CCT dismisses Onnoghen’s motions for jurisdiction, impartiality
Why did CCT dismissed Onnoghen’s motions for jurisdiction, impartiality?
Onnoghen’s motions are challenging the tribunal’s jurisdiction to handle the case that borders on non declaration of asset. Also, for the chairman of the tribunal, Danladi Umar to remove himself from the position of presiding over the case for purpose of bias.
Keep reading to find out how CCT dismisses Onnoghen’s motions for jurisdiction, impartiality…
The Code of Conduct Tribunal, CCT, Thursday dismissed the two motions of jurisdiction and impartiality pending determination for lack of merit.
The motions are challenging the jurisdiction of the tribunal to handle the case of non-asset declaration and for the chairman of the tribunal, Danladi Umar to recuse himself from continuing to hear and preside over the case for purposes of bias.
Danladi in his ruling said the grounds of the motion was essential because he was appointed by the Presidency and moreso, that the tribunal is directly under the presidency.
It was argued that on this premise, he (Danladi) would not maintain impartiality, particularly as the Federal Republic of Nigeria stands as complainant against Justice Onnoghen.
But Danladi, while dismissing the motion also for lack of merit affirmed that all Judicial officers including himself are appointees of Mr. President on the recommendation of the National Judicial Council, NJC, saying all the appointees do not necessarily serve as stooges meant to serve the whims and caprices of Mr. President.
Besides, it was also said in the motion that Danladi was standing trial with the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC, over allegations of demanding and taking bribe, saying he would be morally compromised to dispense Justice as a way to settle his score with the federal government.
But the tribunal chairman said he was no longer facing EFCC trial because the anti-graft Commission had withdrawn the allegations against him.