TheNewsGuru

Tag: Petition

  • Rivers guber: Wike wins again as Tribunal dismisses ADP petition

    Rivers guber: Wike wins again as Tribunal dismisses ADP petition

    The Rivers State Governorship Election Tribunal has dismissed the petition filed by the defeated governorship candidate of Action Democratic Party (ADP), Mr Victor Fingesi against the re-election of Rivers State Governor, Nyesom Wike.

    The Tribunal described the petition as an adventure to discover the Non-existent. It declared that in the end, nothing was discovered by the petitioner.

    In a judgment read by the Tribunal Chairman, Justice K.A. Orjiako on Saturday, the Tribunal ruled that Fingesi of the ADP lacked the locus standi to file the petition.

    The Tribunal held that inconsistent facts contained in the petition filed by the ADP governorship candidate made it incompetent.

    According to the Tribunal, the petitioner in his own petition, wrote that he was challenging the election of the first petitioner.

    The Tribunal noted that an election petition must challenge the person returned as winner and not the petitioner.

    Justice Orjiako stated that the Tribunal had earlier struck out the petition on the same premise and that the petitioner went on appeal. The court noted that the Court of Appeal affirmed that the petitioner lacked locus standi in view of the paragraphs of his own petition.

    He ruled: “This petition is hereby by struck out. The petitioner lacks the locus standi to file the petition.”

    Determining the petition on its merit, the Tribunal declared that the petitioner failed woefully to prove that Governor Wike did not score the highest number of lawful votes during the March 9, 2019 governorship election.

    Justice Orjiako declared that the petitioner’s complaint was vague and merely speculative.

    The Tribunal stated that the first petitioner did not know the number of registered voters in the state. The Tribunal further noted that the petitioner under cross examination said he had no knowledge of the number of registered voters in his own polling unit in Okrika LGA.

    The Tribunal declared that an allegation that the winner did not score the highest number of votes is an invitation to compare figures. The Tribunal held that the petitioner ought to plead his own results and that of the winner for the court to cross check.

    Justice Orjiako noted that there was no evidence of any alleged inflation of results, as the evidence remains vague.

    The Tribunal held that the burden of proof is strictly on the petitioner and not on any weakness of the defence of the respondents.

    The Tribunal agreed with INEC that election was conducted in substantial compliance with the Electoral Act.

    The Tribunal examined the testimonies of the witnesses of the ADP were mere hearsay, since most of them were not at the respective polling units where elections took place.

    The Tribunal described most of the witnesses of ADP as impostors who capitulated in the face of cross examination.

    The Tribunal examined the testimonies on a local Government by Local Government basis.

    According to the Tribunal, despite the litany of documents pleaded by the petitioner, he could only tender Newspaper reports.

    The Tribunal said that INEC has the power to suspend an election, in line with Section 26 (1) of the Electoral Act 2010 as amended.

    The Tribunal further stated that there is no evidence that after the suspension of the election, the petitioners refused to participate in the process. The Court declared that the petitioners have failed to adduce evidence to impugn the election of Governor Wike.

  • Presidential poll: Tension in Buhari, Atiku’s camps as Tribunal rules on petition today

    The dispute over the last presidential election, won by President Muhammadu Buhari of the All Progressives Congress (APC), on March 18, will come to a close today (Wednesday) before the Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC).

    The main opposition party – the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and its candidate in the election, Atiku Abubakar had filed the petition, in which they among others, queried Buhari’s qualification, victory at the election and sought to be declared winners. In the alternative, they prayed the court to void the election.

    The PEPC, sitting at the Court of Appeal, Abuja, on August 21, and adjourned for judgment after entertaining final submissions from lawyers to parties.

    The Presiding Justice of the PEPC, Justice Mohammed Garba, announced, while adjourning proceedings on August 21, that parties would be notified when the court decides of a date for judgment.

    Parties to the petition have, since then, waited with bated breath for the judgment, with the petitioners reportedly writing the court last week in relation to the pending judgment.

    At about 12noon on Tuesday, information filtered in from the court that the much awaited judgment has been scheduled for today.

    The spokesperson for the Court of Appeal, Mrs. Sa’adatu Kachalla confirmed the development in a brief message on Tuesday.

