Walkout On Code Of Conduct Tribunal: Saraki’s Lawyers Vow To Report CCT Chair To NJC

bibing

The legal team of the Senate president, Dr Bukola Saraki, has vowed to send a protest letter to the National Judicial Council (NJC) over the alleged biased conduct of the chair of the Code of Conduct Tribunal, Mr. Danladi Umar, in the trial of their client who is facing charges of false assets declaration in Abuja.

Yesterday, three Senior Advocates of Nigeria (SANs), Mr. Ahmed Raji, Alhaji Mahmoud Magagi and Saka Abimbola Isah, who led the legal team of the Senate president, all staged a walkout on the conduct tribunal chairman to protest alleged bias in the trial.

A source last night said that the legal team had resolved to report the tribal chairman to the NJC.

“You just wait and see the action we will take in the next few days. We cannot continue like this in this country. The judicial body has to intervene in this matter,” the source said.

The angry lawyers, accompanied by about 100 others, withdrew their services in the prosecution of Saraki by federal government, accusing the tribunal of open bias against the number three citizen and displaying judicial rascality in handling the case.

The anger of the lawyers arose when the tribunal chairman, Mr. Umar, ruled that he would not stay the trial in spite of Saraki’s pending appeal at the Supreme Court.

Magaji, who first withdrew his services in the trial, told the tribunal point-blank that going ahead with the prosecution amounted to daring and prejudicing the Supreme Court in the pending appeal case of the Senate president.

He told the chairman that, as a senior counsel in the bar and a minister in the temple of justice, he would not wish to be part of an illegality and an affront on the apex court.

Mr. Raji, who followed suit in withdrawing from the suit, told the tribunal chairman he was setting a bad precedent by sitting on the same issue at the same time with the Supreme Court.

Raji explained that apart from the law and practice, it was the tradition of respect that when the Supreme Court had been invited into a matter, the lower court will, as a matter of tradition, allow the apex court decide the matter first before taking over.

“In my capacity as a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, I have not seen where this kind of conduct will be exhibited against the apex court of the country. The action of this Code of Conduct Tribunal is an affront on the constitution and to the Supreme Court and, from my own side, I will not wish to be part of this act.

“I find it most impossible to sit down here and participate in a proceeding whose legality is being challenged at the Supreme Court.”

Earlier, both Magaji and Raji had asked the tribunal to stay proceedings pending the time the Supreme Court will make pronouncement in Saraki’s appeal in which he is challenging the legality of his trial.

They cited several authorities to buttress their arguments on the need for the tribunal to grant adjournment.

But in a ruling, the chairman of the tribunal dismissed the application for adjournment and agreed with the prosecution counsel, Mr. Rotimi Jacobs (SAN) that trial should go ahead in spite of the appeal at the Supreme Court.

The tribunal chairman held that the action of the defence was a ploy to delay the trial, adding that the arguments canvassed by Saraki’s lawyers had been overtaken by the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA) 2015 which, he said, gave no room for delay in trial.

“It is an obvious fact that where a party wants to delay trial, the party normally rushes to the higher court, as in this case, but the intendment of the ACJA has taken care of such attitude where criminal trials are unjustly delayed. We will not allow that; we are going ahead with the trial,” he had ruled.

The tribunal, however, ran into trouble when no lawyer showed up to defend Saraki yesterday and he was then asked whether he would defend himself.

But the Senate president told the tribunal that he was trained in the medical line and not in law, and that it would be unfair to ask him to defend himself in a terrain he knew nothing about.

He pleaded for one month to enable him persuade his lawyers to come back or for him to look for alternatives but the tribunal insisted that one month was too long.

The case was subsequently adjourned till November 19 for trial.

Source: Leadership