the state, describing it as a true reflection of justice to all parties concerned.

    The Chief Press Secretary (CPS) to  Governor Okezie Ikpeazu, Mr. Godwin Adindu,  who said this while addressing journalists in Umuahia, the State capital, noted that Abia people are happy with the judgments delivered so far by the tribunal, even though they are yet to complete their assignment.

    He added that the people of the state are very much happy with the painstaking efforts with which they have addressed all issues brought before them.

    “Election cases are not quit easy but the tribunal has taken pains to address all the matters before them one after the other. Abia people are happy with all the judgment so far. We believe that all the judgment are  fair to all concerned   and they have reflected the true taste of justice and the wheel of justice has been allowed to run its full course in election cases in Abia State,” he said.

    Adindu condemned the attempts by some elements of the major opposition All Progressive Grand Alliance (APGA) in the State to dent and assassinate the character and the integrity of the honorable jurist of the tribunal by accusing them of collecting bribe from the PDP as well as compromised with properties in the united states of America for them to alter justice.

    The governor’s chief scribe insisted that such allegations and accusations levelled against such honorable jurist were not palatable at all and at the same time do not reflect the true identity of the Abia people and as such the Abia state government wants to disassociate herself from such comments.

    “We vehemently condemn the action of those making such comments in totality and we also want to advise them to refrain from insulting the intelligence of our judiciary.

    “We as a people respect the rule of law, the impartiality of the judiciary, we respect the judiciary as the last bastion of hope for the masses and therefore will not be happy when anybody or group of persons  tries to dent the integrity of the Nigerian judiciary.

    “We believe that the tribunal members have done a good work in Abia State and they are going to complete their work successfully having taken the final written addresses of both parties and having dismissed sine die.  We all also hope that they will come up with the date of the final judgment which will be fair to both parties.

    He also condemned ‘the serial campaign of calumny’ that has been unleashed against the honorable tribunal on the pages of newspapers by APGA members in the State, adding that  just from there have been four full page advertorials alleging all manners of things against the tribunal members.

    “In one of such advertorials the authors even campaigned for the jailing  and execution of the members of  the tribunal. We say that the people who have been making such attempts to undermine the judges are not guided by good morals and wisdom and therefore we ask them to refrain from such act without delay,” he added.

    Adindu pointed out that the chairman of the major opposition party Rev. Austine Ehiemere further embarrassed the state when he openly denied having knowledge of one of such advertorial he authored and signed which was published on page 49 of the Nation newspaper on Friday the 16th of October 2015.

    “Such action was very embarrassing to his person and party and the people of Abia State.  It shows the level of desperation with which this opposition party is pursuing the issues of election.

    “It does show that they are not ready to serve Abia people in all sincerity but only advertises their quest for personal aggrandizement,” he said

     

  • Tribunal: Drama as lawyer begs Saraki to enter dock

    Tribunal: Drama as lawyer begs Saraki to enter dock

    There was drama at the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) yesterday when Senate President Bukola Saraki refused to move into the dock when his case was called.

    The dock is where those standing trial stay during proceedings.

    Saraki’s refusal to leave his seat for the dock led to an argument between his lead counsel, Mahmud Magaji (SAN), and the prosecutor, Rotimi Jacobs (SAN).

    Objecting to Saraki’s action, Jacobs said it was the practice for an accused “irrespective” of his status to enter the dock during his trial.

    According to him, once an accused person’s plea is taken, he/she must always sit in the dock during proceedings.

    “Things must be done properly. The proper thing is for him to go to the dock,” Jacobs said.

    Magaji said there was no need for Saraki to enter the dock, citing Section 22(m) of the Evidence Act to buttress his submission.

    But, tribunal Chairman Justice Danladi Umar overruled him, directing him to prevail on Saraki to do the right thing.

    Shortly after Saraki moved into the dock, Jacobs sought an adjournment to enable the tribunal await the Court of Appeal’s judgment in the defendant’s appeal.  The appeal court on Monday adjourned the verdict sine die (indefinitely).

    Jacobs also acknowledged receipt of a fresh motion for stay of proceedings filed by Saraki’s legal team.

    He said although the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA) 2015 frowns at a stay of proceedings in criminal cases, there was the need to await the appellate court’s verdict because it touches on the tribunal’s jurisdiction to further preside over the case.

    A stay at this moment, he said, was reasonable in order to preserve the integrity of the court and of the legal profession.

    Responding, Magaji, who had suggested an indefinite adjournment, said he would agree to the two-week adjournment suggested by Jacobs if the business of the court on the next date would be for parties to report the appeal court’s decision.

    Magaji said it was necessary for him to remind the tribunal that his client’s trial was affecting his job as Senate President.

    Jacobs objected to Magaji’s claim, saying the statement was intended to intimidate the tribunal.

    “This is an intimidation of the tribunal. The defendant is a defendant. What is the essence of the rule of law?

    He (Magaji) is saying that because the defendant is the Senate President.

    “Are you saying he should not be treated like every other defendant, when the rule of law says even the king is subject to the law?” Jacobs said.

    Ruling, Justice Umar said the tribunal would await the Court of Appeal’s judgment. He adjourned to November 5 for report of the appellate court’s decision and possibly, hearing of pending applications.

    The tribunal, he said, would tarry a while in deference to the appellate court.

    Saraki arrived at the tribunal around 9. 54 am, accompanied by some senators. The case was called at 10:45 am.

    On September 22, Saraki pleaded not guilty to a 13-count charge of false asset declaration brought against him by the Code of Conduct Bureau (CCB).

    He is querying the tribunal’s jurisdiction to try him at the appeal court.

    Saraki is contending that the charge is defective, because it was not filed by a substantive Attorney General of the Federation and that the tribunal is not validly constituted because only two out of its constitutionally stipulated three members are currently sitting.

    On October 8, the Justice MooreAdumein-led three-man panel of the Court of Appeal, sitting in Abuja granted accelerated hearing in Saraki’s appeal and promised to give judgment before his next appearance at the tribunal yesterday.