    Mrs. Kachalla said: “Please be informed that notice has been given for judgment to be delivered tomorrow, September 11, 2019 at 9am in the presidential election petition.

    Four petitions were originally filed against the election, including the one by Atiku and the PDP, marked: CA/PEPC/002/2019, filed on Marc 18, 2019.

    There was the one filed by Hope Democratic Party (HDP) and Ambrose Owuru, who claimed to be the party’s presidential candidate. The petition, marked: CA/PEPC/001/2019 was filed on March 7 this year, before that of the PDP and Atiku, marked: CA/PEPC/002/2019.

    The third, marked: CA/PEPC/003/2019 was filed by the Coalition for Change (C4C) and Geff Ojinika, who claimed to be the party’s presidential candidate.

    The fourth petition, marked: CA/PEPC/004/2019, was filed on March 19 this year by the People’s Democratic Movement (PDM) and Pastor Aminchi Habu, listed as the party’s presidential candidate.

    Two petitioners, te C4C and PDM, at a point, withdrew their petitions, following which the court dismissed them.

    The court, in a judgment on August 22, 2019 dismissed the petition by the HDP on the grounds that it was without merit, the petitioners having been unable to establish their claims.

    While making their final submissions on August 21 this year in the petition by Atiku and the PDP, Buhari, the APC and the Independent National electoral Commission (INEC) – who are respondents to the petition, argued that the petitioners failed to disprove the claim that Atiku is not a Nigerian by birth and as such was not qualified to contest the election.

    Buhari, APC and INEC described the petition by Atiku and the PDP, challenging the outcome of the election as worthless and time wasting. They noted that the petitioner, in prosecution the petition, starved it of necessary evidence and urged the court to dismiss the it with substantial cost.

    They noted that while the petitioners made head wild allegations in their petition, they provided no single evidence in support of their claims and therefore, failed to meet the required standard of proof in relation to all the allegations.

    At the August 21 proceedings, Wole Olanipekun (SAN) led Alex Izinyon (SAN) and other lawyers for Buhari; Yunus Usman (SAN) led INEC’s team; Lateef Fagbemi (SAN) led the team of the APC, while Livy Uzoukwu (SAN) led the petitioners’ team, which included Mike Ozekhome (SAN).

  • BREAKING: Court delivers judgment in Atiku’s petition against Buhari Wednesday

    The Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC) will on Wednesday (September 11) deliver judgement in the petition by the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and its candidate in the last presidential election, Atiku Abubakar.

    They are by their petition, challenging the outcome of the election won by President Muhammadu Buhari of the All Progressives Congress (APC).

    Sources close to the court revealed this a moment ago. Information to that effect has also been sent to parties.

    Details shortly…

  • Atiku’s Petition, Buhari’s Defence and INEC’s Righteousness, By Emmanuel Ekwueme

    Since the candidate of the PDP in the 2019 Presidential election, Atiku Abubakar, submitted his petition in which he contested the results and the conduct of the exercise, there has been all sorts of comments especially from the respondents, INEC and the APC.

     

    Judging from their comments, including those contained in their response to Atiku’s petition, one can only thank God for the existence of the institution called Judiciary as an arm of government globally. The world and life would have been a jungle without the institution which has been described as the last hope of the common man and I add “the uncommon man”. It would have been a scenario where the weak preys on the strong at will.

     

    It is so socking that responses from INEC and APC have been described as evasive, inconsistent, digressive, a distraction such that they are laced with denials and impunity which has brought to the fore the argument that the 2019 Presidential election was deliberately rigged based the belief that the losers will keep quiet after results have been announced and that nothing will happen if they go to court since the judiciary is under the control of the government of the day.

     

    If those who hatched and implemented what has been described as the most massive rigging ever recorded in the history of elections in Nigeria knew what they were doing and understood the strong character of their opponents in the election, they would have thought twice knowing full well that some of them, including Atiku will seek redress in court.

     

    From replies submitted from INEC and APC, it is obvious that the two respondents are not really prepared for the battle ahead in respect of the allegations raised by Atiku/PDP in their petition, otherwise how would an allegation that President Muhammadu Buhari did not qualify for the 2019 Presidential election because he does to have a WAEC certificate and that he swore to an oath that he has the document attract a response that Atiku Abubakar also did not qualify to occupy such position because he is not a Nigerian and that the Senior Advocate leading his legal team is not licensed to practice law.

