Senate’s attempt to remove CCT Chairman hits constitutional roadblock

In a detail fact by PRNigeria, the misinterpretation has raised concerns about the Senate’s grasp of legal and functional distinctions between the two bodies. Furthermore, the Senate’s actions have been criticized for misrepresenting the roles of appointees and undermining constitutional integrity.

The Nigerian Senate, led by Senator Godwill Akpabio, recently passed a resolution to remove the Chairman of the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT), Mr. Danladi Umar, claiming reliance on Section 157(1) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended). The motion, titled “Invocation of the Provision of Section 157(1) for the Removal of the Chairman of the Code of Conduct Tribunal,” was sponsored by Senate Leader Senator Bamidele Opeyemi (APC-Ekiti).

Senator Opeyemi alleged numerous corruption and misconduct accusations against Mr. Umar and noted that President Bola Tinubu had submitted the name of Mr. Abdullahi Usman Bello to the Senate for confirmation as the new CCT Chairman. On July 4, 2024, the Senate confirmed Bello’s appointment, supposedly necessitating Umar’s removal.

Chief Whip Mohammed Tahir Monguno disclosed that 72 Senators supported the resolution at plenary, with ten others backing it during committee meetings, surpassing the two-thirds majority required for such actions in the 109-member Senate.

*Constitutional Misinterpretation*

However, a closer examination of the Constitution reveals significant flaws in the Senate’s interpretation and actions. Section 157(1) of the Constitution applies only to specific executive bodies, including the Code of Conduct Bureau (CCB), Federal Civil Service Commission, and Independent National Electoral Commission. It explicitly does not apply to the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT), a judicial body.

Instead, the removal of the CCT Chairman is governed by Paragraph 17(3) of the Fifth Schedule to the Constitution, which states: “A person holding the office of Chairman or member of the Code of Conduct Tribunal shall not be removed from his office or appointment by the President except upon an address supported by a two-thirds majority of each House of the National Assembly…”

PRNigeria reports that this provision requires a two-thirds majority from both the Senate and the House of Representatives, clearly distinguishing the CCT’s governance from that of the CCB.

*Appointment Confusion*

The PRNigeria Factcheck also notes that the Senate further erred by suggesting Mr. Abdullahi Usman Bello could replace Mr. Danladi Umar as CCT Chairman. Bello was appointed as Chairman of the CCB, not the CCT, based on his qualifications as a forensic accountant. The Constitution specifies that the CCT Chairman must be qualified to hold office as a Judge of a superior court of record, a criterion Bello does not meet.

Corruption Allegations and Clearance

Similarly, contrary to claims of unresolved corruption allegations, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) cleared Mr. Umar of bribery accusations in letters dated March 5, 2015, and April 20, 2016. The clearances were issued under the leadership of former EFCC chairmen Ibrahim Lamorde and Ibrahim Magu.

In 2018, the Attorney-General of the Federation further criticized the EFCC for attempting to revive charges against Mr. Umar without justification.

*Senate Investigation Misstep*

The 9th Senate’s investigation into Mr. Umar stemmed from an alleged assault at Banex Plaza, not corruption allegations. According to Senator Patrick Ayo Akinyelure, the then Chairman of the Senate Committee on Ethics, Privileges, and Public Petitions, the investigation involved a complaint filed by a security guard, Clement Sargwak.

*Legal Expert Reactions*

Prominent legal practitioners have criticized the Senate’s actions. Prof. Yemi Akinseye George, SAN, and Dr. Wahab Shittu, SAN, called the resolution unconstitutional, emphasizing that the Senate lacks authority to remove a judicial officer like the CCT Chairman. They urged the Attorney-General of the Federation to address the anomaly and advise the President accordingly.

Speaking to PRNigeria, legal expert Yunus AbdulSalam, SAN, described the Senate’s actions as deeply troubling: “The misinterpretation of Section 157(2) by lawmakers reflects poorly on our constitutional democracy. This lack of diligence and scrutiny in legislative activities is alarming. The purported removal of the CCT Chairman violates the Constitution’s spirit and intent, raising serious concerns about the damage such impudence inflicts on our democratic processes.”

*Findings and Conclusion*

The Senate’s reliance on Section 157 of the Constitution to justify the removal of the CCT Chairman is a fundamental error. Section 157 applies to the CCB, not the CCT. Furthermore, the Senate failed to recognize the legal and functional distinctions between the two bodies and misrepresented the roles of appointees.

PRNigeria concludes that the Senate’s actions, led by Senate Leader Bamidele Opeyemi, are based on a flawed understanding of constitutional provisions. These errors highlight a worrying lack of legal comprehension and due diligence within the legislative process.

The Senate’s actions undermine constitutional integrity and damage public confidence in governmental oversight. Legislative bodies must adhere strictly to the Constitution, ensuring that their decisions align with the principles of the rule of law and good governance.

Justice Umar has presided over several high-profile cases involving national assembly leadership, governors, top judicial officers, and other public officials. They included the then-opposition leader, Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu, former Senate President Bukola Saraki and Chief Justice of the Federation, Walter Onnoghen

A Link to the PRNigeria Fact-Check and links to Reference: Fact Check: How Senators Misinterpreted the Constitution in Their Attempt to Remove the CCT Chairman: https://prnigeria.com/2024/11/23/fact-check-senate-cct/

By PRNigeria