The Nation Newspaper

Tag: Walter Onnoghen

  • Sagay knocks SANs for misleading public over Onnoghen

    Eminent professor of law Itse Sagay (SAN) on Thursday asked senior lawyers to stop misleading the public with lies that Chief Justice Walter Onnoghen is not a public officer and subject to the code of conduct.

    He condemned the “fraudulent misconduct of some crooked lawyers” who he said have been lying “glibly” on television that judicial officers are not public officers.

    Sagay referred to Part 2, paragraph 5, Fifth Schedule of the 1999 Constitution, which defines a public officer thus: “Public Officers for the Purposes of the Code of Conduct:…(5) Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice of the Supreme Court, Presidents and Justices of the Court of Appeal, all other Judicial Officers and all Staff of Courts of Law.”

    Sagay said: “You can now see that these lawyers, senior advocates and all have been indulging in monumental lies on television, misleading the public.

    “Another major lie is that a public officer, who commits a breach of the Code of Conduct by failing to declare some of his assets, is free from liability, provided he makes a written admission of such breach or non-compliance. For this, they rely on the proviso to Section 3 of the Code of Conduct Bureau and Tribunal Act 1989.

    “However, if one refers to the provisions of the Constitution, there is no such exemption from punishment. I refer specifically to the 5th Schedule Part 1, Paragraph 18 of the Constitution. That paragraph provides for the punishment for a breach of the Code of Conduct.

    “These punishments are: (a) vacation from office, (b) disqualification from holding office for 10 years, (c) seizure and forfeiture to the state of any property acquired in abuse or corruption of office.

    “There is absolutely no proviso whatsoever to the effect that an admission in writing of the offence will relieve the public officer of liability from punishment.

    “On the contrary, paragraph 18(3) goes further to state that the three punishments listed above are without prejudice to the penalty that may be imposed by any law where the conduct is also a criminal offence.”

    Sagay said there was, therefore, a clear conflict between the provision of the Code of Conduct Bureau and Tribunal Act and the 1999 Constitution.

    Read Also: CCT orders IGP to arrest Onnoghen

    According to him, where there is a clash between the Constitution and any other law, Section 1(3) of the Constitution provides that the “Constitution shall prevail, and that other law shall to the extent of inconsistency be void”.

    Besides, Sagay said where there is conflict between two pieces of legislation covering the same matter, the latter in time prevails.

    “The Code of Conduct Bureau and Tribunal Act were enacted in 1989. On the other hand, the present Constitution took effect from 1999. So either way, the provisions of the Constitution prevail over the Code of Conduct Bureau and Tribunal Act.

    “It can, therefore, be seen that there is no exemption from punishment whatsoever for a public officer who admits his guilt with regard to a breach of the Code of Conduct.

    “One other opportunistic matter that the defenders of the Chief Justice are now raising, is the query that if the EFCC could petition the National Judicial Council (NJC) regarding  the $30, 000 allegedly deposited  in the Chief Justice’s Bank account, why was the earlier matter of the failure to fully disclose his assets not sent to the NJC?

    “The answer is simple for anyone thinking in good faith. The non-declaration of assets is Constitutional and mandatorily a matter for the Code of Conduct Tribunal exclusively.

    “On the other hand, payment by a lawyer into the account of a judge including the Chief Justice constitutes an offence committed by the judge as a judicial officer. Therefore, that matter according to the wrongly decided Nganjiwa’s case, goes to the NJC.

    “Failure to declare assets is not an offence committed in the process of Judge’s activities as a judicial officer.

    “Therefore, any complaint arising from such matter does not go to the NJC but to the Code of Conduct Tribunal (in cases of non-declaration of assets) or the ordinary Courts in other cases,” Sagay said.

     

  • Senior lawyers disagree over CCT’s order

    THE bench warrant issued yesterday by the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) Chairman Danladi Umar for the arrest of suspended Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN) Walter Onnoghen has become the subject of arguments by  senior lawyers.

    They are divided over the propriety of the CCT chair ordering the law officer’s arrest at a time his matter was pending before the National Judicial Council (NJC) and at the Court of Appeal.

    Eminent professor of law Itse Sagay (SAN) said Justice Onnoghen was not above the law.