     

    This embarrassing response which is the handiwork of senior advocates and other senior lawyers assembled by the two respondents sounds like the response from Adam when God asked him in the Garden of Eden to identify his location and he responded saying he was naked. There is no correlation between the question and the answer. It turned out that Adam was so guilty that he never knew when he gave a response that was off-the-point.

     

    If not for comic relief, how can Atiku Abubakar whose ancestry took root in Sokoto be described as a foreigner. Those who made this allegation seem to forget that Atiku enjoyed the scholarship of Northern Nigeria; except they are saying that the Northern Nigeria government also trained children of foreigners. It is also amazing that a man who has invested so much in the development of the country can be described as such by the so called free-born who have contributed little or nothing to the development of Nigeria. Atiku was a Deputy Director in Nigeria Customs Service before he retired, elected governor of Adamawa State and Vice President for 8 years.

    His classmates, childhood friends and kinsmen in Jada and Ganye communities in Adamawa State are very much alive and around.

    By the way and in real terms who is originally a Nigerian? The name Nigeria was a contraption and a name given to the geographical entity in the Niger Area by the colonial masters who sowed the seed of discord among ethnic nationalities that made up the entity before granting it independence in 1960. Nigeria is still suffering from their mischief caused by the mismatch.

     

    Anyway, dwelling on this allegation is mere dissipation of energy after spokesman of the APC, Festus Keyamo, a Senior Advocate and one of the crafters of the allegation, said on national TV that APC wants to try the allegation in court based on what he described as security information which may have not been seen all these years even by former President Olusegun Obasanjo when he wanted to dispense of Atiku by all means for denying him the opportunity of a third term in office as President. This allegation leads to a conclusion that APC is not even sure of what it wants and what it is doing and that the party has already shot itself on the foot even before proceedings commence at the election tribunal.

     

    As serial comedians and in an effort to score even with Atiku, INEC Lawyers claim that Atiku’s lead counsel, Dr. Livy Uzoukwu, a Senior Advocate of 20 years standing, is not licensed to practice in Nigeria. That allegation is, to say the least idiotic.

     

    However, an interesting post on social media about a Supreme Court ruling may have settled the issue: “For saying that Dr Uzoukwu, SAN, OON, LLB, LLM, LLD FCIArb, former Attorney General is not licensed to practice law in Nigeria because his name in the roll of lawyers which is Livinus Uzoukwu is not the same as Livy Uzoukwu shows that INEC and APC lawyers are grossly ignorant of the law.

     

    Meanwhile the Supreme Court in a similar situation in the case of DANKWANBO v ABUBARKAR (2015) LPELR-25716(SC) in a unanimous judgment comprising of a full court of 7 Justices ( normally the number is 5) held:

    “Whether an abbreviated name of counsel is permissible for endorsement on court processes I must say clearly, that an abbreviated name is legal and permissible. It does not cease to be a person’s name or render it to lose its juristic personality. In other words, an abbreviation of the first name of any person whose name is on the Roll of Legal Practitioners does not render the abbreviated name to become unregistered or unknown to law as argued by the appellant.

     

    “This is a different situation from the use of two names that are on the role as a Legal Practitioner’s name to file processes in court. There is no doubt that two persons or personalities cannot become, except in marriage when the statutory law of marriage treats husband and wife of two different personalities as one as far as the relationship exists.

     

    “There are many Senior Legal Practitioners and Judicial Officers whose first name as it appears on the roll of legal Practitioners of the Supreme Court of Nigeria has been abbreviated as it stands today, yet that abbreviation has not robbed and could not rob them of their status as legal practitioners nor can it be said that they have contravened the Legal Practitioners Act.

     

    “Many first names such as Oluwole, Olukayode, Akinlolu, Christian, Okechukwu, Joseph, Samuel, Emmanuel, Omotayo, Olajide, Oladele, Olabode appear in the Roll but today stand abbreviated as first name of legal practitioners as Wole, Olu, Akin, Chris, Okey, Joe, Sam, Emma, Tayo, Jide, Dele, Bode. Until the contrary is proved, abbreviated first name or initials before family name used on documents for filing processes in court or announced as appearing for litigants remain valid and proper forever.” Per ARIWOOLA, J.S.C. (Pp. 66-70, Paras. E-A)’’.

