This post has already been read 1606 times!
•CCT orders fresh service of summons, adjourns till Tuesday
•Two courts halt trial
•CJN must face prosecution, says APC
The much advertised arraignment of the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Walter Onnoghen, for alleged non-declaration of assets did not happen yesterday as the CJN stayed away in protest, challenging the jurisdiction of the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) to try him.
Leading lights of the legal profession, including Chief Wole Olanipekun, SAN, Chief Adegboyega Awomolo, SAN, Dr. Yusuf Alli, SAN and 45 other silks, stood in defence of Onnoghen and were ready for legal foot walks before the tribunal adjourned hostility till Tuesday so that the CJN could be properly served the processes.
By the time Olanipekun concluded the defence team’s preliminary objection to the trial, two courts, the National Industrial Court and Federal High Court, sitting in Abuja had stopped the arraignment all together. But in spite of the groundswell of opposition to the failed arraignment, the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) insisted on the prosecution of the CJN, claiming that fight against corruption is the substantive issue to be tackled.
At the tribunal sitting at Abuja High Court, Jabi, Abuja, lawyers and other protesters, who blamed the federal government for Onnoghen’s predicament, stormed the premises to register their disapproval over the manner the CJN was to be arraigned.
The tribunal, following an application by the Code of Conduct Bureau (CCB), had scheduled yesterday for the arraignment of the CJN.
The federal government is prosecuting the CJN on a six-count criminal charge, bordering on non-declaration of his assets.
However, when the matter was called up at 10a.m. yesterday, Onnoghen was not present in court for the arraignment.
Olanipekun, who led the defence team, informed the tribunal Chairman, Mr. Danladi Umar, that the defendant had filed an application challenging the jurisdiction of the tribunal to entertain the suit.
Olanipekun also informed the court that the defendant was not in court because he had not been served with the summons of the tribunal.
Although the prosecution counsel, Mr. Aliyu Umar (SAN), argued that service was effected on the CJN, claiming that the registrar of the court informed him that the CJN directed his personal secretary, one Sunday O. to accept service on his behalf.
But Olanipekun insisted that in a criminal charge, service must be made personally on the defendant, adding that the CJN opted not to appear before the tribunal in protest.
“The law is well settled, where the defendant is challenging the jurisdiction in a criminal matter, he does not have to appear. The non-appearance is on protest. We are not yet on the matter of arraignment,” he said, stressing, “The tribunal should uphold the dignity and sanctity of the law.”
Read Full Story [ThisDay]
