Information has emerged that the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) could not put the Chairman of the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT), Justice Danladi Umar, on trial over the N10 million bribery allegation “because the evidence against him was not weighty and not sufficient to sustain a possible prosecution.”
The anti-graft body, in a memorandum forwarded to the Office of the Secretary to the Government of the Federation (OSGF), claimed that the facts as they were against the CCT chairman raised just mere suspicions which in law, cannot take the place of proof.
But the commission did confirm that one Ali Gambo Abdullahi, a Personal Assistant to the CCT boss, admitted receiving N1.8million in 2012 from one Rasheed Taiwo, who was standing trial at the tribunal.
Abdullahi was alleged to have used his salary account at Zenith Bank to collect the money.
In the letter dated March 5, 2015, and personally signed by the immediate-past Chairman of EFCC, Ibrahim Lamorde, the complainant in the bribery saga (Rasheed Taiwo), a retired Deputy Comptroller General of Nigerian Customs Service (NCS) was said to have failed to produce the alleged telephone conversations and text messages exchanged by him and Justice Umar.
The former NCS chief was said to have persistently claimed that he had lost his phone since 2012 and could not trace or recover it.
EFCC said the telephone of the complainant would have been subjected to independent scientific analysis with a view to corroborating the bribery allegation against the CCT boss.
Justice Umar was however said by EFCC to have admitted meeting the complainant in his chamber at the tribunal and that the meeting was most unethical and highly suspicious conduct on the part of the chairman.
The EFCC letter with reference No EFCC/EC/SGF/03/56 was entitled ‘Investigation Report on N10million bribery allegation against the chairman, Code of Conduct Tribunal, Abuja.’
Meanwhile, former Attorney General of the Federation (AGF) and Minister of Justice, Mr. Mohammed Bello Adoke (SAN), was also quoted to have said that the CCT chairman cannot be removed from office by a mere fiat of the executive arm of the government.
Adoke, in a letter dated march 25, 2015, to the SGF, clarified that the process of removing the CCT chairman was cumbersome and tedious because of the uniqueness of the law that backs the appointment.
The SAN explained that though both the presidency and the National Assembly shared the power to remove the CCT boss or any of the tribunal members.
Adoke stated in the letter with reference No HAGF/SGF/2015/VOL.1/14, which read in part: “I have examined the report of the chairman of EFCC on the allegations against the chairman, Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) your request for advice on the code of conduct bureau and tribunal act. CAP. C.15 LFN 2004 as wish to observe that the procedure for the removal of chairman, CCT is tedious.
“It is apposite to note that by the provisions of section 22 (3) of the Code of Conduct Bureau and Tribunal Act, the president can only remove the chairman or member of the tribunal upon an address supported by two-thirds majority of each House of the National Assembly praying that he be so removed for inability to discharge the functions of the office in question or for misconduct or for contravention of this Act.
“The implication of the above is that the power of removal is shared between the president and the National Assembly the same way as the power of appointment is shared between the president and the National Judicial Institute (NJI).
“The president must therefore garner enough support from the National Assembly to succeed in any bid to remove the chairman of CCT.”
No comments:
Post a Comment