    “So, the order to arrest him for failing to appear before the Conduct Tribunal (CCT) was in order,” Sagay said.

    He told our correspondent that the suspended CJN should have appeared before the CCT to demonstrate his regard for the rule of law.

    Said Sagay: “I don’t want to speak much on it, because whatever I say they will pour petrol and set fire on it. But from the beginning when this problem started, I said that no one is above the law.

    “Ask yourself, if you or I were the ones accused, would we not appear before the CCT? How is Onnoghen different from the rest of us legally and constitutionally? No way,” Sagay said.

    The Presidential Advisory Committee Against Corruption (PACAC) chairman disagreed with former Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) President Olisa Agbakoba (SAN), who said the CCT’s order was subversive of the rule of law since a petition against Justice Onnoghen was pending before the National Judicial Council (NJC).

    Sagay said: “I don’t want to criticise Agbakoba, but they should think of the future of this country. They should not create a privileged class that is not subject to law whilst others are subject to it. At the end of the day, it will bring the law into contempt.

    “I think Onnoghen should have appeared before the CCT to show that as the former head of the Judiciary, he has great respect for the rule of law.”

    Dr Agbakoba faulted the arrest warrant because it was subversive of rule of law and due process.

    He said the CCT should have waited for the NJC to determine a petition by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) against Chief Justice Onnoghen.

    According to Agbakoba, the CCT chairman went “too far” by issuing the order.

    He said: “I am shocked that the CCT will issue a bench warrant for the arrest of Hon. Justice Walter Onnogen, knowing full well that its jurisdiction to try the case has been challenged and the application on challenge is on the CCT docket, and no hearing has occurred.

    “The CCT is aware that there is now before the NJC a petition against Justice Walter Onnogen on exactly the same charges at the CCT.

    “The CCT ought to await the outcome of the pending matters in the NJC, Appeal Court and Federal High Court.

    “The conduct of the CCT subverts the rule of law and due process.”

  • ‘Onnoghen doesn’t have immunity from arrest’

    A lawyer and multilateral diplomat, Dr Babafemi Badejo, Wednesday backed the order by the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) that Chief Justice Walter Onnoghen should be arrested.

    He said the 1999 Constitution does not give the suspended Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN) immunity from arrest and prosecution.

    Badejo, a consultant to the African Union (AU) and a former University of Lagos (UNILAG) don, said the CCT was not bound to wait on the National Judicial Council (NJC).

    He said: “In spite of the crafty arguments of some SANs, the Nigerian Constitution is very clear.

    “Only the President, Vice-President, Governors and Deputy Governors have immunity while in office except they are first impeached and removed from office.

    “In effect, all other Nigerians, including the suspended Chief Justice of Nigeria are subject to law. That is the rule of law.

    “So, it is a surprise and a shock that legal leaders who should give leadership are bent on using all subterfuge to further weaken the rule of law in Nigeria.

    “Hon. Justice Walter Onnoghen is not above the law. He knew very well that the normal procedure was for an arrest warrant to be issued against him when he refused to show up at the CCT.

    “The argument that a process was on at the NJC is irrelevant to the process that began at the CCT that was appealed against but the Court of appeal decided that the process should continue.

    Read Also: CCT orders IGP to arrest Onnoghen

    “A challenge to the jurisdiction of the CCT can never have the status of setting aside the need for the suspended Chief Justice to show up at the CCT and have the proper motions argue for the CCT Judge to decide whether he has jurisdiction or not.

    “To stay away as the suspended Chief Justice did is an unruly challenge to our laws as they stand today.

    “It is unnecessary to repeat that Justice Walter Onnoghen wants to drag the Judiciary totally in the mud in which he has enmeshed himself. That should not be allowed.

    “He should be brought before the CCT as he would have rightly ruled.  The process at the NJC should continue at its own pace.”

    Badejo, a former high ranking United Nations (UN) official, said if Chief Justice Onnoghen does not believe the CCT should continue with the case, he and his lawyers should canvass it before the CCT.

    “He cannot take the law into his own hands. We have no Queen or King in Nigeria. The CJN is subject to law.

    “Finally, we should all salute the Ebun Sofunde led 20 SANs who have stepped forward to say what is truthful and promise to push for needed reforms of our judicial system.

