Assets declaration palaver: In one fell swoop, court stops CJN trial
…Legal tussle begins as court orders parties to maintain status quo
…CCT directs fresh service of summons on Onnoghen
Attempt by the Federal Government to arraign the Chief Justice of Nigeria, (CJN), Justice Walter Onnoghen, on six counts charge before the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) for alleged misconduct and operating a foreign bank account ran into a hitch on Monday as he claimed he was not served personally with the charges.
The development came just as Justice N. E Maha of the Federal High Court in Abuja, on Monday, put on hold the arraignment of the CJN before the CCT, pending the determination of two separate suits challenging his arraignment.
After two hours of intense arguments on service by the Prosecution Lawyer, Aliyu Umar, a senior advocate of Nigeria (SAN), and the Lead defence lawyer, Chief Wole Olanipekun (SAN), who led 45 other SANs and 55 other lawyers, Chairman of the Code of Conduct Tribunal Danladi Umar fixed Tuesday, January 22, 2019 for trial.
Prosecution lawyer, Umar, SAN, informed the tribunal that the business of the day was to arraign the CJN Onnoghen and for him to take his plea. He said the defendant was not present.
Chairman of the Tribunal then asked why the defendant was not brought to the tribunal.
The prosecution said the defendant was served with the summons.
Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Wole Olanipekun, who led a team of about 45 other senior advocates informed the tribunal Chairman, Danladi Umar, that the defendant has filed an application challenging the jurisdiction of the tribunal to entertain the suit.
Olanipekun also informed the court that the defendant was not in court because he has not been served with the summons of the tribunal.
He insisted that because he was not personally served as required by law and he would not have been at the tribunal.
He said that besides the issue of service, the defendant had filed an application challenging the competence of charge brought against him and the jurisdiction of the Tribunal to entertain the case.
“The defendant was not served. If he has been served personally, the defendant is willing to be in Court,” he added.
Olanipekun (SAN) also told the tribunal that the defendant had filed an interlocutory application challenging the jurisdiction because CJN Onnoghen is a judicial officer.
Citing Supreme Court authorities and Court of Appeal decision, he argued that the defendant need not to be in court until the application is heard and deposed off.
Prosecution lawyer, Umar (SAN), countered that Olanipekun’s submission, insisting that section 397 (2) of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA) provides that “no application should be made until the defendant has taken his or her plea.”
The prosecution conceded that Justice Onnoghen was not personally served with the summons. He explained that when the clerk got to his office on Friday, Onnoghen directed that his own clerk should sign for it.
He urged the tribunal for a short adjournment to enable the tribunal serve Onnoghen personally and to take an application the prosecution had filed.
In his ruling. Mr. Danladi Umar overruled Olanipekun’s appeal for January 28 date and adjourned the matter till Tuesday, January 22, 2019 for the hearing of both the prosecution’s and defendant’s applications.
Meanwhile, there was heavy presence of security personnel at the Code of Conduct Tribunal, venue of the scheduled arraignment of the Chief Justice of Nigeria CJN, Justice Walter Onnoghen, on Monday.
As early as 8am, the venue was already condoned off by security operatives who carried out screening of persons going into the premises of the tribunal.
Over 50 Senior Advocates of Nigeria (SANs) alongside dozens of other lawyers attended the proceedings in line with the call of Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) President, Paul Usoro, SAN, to show solidarity with the CJN.
Count one of the charge read: That you, Justice Walter Nkanu Onnoghen CJN, GCON, between June 8, 2005 to December 14, 2016 being a public officer, serving as a Judicial Officer of the Federal Republic of Nigeria as a Justice of the Supreme Court of Nigeria failed to declare
and submit a written declaration of all your assets and liabilities within the prescribed period of (3) months after being sworn-in as a Justice of the Supreme Court of Nigeria on the 8 day of June, 2005 and you thereby contravened the provisions of section 15(1) of the Code of Conduct Bureau and Tribunal Act Cap 15 LFN 2004 and punishable under section 23(2) a, b and c of the same Act.
In counts 2 to 6, Onnoghen, was accused of falsely declaring his assets by omitting to declare funds in his domiciliary accounts as well as an e- saving accounts both in local and foreign currencies, all in Standard Chartered Bank, Wuse, Abuja.
Meanwhile, Justice N. E Maha of the Federal High Court in Abuja, on Monday, stopped the arraignment of the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Walter Onnoghen, before the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) by the Federal Government pending the hearing and determination of two separate suits challenging his arraignment.
The suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/27/2019 was filed by Incorporated Trustees of the Centre for Justice and Peace Initiative and the Incorporated Trustees of International Association of Students against the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF), Chairman,
Code of Conduct Tribunal and the Code of Conduct Bureau (CCB), Federal Judicial Services Commission, CJN and the Inspector General of Police (IGP) were filed before Justice Maha while arraignment of the CJN was being expected before the tribunal.
Justice Maha, while ruling on the two separate ex parte applications, on Tuesday, ordered parties to maintain status quo till January 17, 2019.
The Judge ruled that the defendants should be served with all the court papers filed and that they should appear in court on January 17, being the next adjourned date for the hearing.
Onnoghen: Buhari, APC desperate over 2019 general election
Meanwhile, the Peoples Democratic Party Presidential Campaign Organisation (PPCO) has accused President Muhammadu Buhari and the All Progressives Congress (APC) of desperation in the assault against the judiciary with the attempt to forcefully remove the Chief Justice of the Nigeria, Justice Walter Onnoghen.
Rather than retracing its steps from the ignoble act against the CJN, the party described as despicable attempt by the APC and the Buhari Presidency to blackmail Nigerians, who condemned the assault on the judiciary, as being sympathetic to corruption.
The PDP said this has exposed the desperation of the PDP to subdue and annex the judiciary, particularly, following increasing agitation by Nigerians for the prosecution of President Buhari’s cronies and APC leaders over exposed corruption.
Kola Ologbondiyan, the party’s spokesperson in a statement, said: “The Buhari Presidency and APC in turning around to fight Nigerians have further exposed their desperation to replace Justice Onnoghen with a pliable CJN,
who will execute their plots to use the courts to detain opposition leaders as well as vocal members of the Civil Society during the elections.
“It is now crystal clear to all Nigerians that apart from failing woefully in all its promises, the APC and its presidential candidate, President Buhari, are beginning to manifest their autocratic attributes. “Furthermore, the Buhari Presidency is not only corrupt but has become an asylum for corrupt people”. The PPCO therefore challenged the APC and the Buhari Presidency to name one APC member that has been investigated, prosecuted or arraigned before any court of competent jurisdiction in the last three and half years in spite of their humongous corruption. The party accused President Buhari encouraging corruption more than any President that had the privilege of governing Nigeria. He said: “It is important to restate that the Buhari Presidency is now a refugee camp for known and well-advertised faces of corruption. From the factional National Chairman of the APC, the co-chairman of the Buhari campaign Organisation, the Director General of the Buhari Campaign, the zonal directors and the recent entrants from Bauchi and Gombe states, all leaders of the APC and Buhari campaign structure are all candidates of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC)”. The PDP charged Nigerians not to be deterred by the attacks by the Buhari Presidency, which has since become desperate and anti-people following its rejection by Nigerians because of its corruption, incompetence and insensitivity to the plights of our citizens. Direct AGF to take complaints against Onnoghen to NJC, SERAP urges Buhari However, Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) has urged President Muhammadu Buhari to “instruct the Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice Abubakar Malami, SAN, to immediately withdraw the charges against the Chief Justice of Nigeria, Walter Onnoghen, and to send any allegations of breach of asset declaration provisions of the 1999 Constitution of Nigeria (as amended) to the National Judicial Council (NJC) for investigation.” The organisation said: “Mr. Malami should then request Justice Onnoghen as the Chairman of the NJC to recuse himself, so that the next most senior justice at the Supreme Court can preside over the process and set up a panel to investigate the allegations against Justice Onnoghen to ensure fairness and justice in the matter.” In a statement by SERAP senior legal adviser, Bamisope Adeyanju, the organisation tasked the government to follow due process of law, and allow the NJC to consider the allegations against Justice Onnoghen. He said: “We believe that enforcing asset declaration provisions would help to prevent corruption and abuse of office and ensure transparency in public officers including judges. “But the government should follow due process of law, and allow the NJC to consider the allegations against Justice Onnoghen first before pushing for prosecution, should there be any relevant admissible evidence. This would help to accord Justice Onoghen his entire rights through laid down process. The statement read in part: “The moral guilt or the legal guilt of Justice Onnoghen should be left for the judicial process to decide, as he is presumed innocent until proven guilty by a court of competent jurisdiction. For now, the fundamental question is whether he is afforded the due process of law, as he is constitutionally and legally entitled to. This is our interest in this case, and this should be the interest of every lover of justice. “It is the principle of due process of law which is at stake in this case, the soul and spirit of which will be endangered if Justice Onnoghen’s case continues to be heard before the Code of Conduct Tribunal. A denial of justice to one citizen is a denial of such to all. Due process here requires that Justice Onnoghe be given an opportunity to have allegations against him heard by the NJC. “The bringing of this case against Justice