Potter
Stewart, a renowned Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court
who played a significant role in the interpretation of Civil Rights
laws, coined the basic phrase: “Fairness is what Justice really is.”
This phrase, conceived to propel the notion of every individual’s
equitable right under the law, demonstrates that an unbiased legal
system, is a necessary component for justice to be dispensed.
As
things stand, the case of the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) against
the Senate President, Dr. Abubakar Bukola Saraki, has proven to be full
of contradictions and inequity. ‘Contradictions’ because since the case
was in its preliminary stages, there has been a mismatch between the
facts being propelled by the prosecution, the methods being employed by
the tribunal, and the charges that have been brought against the Senate
President.
Since
the case was brought to light in late 2015, few weeks after Dr.
Saraki’s emergence as President of the Senate, members of the Nigerian
public have come to understand that the charges against Saraki, and the
testimony of the chief witness have not been in sync.
Additionally,
Nigerians have started to also understand that certain legal precedents
have not been followed by the tribunal. For example, based on the
non-adherence to Section 3, paragraph D of the act that established the
Code of Conduct Bureau (CCB) and the Tribunal, the Senate President
ought to be given an opportunity to respond to the charges brought
against him.
One
noteworthy instance that comes to mind is that in 2007, the CCT
dismissed the charges against former Vice-President, Atiku Abubakar
based on the non-adherence to the precedent clause. Another ocassion, in
2011, the same CCT quashed the case against Bola Ahmed Tinubu on the
same ground. However, in what has been described by many legal
practitioners as an abuse of judicial precedent, the same judicial body,
with the same Chairman that delivered the Tinubu judgement, went back
on the legal precedent that it had set on several occasions, and threw
out the proviso which created a condition precedent clause before the
law can be applied against Saraki case.
What
was even more disturbing, was the self-indictment by Dan Ladi Umar in
the case, as he casually revealed that Tinubu’s ruling was simply “made
in error.” This outright reversal stirs up questions regarding if Umar
was under duress when he delivered his judgement; if the tribunal
understands the legal implications of their actions; and if the same
1999 Constitution and Code of Conduct Bureau acts were not the documents
used in the cases of Atiku and Tinubu.
Furthermore,
the contributions of the prosecution's Chief Witness, Michael Wetkas,
an operative of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), has
poked further holes in the prosecution’s case.
Some
clear examples are Wetkas admitting that neither he nor his team
investigated three crucial exhibits (11, 12, and 13) tendered as
evidence against the Senate President. Another example is the witness
mentioning that it was the EFCC that investigated Saraki, as opposed to
agents from the CCB. In essence, the case before the CCT now is money
laundering, instead of false Asset Declaration which it is created to
handle.
These
inconsistencies lend credence to what the Senate President and his team
have been saying for a while: “This case is not about prosecuting
alleged corruption, but about some powerful individuals settling
political scores, using their control of the judiciary.”
Finally,
in another ruling by the Chairman of the CCT that demonstrates his bias
in the Saraki situation, Mr. Danladi Umar mandated the trial of the
Senate President to proceed on a day-to-day basis - citing the
Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA), despite the fact that he
has adjourned other cases - that are also under the purview of the ACJA.
This
situation came to a head on Wednesday, April 20th, 2016, when the
Counsel for the Former Minister of Niger Delta, Godsday Orubebe, argued
that because the trial had earlier been moved from April 14 to 20 for
continuation, their case should be heard before Saraki’s case which was
adjourned just a day before. However, Justice Umar insisted that the
Senate President’s case must continue, and stood down Orubebe’s case -
leaving many to question if in fact there is a timeline (as some have
speculated) to convict Saraki by hook or by crook before a certain
date.
As
the head of the Senate President’s New Media team, based on all these
observations, it has become not only necessary, but mandatory to let the
Nigerian public know that as things stand, the case against my
principal, the Senate President, is concocted on shaky evidence as the
outcome of the on-going cross-examination has indicated. As the
prosecution is attempting to make this a media trial, I enjoin Nigerians
to urge the CCT to make this a trial that is based on the substance and
the spirit of the law. Doing this, would ensure that the process is
free and fair, so that at the end of the day, we can all be able to
claim that justice was in fact done.
Bamikole Omishore is the Special Assistant on New Media to President of the Senate.
Read more
at - http://www.armanikedu.blogspot.com
No comments:
Post a Comment