Chukwuemeka Njoku, Abuja
The Court of Appeal, Abuja Division, on Wednesday refused to grant an application for stay of proceedings at the Code of Conduct Tribunal,CCT, filed by the embattled Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Walter Onnoghen. The appellate court gave the ruling in an appeal filed on behalf of Justice Onnoghen, by Chief Adegboyega Awomolo (SAN), wherein he prayed for an order setting aside the ruling of Chairman of CCT, Justice Danladi Umar on January 14, which directed that motions filed by lead counsel to the CJN, Wole Olanipekun SAN, and the Federal Government’s counsel, Aliyu Umar SAN, be taken together. Onnoghen also filed a motion on notice on January 18, seeking an order for stay of proceedings at the CCT. The Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami (SAN) also filed a motion asking for an order directing Onnoghen to stepdown as the CJN pending hearing and determination of the case against him.The CJN challenged the motion as well as jurisdiction, and validity of the charge levelled against him by the Federal Government. But ruling on Wednesday, a 3-man panel of the appellate court led by Justice Abdul Aboki held that in accordance with section 306 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act, proceedings in a criminal charge cannot be stayed. The panel noted that the CCT has quasi-criminal jurisdictions and that the proceedure observed in the country’s criminal justice system is also applicable in the tribunal. In a unanimous decision, the appellate court was of the opinion that an order for stay of proceedings is granted equitably and cannot be made in vacuum. Consequently, the panel dismissed Justice Onnoghen’s motion on notice for stay of proceedings of his trial at the CCT and ordered that it be continued. However, the Court of Appeal stated that it’s earlier interlocutory injunction made on the 24th of January directing the Federal Government and the embattled Justice Onnoghen to maintain status quo pending the outcome of Wednesday’s ruling has become “spent and is no longer in existence”.Though the Court of Appeal agreed that a court has powers to grant stay of proceedings, however, Justice Aboki opined that in doing so, there must be proper evaluation of the affidavit evidence of parties involved in order to arrive at justice of the matter. Aboki held that after evaluation, “you juxtapose the findings with the guiding principle considered before a court could use it’s discretion to grant a stay of proceedings. Consequently, “It is my humble view that the motion on notice filed by the appellant seeking stay of proceedings at the Code of Conduct Tribunal ought to be refused”.”It is hereby refused” Justice Aboki held, adding that the matter has been adjourned to February 4 for hearing of the main appeal. During the hearing of the appeal on January 24, Wole Olanipekun, leading 18 other Senior Advocates of Nigeria, chronicled the genesis of the case to the appellate court panel. Olanipekun had informed the court that the complainant (FG) had on January 11, through the Code of Conduct Bureau, CCB, commenced what it termed as investigtion of information contained in the assets declaration forms submitted by the CJN.“My lords, on that same day, the charge was filed before the CCT. By the next Monday being January 14, the tribunal issued a summon for the Appellant to appear. “On that same day, the Appellant filed an appeal to challenge jurisdiction of the Tribunal. “Likewise, the Respondent, on the same day, filed a motion asking the Applicant to step aside from office pending the determination of the substantive trial and for President Muhammadu Buhari to be compelled by the tribunal to swear in the most senior jurist of the Supreme Court as the acting CJN”. Olanipekun stated that on January 14, a day fixed for the CJN’s arraignment, the CCT chairman, Justice Danladi Umar ruled that the panel would take the motions of the defence and prosecution together. Olanipekun attached eight exhibits to show why his motion and that of the prosecution should not be heard the same time.In the said motion, the CJN prayed the appellate court to stay further proceedings in respect of charge No.CCT/ABJ/01/2019, pending against him before the CCT. He urged the court to suspend further action on his trial, pending the determination of his appeal.Olanipekun told the appellate court that regardless of four separate court injunctions that stopped further action on the matter pending determination of legal issues surrounding both the competence of the charge and jurisdiction of the tribunal to entertain same, the CCT Chairman, in a ruling last Tuesday, insisted on proceeding with the trial. He told the court that aside Mr. Umar’s position that the CCT was not bound by orders from both the high court and the National Industrial Court, he equally refused to temporarily hands-off the matter to await the outcome of the CJN’s appeal. Olanipekun alleged that over 48 hours after the tribunal gave its ruling, it had yet to furnish the applicant with a copy despite a letter that was written on behalf of the CJN. Olanipekun also told the appellate court panel that both the CCT and its Chairman are parties in all the pending cases. “We are urging my lords to protect the ‘Res’ of this matter which is not only about the office and position of the CJN, but about the judiciary and the constitution. The Res in this matter is serious and very unique.“There is a threat to the institution of the judiciary and the ruling of the tribunal further compounded the already existing conondurum. “The sanity and sanctity of the legal profession and the judicial process is at stake. We want to plead your Lordships to accede to our request and order stay of proceedings at the Code of Conduct Tribunal and also order accelerated hearing of the appeal. “I dare submit that there cannot be two kings in the palace. The court of appeal has been seized of the matter and yet that tribunal want to proceed on Monday. “The urgency of this situation deserves an intervention of your lordships”, he pleaded.Responding, the FG’s lawyer, Mr. Oyin Koleosho, urged the appellate court to dismiss the CJN’s application, arguing that it was within the discretion of the tribunal and not the FG to decide whether or not the trial should be temporarily suspended. “It is not within the powers of the Respondent to on its own, stay proceedings. “It is the exercise of discretionary powers of the tribunal. “Exhibit A to A4 attached to the Applicant’s further affidavit clearly indicated that the tribunal adjourned to hear the application challenging its jurisdiction. “This exhibit equally shows that the adjournment at the tribunal was at the instance of this Applicant who sought for time to file his response. “There is nothing before this court to show that the application challenging jurisdiction of the tribunal and the one asking him to step aside were adjourned together. “The exhibit will show that the tribunal adjourned to hear the motion challenging its jurisdiction. “If an order of stay of proceeding is granted, how then can the tribunal take that motion challenging its jurisdiction? “It is our position that even if this appeal succeeds, it cannot terminate the charge against the Applicant or the proceeding before the lower tribunal. “The success of the instant appeal will be of no utilitarian value to the Applicant. Therefore this appeal should not be the basis for granting a stay of proceeding. “In conclusion, we urge your Lordships to dismiss this application”, FG’s lawyer added. Justice Onnoghen is being accused by the Federal Government of money laundering and falsifying his assets while filling assets declaration forms given to him by the Code of Conduct Bureau. Consequently, the Federal Government filed a 6-count charge against the CJN, which has elicited avalanche of court cases since January 14, a day his arraignment was stalled.