    “Their names will be written in gold when dispassionate efforts are undertaken on the Onnoghen saga.

    “We cannot hope for a sustainable country if our Judiciary remains as corrupt as we all know it is but continue to play the ostrich,” Badejo said.

     

  • Onnoghen is subject to law, he can be arrested – Sagay

    Eminent professor of law Itse Sagay (SAN) on Wednesday said Chief Justice Walter Onnoghen was not above the law, so the order to arrest him for failing to appear before the Conduct Tribunal (CCT) was in order.

    Sagay told our correspondent that the suspended Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN) should have appeared before the CCT to demonstrate his regard for the rule of law.

    He said: “I don’t want to speak much on it, because whatever I say, they will pour petrol and set fire on it.

    “But from the beginning when this problem started, I said that no one is above the law.

    “Ask yourself, if you or I were the ones accused, would we not appear before the CCT?

    “How is Onnoghen different from the rest of us legally and constitutionally? No way,” Sagay said.

    The Presidential Advisory Committee Against Corruption (PACAC) Chairman disagreed with former Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) President Dr Olisa Agbakoba (SAN) who said the CCT’s order was subversive of the rule of law since a petition against Onnoghen was pending before the National Judicial Council (NJC).

    Sagay said: “I don’t want to criticise Agbakoba, but they should think of the future of this country.

    “They should not create a privileged class that is not subject to law whilst others are subject to it. At the end of the day, it will bring the law into contempt.

    “I think Onnoghen should have appeared before the CCT to show that as the former head of the Judiciary, he has great respect for the rule of law.”

  • CCT orders IGP to arrest Onnoghen

    …Plans arraignment for Friday

    The Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) has ordered the Inspector General of Police (IGP) to arrest and produce before it on Friday, the suspended Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN) Justice Walter Onnoghen.

    CCT Chairman, Danladi Umar gave the directive on Wednesday while granting the prosecution’s request that Onnoghen must be compelled to attend the tribunal and plead to the charge of breach of code of conduct (non-declaration of assets) pending against him.

    Read Also: CCT: Prosecution asks for arrest warrant against Onnoghen

    Umar, in a ruling, after taking argument from Aliyu Umar (SAN), for prosecution, and Adegboyega Awomolo (SAN) for the defence, granted the request of the prosecution for the issuance of a bench warrant against Onnoghen.

    The CCT Chairman subsequently scheduled next Friday for his (Onnoghen’s) arraignment.

    Details later…

  • CCT: Prosecution asks for arrest warrant against Onnoghen

    The prosecution in the charge against the suspended Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Wlater Onnoghen before the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) has applied for the issuance of a warrant of arrest on him (Onnoghen).

    Lead prosecution lawyer, Aliyu Umar (SAN) made the application at the resumption of proceedings on Wednesday morning.

    Umar noted that Onnoghen has consistently absented himself from the tribunal since proceedings commenced on the charge in January this year.

    He said both the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA) and the Practice Direction of the CCT provides that a defendant must be present in court before any proceedings can be conducted in respect of a pending charge.

    Lawyer to the defendant, Adegboyega Awomolo (SAN) is currently making a counter-argument, urging the court to, among others reject the prayer for the issuance of an arrest warrant against Onnoghen.

    Details shortly…

  • CCT Chair truly answerable only to Presidency, says NBA

    …..Pleads with FG to stop Onnoghen’s CCT trial

    The Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) said on Tuesday that it agreed with the argument by the Chairman of the Code of Conduct Tribunal ( CCT ), Danladi Uma that he and his tribunal were not answerable to the Judiciary, but the Presidency.

    NBA, in a statement issued on Tuesday by its President, Paul Usoro (SAN), said Umar was correct in that argument, but contended that the fact that the CCT was under the control of the Executive informs the urgent need to discontinue charge of breach of code of conduct pending against the suspended Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Walter Onnoghen before the CCT.

    It said: “the Chairman of the CCT, Hon. Danladi Umar, in his response to a petition that was written against him and which was forwarded to him by the Federal Judicial Service Commission (FJSC) states emphatically that he and his tribunal are answerable and report only to the Presidency, by law and practice. He is absolutely correct.