    It is on record that in his confirmation document as a SAN, the name Dr Livy Uzoukwu was used.

     

    On the card reader, INEC said in its response that the equipment was only for “authentication of voters”. This is quite revealing in the sense that INEC Spokesman Festus Okoye and the Chairman, Prof Mahmood Yakubu confirmed at several fora that “the smart Card Reader has become an integral part of the electoral process and will be deployed for the conduct of the 2019 general elections” and that “the upgraded Smart Card Reader is faster, more robust and has new features that enable it to store additional data and transmit results”. The billion Naira question is why make the government to spend whopping N27 billion of tax payers’ money improving the technologies for the 2019 election when the commission knew that it will not use the features embedded in the equipment. Why did the commission change its mind not to use the reader to transmit results? What then is at the bank end?

     

    On President Muhammadu Buhari’s qualification, INEC in its response said in one sentence that it “is satisfied with the educational qualification presented to contest for office”. There was no attachment of any sort to show what was presented.

     

    Going by the rule of engagements for petitions of this nature, respondent must mandatorily front load supportive documents especially when INEC as a regulatory body is the custodian of all election materials. This evasive style was also adopted by APC in its reply.

    Compounding matters, Festus Keyamo had said one does not need WAEC certificate to become President or governor. According to him, occupying a public office for a reasonable length of time, can qualify one for President. Perhaps NEPA bill would also have been appropriate as was canvassed in the 2015 Presidential election

     

    On INEC’s denial that results were not transmitted to its server and that all results were collated manually and were never transmitted electronically, Atiku’s reply stated as follows: “The servers from which the said figures were derived belong to INEC, The figures and votes were transmitted to INEC’s Presidential result’s Server 1 and thereafter aggregated in INEC_PRES_RSLT_SRV2019 whose physical address or unique Mac address as 94-57-A5-DC-64-B9 with Microsoft Product ID 00252-70000-0000-AA535. The descriptions are unique to INEC’s server”.

     

    For now, all eyes and ears are on the judiciary and the Acting Chief Justice of Nigeria Tanko Ibrahim Mohammed.

     

    Ekwueme, a public affairs analyst wrote from Lagos

  • Presidential poll: Three more parties file petition against Buhari’s victory

    The number of political parties, challenging the outcome of the last presidential election has risen to four, with three more depositing their petitions before the Presidential Election Tribunal in Abuja.

    Beside the one filed on March 18 this year by the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) and its candidate in the election, Atiku Abubakar, three other parties have also filed.

    There is the one filed by Hope Democratic Party (HDP) and Ambrose the party’s presidential candidate. The petition, marked: CA/PEPC/001/2019 was filed on March 7 this year, before that of the PDP and Atiku, marked: CA/PEPC/002/2019.

    The third, marked: CA/PEPC/003/2019was filed by the Coalition for Change (C4C) and Geff Ojinika, the party’s presidential candidate.

    The core contention of the authors of the third petition is that the election, held on February 23 this year, “was vitiated by substantial non-compliance with mandatory statutory provisions, which irregularity substantially affected the election, such that the 1st respondent (Buhari) was not entitled to be returned as the winner of the presidential election.”

    The fourth petition, marked: CA/PEPC/004/2019, was filed on March 19 this year by the People’s Democratic Movement (PDM) and Pastor Aminchi Habu, the party’s presidential candidate.

    At a pre-hearing session conducted on Wednesday, the tribunal acceded to the request by the People’s Democratic Democratic Party (PDP) and its candidate in the last presidential election, Atiku Abubakar for permission to serve their petition of President Muhammadu Buhari through his party, All Progressives Congress (APC).

    PDP and Atiku, who, by their petition, are challenging Buhari’s victory at the election, applied for leave to effect service of the petition on the President on the grounds that they were having difficulty serving him.

    The three-man tribunal, after listening to Chris Uche (SAN), who moved the ex-parte filed by the PDP and Atiku, granted them permission to serve through substituted means.

    Justice Abdul Aboki, who led the panel, ordered that Buhari, who is listed as the second respondent to the petition, be served through any senior official or an officer of the APC at the party’s secretariat in Abuja.

