COURT OF APPEAL PUTS SARAKI'S CASE ON HOLD INDEFINITELY

The much-awaited judgment in the appeal filed by Senate President, Dr Olubukola Saraki challenging his trial at the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) at the Abuja division of the Court of Appeal has been postponed indefinitely.
Mrs. Christy Haruna who broke the news to lawyers and supporters of both parties said a new date would be communicated to parties in the appeal.
She, however, did not give detailed information on why the judgment fixed for yesterday by the Presiding Judge, Justice Moore Adumein was put off.
But sources at the court said that although the judgment was ready, there was so much pressure to delay the judgment.
Prominent persons including Senators, chieftains of the All Progressive Congress (APC) and supporters of the Senate President who had besieged the court as early as 8am for the judgment slated for 2pm left the court premises disappointed.
At the last sitting, the court had after taking submissions from counsel to both parties fixed judgment for yesterday having granted accelerated hearing to the appellant.
Saraki had challenged the power of the CCT to prosecute him on behalf of the Federal Government over false assets declaration. He premised the appeal on five grounds among which were that the tribunal was unlawfully constituted having not formed quorum because of the two members sitting at the trial instead of the mandatory three members and that the tribunal lacked power to assume criminal jurisdiction.
Former President of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), Mr. Joseph Daudu led five other Senior Advocates of Nigerian (SAN) comprising Malam Yusuf Ali, Adebayo Adelodun, Mahmud Magaji, Ahmed Raji and Kayode Eleja had raised five major issues for determination of the court to determine the legality of the trial of Senator Saraki at the tribunal.
Among others, the appellant counsel had argued that the code of conduct tribunal erred in law by proceeding with the trial with two members instead of the mandatory three as stipulated by the constitution.
He had informed the court that composition of the tribunal during the trial of Saraki violated paragraphs 15(1) of the 1999 constitution by sitting with two members instead of three and asked the court to nullify the CCT proceedings of last month due to lack of quorum.
The appellant counsel disagreed with the arguments of the Federal Government that the Interpretation Act can be used to resolve the constitutional logjam since the constitution was silent on the quorum for the tribunal membership.
Daudu insisted that the Interpretation Act cannot override the constitution being the supreme law and the Act being inferior to the constitution.
He also argued that the tribunal was wrong in assuming criminal jurisdiction against the Senate President when it was not a superior court of record.
Daudu who cited several authorities submitted that the tribunal cannot assume concurrent jurisdiction with the Federal High Court adding that the tribunal was by law inferior to the Federal High Court.
He had therefore urged the Appeal Court to nullify the proceedings of the tribunal and to also set aside the criminal charges filed against Saraki on account of being illegal and unlawful.
But opposing the submissions of Saraki’s counsel, the Federal Government through its counsel, Rotimi Jacobs (SAN), asked that the appeal case be dismissed for lacking merit.
Jacobs told the three-man Appeal Court panel that the constitution was silent on the quorum of the tribunal memberships and urged the court to invoke the Interpretation Act to resolve the issue in favour of the respondent.
Jacobs also submitted that the tribunal has criminal jurisdiction because of the use of words like “guilty” and “punishment” in the law that established the tribunal.
The trial of the Senate President had been fixed for October 21, 22 and 23 by the CCT in Abuja inspite of the pending appeal against its decision on the legality of the arraignment of Senator Saraki by the Federal Government.
As at yesterday, it could not be ascertained whether the tribunal will still sit on not since the outcome of the Court of Appeal where the two parties have already joined issues with each other has not been decided.