By Bamikole Omishore
\nPotter Stewart, a renown Associate Justice of the United States Supreme
\nCourt who played a significant role in the interpretation of Civil Rights
\nlaws, coined the basic phrase: \u201cFairness is what Justice really is.\u201d This
\nphrase, conceived to propel the notion of every individual\u2019s equitable
\nright under the law, demonstrates that an unbiased legal system, is a
\nnecessary component for justice to be dispensed.
\nAs things stand, the case of the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) against
\nthe Senate President, Dr. Abubakar Bukola Saraki, has proven to be full of
\ncontradictions and inequity. \u2018Contradictions\u2019 because since the case was
\nin its preliminary stages, there has been a mismatch between the facts
\nbeing propelled by the prosecution, the methods being employed by the
\ntribunal, and the charges that have been brought against the Senate
\nPresident.
\nSince the case was brought to light in late 2015, few weeks after Dr.
\nSaraki\u2019s emergence as President of the Senate, members of the Nigerian
\npublic have come to understand that the charges against Saraki, and the
\ntestimony of the chief witness have not been in sync.
\nAdditionally, Nigerians have started to also understand that certain legal
\nprecedents have not been followed by the tribunal. For example, based on
\nthe non-adherence to Section 3, paragraph D of the act that established
\nthe Code of Conduct Bureau (CCB) and the Tribunal, the Senate President
\nought to be given an opportunity to respond to the charges brought against
\nhim.
\nOne noteworthy instance that comes to mind is that in 2007, the CCT
\ndismissed the charges against former Vice-President, Atiku Abubakar based
\non the non-adherence to the precedent clause. Another ocassion, in 2011,
\nthe same CCT quashed the case against Bola Ahmed Tinubu on the same
\nground. However, in what has been described by many legal practitioners as
\nan abuse of judicial precedent, the same judicial body, with the same
\nChairman that delivered the Tinubu judgement, went back on the legal
\nprecedent that it had set on several occasions, and threw out the proviso
\nwhich created a condition precedent clause before the law can be applied
\nagainst Saraki case.
\nWhat was even more disturbing, was the self-indictment by Dan Ladi Umar in
\nthe case, as he casually revealed that Tinubu\u2019s ruling was simply \u201cmade in
\nerror.\u201d This outright reversal stirs up questions regarding if Umar was
\nunder duress when he delivered his judgement; if the tribunal understands
\nthe legal implications of their actions; and if the same 1999 Constitution
\nand Code of Conduct Bureau acts were not the documents used in the cases
\nof Atiku and Tinubu.
\nFurthermore, the contributions of the prosecution’s Chief Witness, Michael
\nWetkas, an operative of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission
\n(EFCC), has poked further holes in the prosecution\u2019s case.
\nSome clear examples are Wetkas admitting that neither he nor his team
\ninvestigated three crucial exhibits (11, 12, and 13) tendered as evidence
\nagainst the Senate President. Another example is the witness mentioning
\nthat it was the EFCC that investigated Saraki, as opposed to agents from
\nthe CCB. In essence, the case before the CCT now is money laundering,
\ninstead of false Asset Declaration which it is created to handle.
\nThese inconsistencies lend credence to what the Senate President and his
\nteam have been saying for a while: \u201cThis case is not about prosecuting
\nalleged corruption, but about some powerful individuals settling political
\nscores, using their control of the judiciary.\u201d
\nFinally, in another ruling by the Chairman of the CCT that demonstrates
\nhis bias in the Saraki situation, Mr. Danladi Umar mandated the trial of
\nthe Senate President to proceed on a day-to-day basis – citing the
\nAdministration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA), despite the fact that he
\nhas adjourned other cases – that are also under the purview of the ACJA.
\nThis situation came to a head on Wednesday, April 20th, 2016, when the
\nCounsel for the Former Minister of Niger Delta, Godsday Orubebe, argued
\nthat because the trial had earlier been moved from April 14 to 20 for
\ncontinuation, their case should be heard before Saraki\u2019s case which was
\nadjourned just a day before. However, Justice Umar insisted that the
\nSenate President\u2019s case must continue, and stood down Orubebe\u2019s case –
\nleaving many to question if in fact there is a timeline (as some have
\nspeculated) to convict Saraki by hook or by crook before a certain date.
\nAs the head of the Senate President\u2019s New Media team, based on all these
\nobservations, it has become not only necessary, but mandatory to let the
\nNigerian public know that as things stand, the case against my principal,
\nthe Senate President, is concocted on shaky evidence as the outcome of the
\non-going cross-examination has indicated. As the prosecution is attempting
\nto make this a media trial, I enjoin Nigerians to urge the CCT to make
\nthis a trial that is based on the substance and the spirit of the law.
\nDoing this, would ensure that the process is free and fair, so that at the
\nend of the day, we can all be able to claim that justice was in fact done.
\nBamikole Omishore is the Special Assistant on New Media to President of
\nthe Senate<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
By Bamikole Omishore Potter Stewart, a renown Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court who played a significant role in the interpretation of Civil Rights laws, coined the basic…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":48803,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[7],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-48802","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-articles-opinions"],"yoast_head":"\n