    Justice Aboki, in his lead ruling, said “it is in the interest of justice” to grant the prayers in the petitioners’ motion.rant the prayers in the petitioners’ motion.

     

  • INEC server: PDP reacts to petition by Buhari’s campaign to arrest, prosecute its leaders

    Major opposition, Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) on Monday reacted to a petition by President Muhammadu Buhari’s campaign to the Inspector General of Police and Director General of the Department of State Services (DSS) calling for the investigation and subsequent arrest of its leaders over alleged illegal access to the server of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).

    The party in a reaction by its national chairman, Prince Uche Secondus said the ruling party was already jittery because it can’t defend the victory of its candidate at the February 23 presidential poll.

    Recall that the All Progressives Congress Presidential Campaign Council on Monday asked the Nigeria Police Force and the Department of State Services to invite, interrogate and possibly prosecute leaders of the opposition Peoples Democratic Party over what it described as their illegal access to the server of the Independent National Electoral Commission.

    The organisation’s Director, Strategic Communications, Festus Keyamo (SAN), made the call in a petition addressed to the acting Inspector-General of Police, Mohammed Adamu; and the Director-General of DSS, Yusuf Bichi.

    Although he was not specific on the identities of the PDP leaders he wants investigated, Keyamo made reference to the fact that the party’s presidential candidate, Alhaji Atiku Abubakar, has filed an election petition against the victory of President Muhammadu Buhari and has made a claim of having access to INEC server.

    He claimed that upon the postponement of the February 16, 2019 presidential/National Assembly elections, already prepared presidential election results surfaced on the Internet.

    Keyamo said the fake results which had details of the scores of the candidates of the major political parties gave victory to Atiku even when elections did not hold.

    According to him, the only conclusion that can be drawn from the development is that the PDP had prepared those results which were to be smuggled into INEC server.

    He added that when the election was finally held on February 23, 2019 and Buhari was declared the winner, the PDP cried foul and claimed that from results it obtained from INEC server, it had proof that its candidate won the election by about 1.6million votes.

    Keyamo said the claim had revealed that “some criminally-minded PDP operatives” had access to the INEC server to be able to smuggle in fake results.

    He argued that the only means by which they could have access to the INEC server was by the criminal hacking of the server or through the criminal conspiracy of some INEC officials.

    He said, “The APC Presidential Campaign Council hereby prays that the Inspector-General of Police and the Director-General of the Department of State Services should use your good offices to investigate the hacking of and/or illegal tampering with the INEC server by the PDP.

    “The leadership of the PDP must be invited, interrogated and investigated and those identified as perpetrators must be arrested and prosecuted.

    “Opposition is healthy in a democracy but it is not a licence for criminality and illegality.

    “A country governed by laws cannot be blackmailed or cowed into indolence by the perceived underdog status of the opposition so as to condone such a blatant criminal claim by the PDP of having illegal access to INEC server.”

    However, in a swift response, Secondus alleged that the APC and Buhari were panicking because of the case instituted before the tribunal by it and Atiku.

    He said this was why the ruling party was writing petitions to the DSS and the police.

    Secondus insisted that the national leadership of the party would not be intimidated in quest for justice for its candidate, Atiku Abubakar.

    He said both the APC and the President were afraid to defend their “rigging of the presidential election at the tribunal.”

    He said, “It is obvious that the President and his party are afraid and are panicking as a result of the petition we filed at the tribunal.

    “They failed in their clandestine moves to persuade us not to go to the tribunal. Now the reality has dawned on them that they have to defend the injustice they meted out to us and Nigerians now.

    “Now, for election they claimed they won, they ought to have filed their defence at the tribunal and be eager to defend it.

    “Why are they running to the DSS and the Police with the hope that they will force us to reveal our sources? Tell them to go to the tribunal and submit their evidence of winning the election.”

     

  • Rivers Election: Court declines AAC petition against INEC to stop result compilation

    Rivers Election: Court declines AAC petition against INEC to stop result compilation

    The Federal High Court, Abuja on Wednesday declined to give an order stopping the collation of results of the Governorship and House of Assembly elections conducted by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), in Rivers on March 9.

    Justice Inyang Ekwo, in his ruling in an application filed by the plaintiffs, Mr Biokpomabo Awara and Ben-Gurion Peter of the African Action Congress, (AAC), held that the application was such that the court could not grant without hearing from the other parties.