    “An insistence, in the circumstance, on the CJN, the head of an independent arm of the FGN, standing trial before a tribunal that is under the Presidency and is answerable only to the Presidency, mocks the concept of and completely erodes the independence of the judiciary and the constitutional separation that should exist between the three arms of the FGN.

    “It is precisely for this reason that our Constitution created the NJC and we are pleased that the FGN has warmed up to the utilization of that due process, as illustrated by the submission of the EFCC petition to the council.”

    NBA’s new intervention in the case is coming a day before the resumption of proceedings in the case before the CCT.

    The Chairman of the CCT, Danladi Umar had, at the last proceedings on February 4 this year, insisted that Onnoghen must appear before the tribunal in person before any further businesses could be conducted in the charge pending against him (Onnoghen).

    Umar gave the directive shortly before agreeing to the request by parties for adjournment to February 13.

    He said: “Under the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA), a defendant, who is served with a charge and represented by lawyers, must take his plea before raising any objection.

    “The defendant has continued to stay away from this tribunal. I am going to grant this adjournment at the instance of the prosecution and defence, but must state that the defendant must attend court at the next adjourned date so that all the issues would be resolved in his presence.”

    Read Also: Onnoghen to CCT chair: you’re a biased, tainted arbiter

    Also on Tuesday, the Court of Appeal in Abuja failed to hear the three appeals filed suspended Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN) Justice Walter Onnoghen.

    The appellate court had in late January adjourned on February 12, 2019 for the hearing of the appeals

    But, when lawyers to parties got to court on Tuesday, the court could not form quorum (of three Justices) for the purpose of hearing the appeals.

    Parties were told to await information, on a later date, on when the hearing is to be rescheduled.

    The appeals are against the decisions of the Code of Conduct to assume jurisdiction over the charge pending against Onnoghen and the ex-parte injunction granted by the CCT, and on which President Muhammadu Buhari acted to suspend Onnoghen.

    The statement by the NBA reads: “Ahead of the adjourned proceedings in the above-named matter before the Code of Conduct Tribunal (“CCT”), scheduled for tomorrow, February 13, 2019, the Nigerian Bar Association again urges the Executive arm of the Federal Government of Nigeria (“FGN”) to discontinue this Charge against the Chief Justice of Nigeria, Honorable Mr. Justice Walter S N Onnoghen, GCON (“CJN”) for the following reasons, amongst others:

    “First, as widely reported, one of the two petitions against the CJN that is currently before the National Judicial Council (“NJC” or “Council”) is an exact replica of the petition that motivated the CCT Charge.

    “The second petition was reportedly presented by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), an FGN agency. We commend the FGN for adhering to due process by submitting the EFCC petition to the NJC for consideration.

    “In like manner and in adherence to the law and due process, we urge the FGN to discontinue the CCT Charge and allow the NJC consider the initial petition which, as widely reported, has already been responded to by the CJN.

    “Second, the Chairman of the CCT, Hon. Danladi Umar, in his response to a petition that was written against him and which was forwarded to him by the Federal Judicial Service Commission, states emphatically that he and his tribunal are answerable and report only to the Presidency, by law and practice. He is absolutely correct.

    “An insistence, in the circumstance, on the CJN, the head of an independent arm of the FGN, standing trial before a tribunal that is under the Presidency and is answerable only to the Presidency, mocks the concept of and completely erodes the independence of the judiciary and the constitutional separation that should exist between the three arms of the FGN.

    “It is precisely for this reason that our Constitution created the NJC and we are pleased that the FGN has warmed up to the utilization of that due process, as illustrated by the submission of the EFCC petition to the Council.

    “Third, and complementary to the two points afore-stated is the fact that the spectacle of having our CJN, while still holding that title, in the dock before the CCT or any other court, truly diminishes all of us, not least the Executive arm of the FGN.

    “The NJC process allows an initial determination to be made on the petitions against the CJN and if His Lordship is found liable or wanting howsoever, appropriate sanctions would be imposed by the NJC including recommendation for his dismissal or retirement.

    “In that event, he would no longer hold the office or title of CJN and could be prosecuted for any criminal infraction before the CCT or any other Court.

