Confusion as Umar, Kogo parade selves as chairman Code of Conduct Tribunal

While tribunal staff have expressed concerns about a slowdown in operations following the controversy surrounding Umar’s removal, corruption cases involving public servants are still ongoing, with several charges scheduled for trial or arraignment.

However, a senior tribunal staff, speaking expressed confusion about the leadership situation, stating that both men have communicated with them. They emphasized their position as civil servants obligated to follow official instructions.

“We are civil servants and can work with anyone appointed,” one staff member noted. “But we have not received any formal letter regarding these changes. There is a process for the removal and appointment of a CCT chairman.”

Another senior official explained that the established procedure involves screening by the Federal Judicial Service Commission (FJSC), a recommendation to the National Judicial Council (NJC), and final approval and confirmation by the Senate.

Due to the ambiguity, unresolved files have piled up, and staff are uncertain about proceeding.

“He (Umar) came today and left, and with the judiciary now on holiday, we adjourned all pending cases to January,” said a staff member.

A former tribunal staff member criticized Umar for visiting the office after his removal, accusing him of attempting to approve payments and sign documents.

“His visits are illegal since he has been validly removed,” the former staffer said.

Following the president’s announcement, both the Senate and House of Representatives, in sessions on November 20 and 26, endorsed Umar’s removal over allegations of misconduct and corruption.

Their resolutions were based on Section 17(3), Part 1, Fifth Schedule of the Nigerian Constitution, and Section 22(3) of the Code of Conduct Bureau and Tribunal Act 2004.

This provision states that a CCT chairman or member can only be removed by the president after a resolution supported by two-thirds of both houses of the National Assembly, on grounds of inability to discharge duties, misconduct, or code violations.

Legal Challenges

The removal is now being challenged in a Federal High Court in Abuja by groups including the Community Rescue Initiative and Toro Concerned Citizens. They argue that the Senate and House resolutions contravene constitutional provisions, rendering the process null and void.

Legal experts have criticized the situation. Sunusi Musa (SAN) noted that the president did not explicitly announce Umar’s removal as required, and no official updates have followed regarding Kogo’s appointment by the NJC.

“Where is Kogo deriving the authority to act as chairman if he has not been formally appointed or inaugurated?” Musa questioned.

Similarly, Dayo Akinlaja (SAN) argued that without a formal letter of appointment, Kogo’s position is not legally binding. He added that the proper process for Umar’s removal must also be documented and could be challenged judicially.

Haroun Eze, Esq highlighted irregularities in Umar’s removal, stating that the Attorney General of the Federation should have initiated a case of misconduct to justify the National Assembly’s resolution. He questioned whether the procedure adhered to the provisions of Section 22 of the CCT Act.

The controversy has left the tribunal’s leadership in disarray, raising concerns over the proper application of due process.