    The plaintiffs, represented by Tawo Tawo (SAN), in an ex parte application, prayed for an order , stopping INEC from resuming collation, concluding and announcing the results of the March 9 election in Rivers.

    The judge, rather ordered the plaintiffs to put the respondents, INEC and the Peoples Democratic Party, (PDP), on notice and fixed March 25 for both the plaintiffs and respondents to appear before him to argue their case.

    Earlier, Justice Ekwo drew the attention of the plaintiffs’ counsel to news making the rounds that he had already restrained INEC from going ahead to take further action on the Rivers election.

    The judge also drew Tawo’s attention to a name Inyang Ewa, who granted the purported order but the counsel denied the existence of such name for any Federal High Court judge.

    The judge cautioned those behind the false news, saying that it was wrong for anybody or group to resort to self-help as such was prohibited in the judiciary.

  • BREAKING: Atiku, PDP file petition against Buhari’s reelection

    BREAKING: Atiku, PDP file petition against Buhari’s reelection

    The Peoples Democratic Party is currently filing its petition challenging the declaration of President Muhammadu Buhari as winner of the 2019 presidential election.

    The party and its presidential candidate, Atiku Abubakar, have gathered a team of lawyers at the Court of Appeal, venue of the presidential election tribunal who are currently working on the processes of filing the petition.

    Atiku has since rejected the result of the February 23 polls, alleging rigging. He vowed to contest the outcome of the election in court.

    Earlier, a court approved the PDP’s application to be allowed access to materials used for the election. The court however blocked the party’s move to have the materials forensically examined.

    On Monday, Atiku’s lead lawyer, Chris Uche confirmed the processes were being filed

    “Yes it is true,” said Mr Uche without providing more details.

    Details later…

     

  • The case against CJN Onnoghen – Content of the petition

    Barring a late minute change, the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Walter Nkanu Onnoghen, has a date in court in Abuja tomorrow for alleged failure to declare some of his assets, including about $3million.

    Onnoghen is scheduled to be arraigned before the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT).

    The Federal Government has already filed a six-count charge against him in that respect.

    The $3million in said to be lodged in five accounts.

    The domiciliary and Naira accounts in the Standard Chartered Bank are coded as USD account No. 870001062650; Euro account No. 93001062686; Pound Sterling A/CNo. 285001062679; e-Saver Savings (Naira) account No. 5001062693; and a Naira A/C No. 010001062667.

    The alleged undeclared amount is put at about $3million in the evidence before the CCT.

    The charge sheet is dated January 10 and filed on January 11.

    Onnoghen will be prosecuted by the Code of Conduct Bureau (CCB) through the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF), Mallam Abubakar Malami (SAN).

    The application to put the CJN on trial was filed by two prosecutors, Musa Ibrahim Usman and Fatima Danjuma Ali on behalf of the Attorney-General of the Federation and the Code of Conduct Bureau.

    The application reads: “Pursuant to Section 24 of the Code of Conduct Bureau and Tribunal Act, I hereby apply to the Tribunal for the commencement of trial for the offence of failure to submit all assets and liabilities contrary to Paragraphs 15(1) and (2), Code of Conduct Bureau and Tribunal Act, 11(1) of the Fifth Schedule, Part 1 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999(as amended) and punishable under paragraph 18(1) and (2) of same constitution against Honourable Mr. Justice Walter S. Nkanu Onnoghen( GCON).

    “In support of this application, I attach herewith four copies of the charge, affidavit and summary of evidence consisting of a list of witnesses.

    “If the application is granted, we shall be relying on the facts disclosed in the summary of evidence and further evidence the tribunal may consider necessary at the trial.

    “I attach herewith four copies of the charge against the accused.”

    In an affidavit in support of the application by an investigator with the Code of Conduct Bureau (CCB), Mr. James Akpala said “it is in the public interest to charge the CJN.”

    He said: “I know as a fact that the Head Office of the Bureau received a petition alleging that the CJN failed to declare his assets according to the law.

    “I know as a fact that the defendant did not comply with the provisions of the Code of Conduct for public officers in that he failed to declare his assets after his elevation to the Supreme Court and immediately after taking oath of office in the year 2005 and he failed to declare his five Standard Chartered Bank accounts in his two forms CCB1 leveled 2014 and 2016 respectively.