    “An insistence on the CCT prosecution paints a picture of persecution of the CJN by the Executive and such a spectacle in no way ennobles the FGN Executive arm and/or its officials. Such a scenario should be avoided by all means.

    “Given these non-exhaustive considerations and facts, we press on the Executive arm of the FGN to please discontinue the Charge against the CJN when the matter comes up before the CCT tomorrow, Wednesday, 13 February 2019.

    “We respectfully urge full compliance with due process by FGN in this matter by allowing the NJC process to take its course in respect of the two petitions against the CJN – a step that has already, commendably, been embraced by FGN in respect of the EFCC petition.”

  • Breaking: NJC to decide Onnoghen, Muhammad’s fate Wednesday

    The National Judicial Council (NJC) has fixed February 13 for its possible decision on the petitioners against the suspended Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Walter Onnoghen and the Acting CJN, Justice Ibrahim Tanko Muhammad.

    The body, which rose a moment ago from its emergency meeting, elected to constitute a Preliminary Complaints Assessment Committee in accordance with its Regulation 17, to consider the responses from Onnoghen and Muhammad.

    The NJC, in a statement by its spokesman, Soji Oye, also forwarded a fresh petition from the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) against Onnoghen to him for his response.

    The statement reads: “The National Judicial Council reconvened today in an Emergency Meeting to consider the responses of Hon. Mr. Justice W.S.N. Onnoghen, GCON and Hon. Mr. Justice I.T. Muhammad, CFR to the three petitions written against them.

    Read Also:  CCT insists on Onnoghen’s appearance

    “Members resolved to constitute a Preliminary Complaints Assessment Committee, in accordance with Regulation 17 of the National Judicial Council Judicial Discipline Regulations, 2017 and report to Council on the 13th of February 2019.

    “The Council will reconvene on Wednesday, 13th February, 2019.

    “Council also received a new petition written by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) against Hon. Mr. Justice W.S.N. Onnoghen, GCON and forwarded it to him for his response within seven (7) working days.

    “Council reaffirmed its confidence in Hon. Mr. Justice Umaru Abdullahi, CON and continues under his Interim Chairmanship.”

  • Nigerians back Buhari on suspension of CJN

    President Muhammadu Buhari’s suspension of Chief Justice of Nigeria ( CJN ) Justice Walter Onnoghen over alleged failure to fully declare his assets to the Code of Conduct Bureau (CCB) is in order, a poll has revealed.

    66 per cent of Nigerians who participated in the poll on the website of The Nation Newspaper backed the action.

    Only 31 per cent of respondents faulted the suspension.

    Read Also: CJN at CCT: proceedings suspended abruptly

    Buhari suspended Justice Onnoghen as CJN on January 25 over allegations of non-declaration of assets.

    The President immediately swore in Justice Tanko Muhammad to replace Onnoghen in an acting capacity.

    A total of 5,689 Nigerians voted in the poll carried out from January 27 to February 8, 2019.

    3,863 of them are in support while only 1,820 opposed it. 186 voters abstained from a yes or no response, declaring there were unsure of the legality or otherwise of the action.

  • Onnoghen: Agbakoba sues NJC, seeks declaratory reliefs

    A former president of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) Mr Olisa Agbakoba (SAN) has approached a Federal High Court in Lagos, challenging the suspension of Justice Walter Onnoghen as Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN).

    In the suit, Agbakoba joined the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF) and the National Judicial Council (NJC) as first and second defendants.

    His application is brought pursuant to Order 3 rule 9 of the Federal High Court Civil Procedure Rules 2009.

    The plaintiff wants the court to decide, whether by the combined interpretation of Section 153 (1)(i) and Section 292 (1) (a) (i) of the Constitution, Justice Onnoghen can be suspended from office without the recommendation of the NJC or the President acting on an address supported by two third majority of the Senate.

    Read Also: CJN’s suspension: Agbakoba, activist kick

    Agbakoba seeks from the court: “A Declaration that by the combined interpretation of the above Sections of the Constitution as (amended) Justice Onnoghen cannot be suspended or removed from office except on the recommendation of the NJC or the President acting on an address supported by two thirds majority of the Senate.”

    He also seeks further order or orders as the Court may deem fit to make in the circumstances.

    No date has been fixed for hearing of the suit.

    NAN