Onnoghen before the Code of Conduct Tribunal would appear to have fallen below the minimum procedural standards of legal justice, which in turn would affect the quality of justice he receives. Due process rights should not be curtailed in the interest of expediting enforcement of asset declaration provisions. The authorities have the responsibility to insure fair treatment of judges or others who face these kinds of charges that may ultimately lead to deprivation of liberty. “Preventing the NJC to first hear the allegations against Justice Onnoghen would deny him his constitutionally and internationally recognised right to a fair hearing and lead to the matter being unnecessary politicised. “The authorities may have a strong case against him but the possibility of success is diminished if the proper procedure is not followed. The requirements of justice and success of the fight against corruption justify the fundamental need to ensure and apply due process rights in this case.” Andrew Orolua, Doosuur Iwambe and Tunde Opalana – Abuja
“It is now crystal clear to all Nigerians that apart from failing woefully in all its promises, the APC and its presidential candidate, President Buhari, are beginning to manifest their autocratic attributes. “Furthermore, the Buhari Presidency is not only corrupt but has become an asylum for corrupt people”. The PPCO therefore challenged the APC and the Buhari Presidency to name one APC member that has been investigated, prosecuted or arraigned before any court of competent jurisdiction in the last three and half years in spite of their humongous corruption. The party accused President Buhari encouraging corruption more than any President that had the privilege of governing Nigeria. He said: “It is important to restate that the Buhari Presidency is now a refugee camp for known and well-advertised faces of corruption. From the factional National Chairman of the APC, the co-chairman of the Buhari campaign Organisation, the Director General of the Buhari Campaign, the zonal directors and the recent entrants from Bauchi and Gombe states, all leaders of the APC and Buhari campaign structure are all candidates of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC)”. The PDP charged Nigerians not to be deterred by the attacks by the Buhari Presidency, which has since become desperate and anti-people following its rejection by Nigerians because of its corruption, incompetence and insensitivity to the plights of our citizens. Direct AGF to take complaints against Onnoghen to NJC, SERAP urges Buhari However, Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) has urged President Muhammadu Buhari to “instruct the Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice Abubakar Malami, SAN, to immediately withdraw the charges against the Chief Justice of Nigeria, Walter Onnoghen, and to send any allegations of breach of asset declaration provisions of the 1999 Constitution of Nigeria (as amended) to the National Judicial Council (NJC) for investigation.” The organisation said: “Mr. Malami should then request Justice Onnoghen as the Chairman of the NJC to recuse himself, so that the next most senior justice at the Supreme Court can preside over the process and set up a panel to investigate the allegations against Justice Onnoghen to ensure fairness and justice in the matter.” In a statement by SERAP senior legal adviser, Bamisope Adeyanju, the organisation tasked the government to follow due process of law, and allow the NJC to consider the allegations against Justice Onnoghen. He said: “We believe that enforcing asset declaration provisions would help to prevent corruption and abuse of office and ensure transparency in public officers including judges. “But the government should follow due process of law, and allow the NJC to consider the allegations against Justice Onnoghen first before pushing for prosecution, should there be any relevant admissible evidence. This would help to accord Justice Onoghen his entire rights through laid down process. The statement read in part: “The moral guilt or the legal guilt of Justice Onnoghen should be left for the judicial process to decide, as he is presumed innocent until proven guilty by a court of competent jurisdiction. For now, the fundamental question is whether he is afforded the due process of law, as he is constitutionally and legally entitled to. This is our interest in this case, and this should be the interest of every lover of justice. “It is the principle of due process of law which is at stake in this case, the soul and spirit of which will be endangered if Justice Onnoghen’s case continues to be heard before the Code of Conduct Tribunal. A denial of justice to one citizen is a denial of such to all. Due process here requires that Justice Onnoghe be given an opportunity to have allegations against him heard by the NJC. “The bringing of this case against Justice Onnoghen before the Code of Conduct Tribunal would appear to have fallen below the minimum procedural standards of legal justice, which in turn would affect the quality of justice he receives. Due process rights should not be curtailed in the interest of expediting enforcement of asset declaration provisions. The authorities have the responsibility to insure fair treatment of judges or others who face these kinds of charges that may ultimately lead to deprivation of liberty. “Preventing the NJC to first hear the allegations against Justice Onnoghen would deny him his constitutionally and internationally recognised right to a fair hearing and lead to the matter being unnecessary politicised. “The authorities may have a strong case against him but the possibility of success is diminished if the proper procedure is not followed. The requirements of justice and success of the fight against corruption justify the fundamental need to ensure and apply due process rights in this case.” Andrew Orolua, Doosuur Iwambe and Tunde Opalana – Abuja
