The arrangement of Nigeria's chief justice before the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) begin on Monday without the accused, Justice Walter Onnoghen physically present in the court.
By 10 am, the three-member tribunal, led by its chairman, Danladi Umar arrived in the courtroom, while the case was called a few minutes afterwards.
The court official who announced the case observed that CJN was not present and then notified the tribunal chairman of the development.
Representing the prosecutor was Aliyu Umar, a senior advocate and four other lawyers, while Wole Olanipekun also a senior advocate with 30 other senior advocates represented the chief justice.
Representing the prosecutor was Aliyu Umar, a senior advocate and four other lawyers, while Wole Olanipekun also a senior advocate with 30 other senior advocates represented the chief justice.
CCT chairman, Umar had asked the court official whether the CJN had been served with the charges and summons. ALSO READ:
The court official confirmed that the CJN was served through his personal assistant.
“He was served through his personal assistant. We went to his house and the defendant directed his personal assistant to collect the charge on his behalf. “So the defendant has been served,” the court official told the Tribunal chairman.
“He was served through his personal assistant. We went to his house and the defendant directed his personal assistant to collect the charge on his behalf. “So the defendant has been served,” the court official told the Tribunal chairman.
Five governors from the Niger Delta region where the chief justice comes from had last night asked him to stay way from the court today. The governors believed that the planned arrangement of the Onnogeh was politically motivated and meant to cow the judiciary ahead of the February election.
Meanwhile, the CCT has adjourned proceedings involving the charges of non-declaration of assets preferred against the Chief Justice of Nigeria, Onnoghen, till January 22.
Chairman of the CCT Umar said ruled that the tribunal would hear Onnoghen’s motion challenging the jurisdiction of the tribunal at the next proceedings.
Meanwhile, the CCT has adjourned proceedings involving the charges of non-declaration of assets preferred against the Chief Justice of Nigeria, Onnoghen, till January 22.
Chairman of the CCT Umar said ruled that the tribunal would hear Onnoghen’s motion challenging the jurisdiction of the tribunal at the next proceedings.
The adjournment came after the lead prosecuting counsel conceded that Onnoghen was improperly served with the charges and the summons.
He affirmed that the CJN was not personally served with the charges and the court’s summons, as required by the law.
He, therefore, requested the three-man tribunal led by Danladi Umar to direct a fresh service on the CJN.
The defence team led by Olanipekun had earlier said that the CJN needed not to be present, having filed a motion to challenge the tribunal’s jurisdiction.
Olanipekun said he and other defence lawyers only appeared in court in protest against the jurisdiction of the tribunal.
He also said that, from the account given by the court official earlier in the proceedings, the CJN was not served with the charges and summons personally, but through his aide.
Olanipekun insisted that the law requires that the defendant be served personally.
“By what the registrar has said, although the defendant was the one who directed his personal assistant to accept service on his behalf and what the law says is that he must be personally served.
“We agree that that the service should be properly done. The processes should be served personally on him.
“If, after the service is done, and the defendant is not present, we can then argue whether or not he needs to be present on the grounds that he has filed a motion challenging the jurisdiction of the court.”
He affirmed that the CJN was not personally served with the charges and the court’s summons, as required by the law.
He, therefore, requested the three-man tribunal led by Danladi Umar to direct a fresh service on the CJN.
The defence team led by Olanipekun had earlier said that the CJN needed not to be present, having filed a motion to challenge the tribunal’s jurisdiction.
Olanipekun said he and other defence lawyers only appeared in court in protest against the jurisdiction of the tribunal.
He also said that, from the account given by the court official earlier in the proceedings, the CJN was not served with the charges and summons personally, but through his aide.
Olanipekun insisted that the law requires that the defendant be served personally.
“By what the registrar has said, although the defendant was the one who directed his personal assistant to accept service on his behalf and what the law says is that he must be personally served.
“We agree that that the service should be properly done. The processes should be served personally on him.
“If, after the service is done, and the defendant is not present, we can then argue whether or not he needs to be present on the grounds that he has filed a motion challenging the jurisdiction of the court.”
0 comments:
Post a Comment