Tribunal Re-enforce Jurisdiction 13 Count Charges Against Saraki Upheld

Relying on the decided case-law in FRN vs Atiku Abubakar, 2007, 8-NWLR, the tribunal said it was vested with the powers to handle allegations bordering on breach of code of conduct by public officers.

The Code of Conduct Tribunal, CCT, sitting in Abuja, yesterday, declined to quash the 13-count charge preferred against the Senate President, Dr. Bukola Saraki, by the Federal Government.

However, Justice Umar admitted that the tribunal took an erroneous decision in a similar case that involved the former governor of Lagos State and National Leader of the All Progressives Congress, APC, Ahmed Bola Tinubu.

He said: “The tribunal has since realised that the decision it made on the case between FRN vs Tinubu was in error and has clearly departed from it.” On Saraki’s contention that the Federal Government waited for over 13 years before instituting the charge against him, the CCT held that there was no time frame for the prosecution of a criminal offence.

Justice Umar said: “It is not out of place for the prosecution to charge the defendant now. The application to quash the charge is hereby refused. The tribunal hereby re-enforce its jurisdiction in line with the constitution and Section 3(d) of the CCB and Tribunal Act. “Accordingly, the prosecution is hereby ordered to produce its witnesses for the trial of the defendant to commence immediately.”

However, by consensus of both the prosecution counsel, Mr. Rotimi Jacobs, SAN, and Saraki’s lawyer, Chief Kanu Agabi, SAN, the tribunal subsequently adjourned the matter till April 6. Uwaifo, Ozekhome, Nnoruka, others fault CCT chairman However, the leading lawyers, who said their disagreement with the CCT’s moves so far did not mean they were against President Muhammadu Buhari’s anti-graft war, noted that all they wanted was for the war to be waged within the rule of law.

Delivering his paper, Justice Uwaifo cited relevant authorities and said that the CCT was not right in refusing to grant Saraki’s request for stay of proceedings in the case; the presence or bias or likelihood of it and lack of impartiality on the part of the CCT chairman, who is facing bribery allegations could vitiate the proceedings of the tribunal. Citing Section 306 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act, 2015, he said  “the Code of Conduct tribubal cannot come into focus under criminal justice administration, not being a court in any sense. It follows as well that the tribunal could not rely on the Administration of Criminal Justice Act to refuse to grant stay of proceedings.”

Also speaking, Justice Nnoruka said the CCT was not a court and did not enjoy the status of a court as provided in the constitution. According to him, the CCT does not have judicial power and so any judicial activity it undertakes is null and void. Agbakoba concurred with Uwaifo, saying the CCT was not one of the judicial bodies enshrined in the constitution as such does not have jurisdiction to trial criminal matters. EmekaNgige said the National Judicial Council, NJC, should have called the CCT chairman to order when he started going beyond his bounds because he is not a judge.