Saraki’s CCT Trial And Matters Arising

In this report, KUNLE OLASANMI looks at the trial of the Senate President, Dr. Bukola Saraki, which continues at the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) today and the fresh issues raised by his legal team

About six months after the trial of Senate President, Dr. Bukola Saraki began at the code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT), much controversies have been generated due to the calibre of person involved in the case.

Pro-Dr. Saraki Senators have been unwavering in their support for the number one lawmaker in the country. They have shown their support for the Senate President through their presence at the tribunal in their numbers since the case started because they believed the senate President is being persecuted rather being prosecuted because of the interest of some highly placed individual in the seat of Dr. Saraki.

Before now,Saraki, through his lawyers had challenged the jurisdiction of the court saying that he was not properly served with the charges filed against him by the Code of Conduct Bureau. He also raised some other issues which was dismissed by the tribunal. The Senate president took his case to the appeal court and the Supreme Court but also got the same verdict.

After the case had traveled to the apex court from the tribunal and now back to the tribunal for trial, Dr. Saraki, through Mr, Kanu Agabi, a senior advocate and former Attorney-General of the Federation filed a fresh motion, challenging the jurisdiction of the court to try his client,

According to Agabi, due process was not followed before charges was file against Dr. Saraki.

To him, his client should have been invited to clarify issues on his asset declaration form before charging him before the tribunal for alleged false asset declaration.

According to him, former Lagos State Governor and leader of the All Progressive Congress (APC), Mr. Bola Ahmed Tinubu, who was accused of false declaration of assets was set free by the tribunal because of the failure of the CCB to fulfill necessary conditions of inviting him first to make statement on the alleged discrepancies before referring him for trial.

Saraki, through Mr. Agabi, told the tribunal chairman, Mr. Danladi Umar, while arguing a motion challenging the jurisdiction of the tribunal that he should have been invited to clarify issues before charging him before the tribunal.

A Kaduna based lawyer, Ankpanu Ogozabi, in his view said the new issues raised by the Senate President in his trial should call for concern because the treatment metted out to one public officer should also apply to the other in order for the agency saddled with the responsibility of ascertaining assets of public servant not to be seen as engaging in double standard.

Agabi had also argued that ten other former governors who had the opportunity of being invited to defend their asset declaration before CCB were not referred to the tribunal after taking explanations on their declared assets.

“At this point, the question to ask is, why is Saraki’s trial different from others”, Ogozabi asked.

Agabi in his argument urged the tribunal to dismiss the charge against Saraki for being incompetent, baseless and having been filed without observing the due process of the law.

He also appealed to the tribunal to quash the charge against his client on the ground that the charge was not competent in law.

Agabi premised his argument on preliminary objection to the charge on the ground that the conditions precedent for arraignment of Saraki, by the Code of Conduct Bureau (CCB) were not fulfilled.

Among others, Agabi claimed that Saraki was not invited by the Code of Conduct Bureau as required by law to deny or admit the alleged discrepancies in the asset declaration form submitted to the Bureau.

Agabi told the tribunal that up till now, Saraki as a defendant has not made any statement to the Bureau upon which he can be effectively put to trial.

Agabi said that the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF) was wrong in law in initiating the charge against Saraki because the Code of Conduct Bureau Act vested power to accept asset declaration form, investigating assets form and prosecuting the offender on the Bureau and not on any external force like the AGF, ICPC or EFCC.

He said the failure of the CCB to fulfill the conditions precedent of summoning Saraki to first make statement on discrepancies in his declared assets was fatal to the charge before tribunal and cannot operate to the detriment of the defendant.

“CCB is a peculiar institution; it has the duty to accept, to examine, to keep custody of assets declaration forms submitted to it and also has power to accept complaints from the public on the discrepancies that may arise from any form submitted to it.

“In the instant case, there is no petition or complain before the CCB and that the power of the CCB to refer any offender to the CCT for trial cannot be delegated to the AGF”.

According to him, such measure should also apply to Saraki because he was not first invited by CCB to make statement of denial or confirmation of discrepancies in his assets declaration form.‎

The tribunal is set to rule on the motion next Thursday, March 24, 2016. Whichever way the ruling goes, a precedent would again be set to be followed in related cases in the future.