    “The investigation had been concluded and it is in the public interest to charge the defendant. That all witnesses are ready and available to testify. That prosecution is ready to commence trial.

    “At the trial, the complainant will rely on the testimony of the witnesses set down in the list attached hereto and tender all relevant documents in proof of the case.”

    The allegations against the CJN are as follows:

    “That you, Justice Walter Nkanu Onnoghen, CJN, GCON between 8th June 2005 to 14th December 2016 being a public officer serving as a Judicial Officer in the Federal Republic of Nigeria as a Justice of the Supreme Court failed to declare and submit a written declaration of all your assets and liabilities within the prescribed period of three months after being sworn in as the Justice of the Supreme Court of Nigeria on the 8th day of June 2005 and you thereby contravened the provisions of Section 15(1) of the Coded of Conduct Bureau and Tribunal Act Cap C15 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria( LFN) 2004 and punishable under Section 23(2) a, b, c, of the same Act.

    • “That you, Justice Walter Nkanu Onnoghen, CJN, GCON between 8th June 2005 to 14th December 2016 falsely declared your assets in your Declaration of Assets Form CCB 1(after you were sworn-in as the Justice of the Supreme Court of Nigeria) by omitting to declare a domiciliary (US dollar) account No. 870001062650 maintained with Standard Chartered Bank(Nig.) Limited Wuse 2, Abuja which is being operated since 2011 and you thereby contravened the provisions of Section 15(2) read along with Section 15(1) of the Code of Conduct Bureau and Tribunal Act Cap C15 LFN 2004 and punishable under Section 23(2) a, b, c, of the same Act
    • “That you, Justice Walter Nkanu Onnoghen, CJN, GCON between 8th June 2005 to 14th December 2016 being a public officer as Justice of the Supreme Court of Nigeria who is under a duty to declare his assets to the Code of Conduct Bureau on or about 14th December 2016 falsely declared your assets in your Declaration of Assets Form CCB 1(after you were sworn-in as the Justice of the Supreme Court of Nigeria) by omitting to declare a domiciliary (Euro) account No. 93001062686 maintained with Standard Chartered Bank (Nig.) Ltd. Wuse 2, Abuja which is being operated since 2011 and you thereby contravened the provisions of Section 15(2) read along with Section 15(1) of the Code of Conduct Bureau and Tribunal Act Cap C15 LFN 2004 and punishable under Section 23(2) a, b, c, of the same Act.
    • “That you, Justice Walter Nkanu Onnoghen, CJN, GCON between 8th June 2005 to 14th December 2016 being a public officer as Justice of the Supreme Court of Nigeria who is under a duty to declare his assets to the Code of Conduct Bureau on or about 14th December 2016 falsely declared your assets in your Declaration of Assets Form CCB 1(after you were sworn-in as the Justice of the Supreme Court of Nigeria) by omitting to declare a domiciliary(Pound Sterling) account No. 285001062679 maintained with Standard Chartered Bank (Nig.) Ltd. Wuse 2, Abuja which is being operated since 2011 and you thereby contravened the provisions of Section 15(2) read along with Section 15(1) of the Code of Conduct Bureau and Tribunal Act Cap C15 LFN 2004 and punishable under Section 23(2) a, b, c, of the same Act
    • “That you, Justice Walter Nkanu Onnoghen between 8th June 2005 to 14th December 2016 being a public officer as Justice of the Supreme Court of Nigeria who is under a duty to declare his assets to the Code of Conduct Bureau on or about 14th December 2016 falsely declared your assets in your Declaration of Assets Form CCB 1(after you were sworn-in as the Justice of the Supreme Court of Nigeria) by omitting to declare an e-Saver Savings (Naira) account No. 5001062693 maintained with Standard Chartered Bank (Nig.) Ltd. Wuse 2, Abuja which is being operated since 2011 and you thereby contravened the provisions of Section 15(2) read along with Section 15(1) of the Code of Conduct Bureau and Tribunal Act Cap C15 LFN 2004 and punishable under Section 23(2) a, b, c, of the same Act.
    • “That you, Justice Walter Nkanu Onnoghen, CJN, GCON between 8th June 2005 to 14th December 2016 being a public officer as Justice of the Supreme Court of Nigeria who is under a duty to declare his assets to the Code of Conduct Bureau on or about 14th December 2016 falsely failed to declare assets in your Declaration of Assets Form CCB 1(after you were sworn-in as the Justice of the Supreme Court of Nigeria) a Naira Account No. 010001062667 maintained with Standard Chartered Bank (Nig.) Ltd. Wuse 2, Abuja which is being operated since 2011 and you thereby contravened the provisions of Section 15(2) read along with Section 15(1) of the Code of Conduct Bureau and Tribunal Act Cap C15 LFN 2004 and punishable under Section 23(2) a, b, c, of the same Act.
  • [Photo] Meet die hard Buhari supporter behind CJN’s petition, trial at CCT

    [Photo] Meet die hard Buhari supporter behind CJN’s petition, trial at CCT

    Dennis Aghanya, the Executive Secretary of the Anti-Corruption Research and Data-Based Initiative, is the author of the petition to the Code of Conduct Tribunal in which he alleged the Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Walter Onnoghen, failed to declare his assets.

    The petitioner is one of the founding members of the Buhari Organisation and he is the pioneer National Publicity Secretary of the defunct Congress for Progressive Change. Buhari contested the 2011 presidential election on the platform of the party.

    [Photo] Meet die hard Buhari supporter behind CJN's petition, trial at CCT

    Aghanya is and has been canvassing support for the President since he assumed office. He pleaded with the National Assembly to forgive Buhari when the lawmakers threatened to impeach him for spending $496m to buy Tucano jets for the military to fight Boko Haram in the North-East without following due process.

    Although Aghanya said Buhari’s action might have violated the laid down procedure, his intention was altruistic.

    Aghanya in 2017 lauded the efforts of the Kano State Governor, Abdullahi Ganduje, in the fight against corruption through curtailing drug abuse in the state. Aghanya’s group honoured the governor with an award of Best Governor in Curtailing Drug Abuse in the country.

    At the 2017 ARDI Media Merit Award of Excellence in Abuja, Aghanya said, “Governor Ganduje represents most of the values that the ARDI as an organisation is known for supporting the fight against corruption in Nigeria.

    “To be specific, he has taken the anti-corruption campaign to the grassroots by inaugurating the Kano State Public Complaints and Anti-Corruption Commission offices in all the 44 local governments of the state.”

    He added, “ The Ganduje administration remains committed to the fight against corruption in line with President Buhari’s campaign promises and his administration’s determination to end corruption.”

    Meahwhile, Aghanya has dismissed allegations that his petition against the CJN was instigated by President Muhammadu Buhari. He said he also took Buhari to court in 2011.

    He also said the CJN had already owned up to the allegations brought against him in the petition.

    Aghanya in an interview with The Punch on Saturday night said: “Did you not know that I once took Mr. President to court in 2011? I used to be one of his aides but I took him to court.

    “This is a petition by an NGO. What has Mr. President got to do with it? People are just trying to avoid a major issue. Our concern is to unveil irregularities. People should not try to politicise the good work we are doing.

    “The person the petition was written against owed up to everything. In issues of this nature, should we be sentimental or do we face facts?”

    Aghanya added that he would address a press conference on a yet-to-be-determined date over the development.

    Asked why the petition against Onnoghen was coming so close to the elections, Aghanya said there was no time lag in things of that nature.

    He noted that his organisation commenced investigation against the senior judicial officer about a year ago.

    He dismissed the allegations that the petition was politically motivated, adding that the ARDI should rather be commended for exposing the alleged misdemeanour of the CJN.

    Aghanya said it was not true that the petition was calculated to emasculate the judiciary or help President Muhammadu Buhari’s re-election in the forthcoming presidential poll, arguing that Nigerians should be more interested in the substance of the case.

    He said, “There is no time lag in things of that nature, but it appears people are leaving the substance of the case to pursue shadow. People have not looked at the merit of the case, so they are not bothered that something was going wrong and we had to point it out.

    “I weep for this country. How are we working for Mr President? Is it because we came up with a petition that was substantiated? Why should it be tied to the elections? It is immaterial. Even before he was sworn in as the CJN, there were cases established against him, but nobody had the courage to take them up.”