The Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) has described the recent call for the immediate suspension of its Chairman, Justice Danladi Umar, from office over alleged incompetence as a reflection of ignorance.
The Media Aide to the CCT Chairman, Atekojo Usman, disclosed this in a statement on Friday in Abuja.
A group under the umbrella of the Progressive Foundational Movement (PFM) had, on Thursday called for Umar’s sack through some social media platforms.
Usman said the call would have been ordinarily considered as the work of an idle mind and be ignored, but records must be put in proper perspective to guard against misleading the public.
He said “the CCT is a specilonial court with coordinate jurisdiction with the Federal and State High Courts in Nigeria, saddled with the responsibility of adjudicating assets declaration related cases of public servants which emanated from the Code of Conduct Bureau, CCB.
“This means, the CCT under the chairmanship of Justice Danladi Umar does not generate administrative cases to be adjudicated.
“This is with the exception those cases passed to it by the Code of Conduct Bureau, an agency saddled with the mandate to document, verify and assess assets of public servants in Nigeria.
“One is therefore, appalled at how a group which is led by an acclaimed lawyer who should know is displaying a crass ignorance of the workings of the CCT and CCB.”
The media aide explained further that “of particular interest, is the fact that every public servant is obliged to declare asset at the beginning of his or her office and also declare asset after the tenure of office.
“This means that public servants by the end of President Muhammadu Buhari administration on May 29, 2023 were expected to declare their assets which is statutorily the responsibility of the CCB.
“It is an administrative process which the CCB would have to carry out through its internal organ before forwarding to the CCT depending on the report of CCB’s Asset and Verification Committee report.
“One wonders if the CCT that has adjudicatory powers should witch hunt anyone as one, Mr Aganaba Johnson, a lawyer and leader of the group would want the public to believe,” he said.
Usman added that the CCT is a court and does not get involved in politics hence should be excused from political mudslinging of any sort.
He added that the court would not allow politicians to use it as means of political vendetta.
He also condemned the claim by the group that the two agencies had failed woefully in the fight against corruption in the past four years, especially the CCB, by not able to send at least one person to be prosecuted in the tribunal.
“If his words were anything to go by, should Danladi Umar-led CCT be going to the market square in search of who to prosecute?
“Surprisingly, the CCT chairman has championed a far- reaching reform on the Act that established the court which was signed into law at the twilight of the former President Buhari’s administration, that will yield results in no distant time.
“Justice Danladi Umar-led CCT is an open court where lawyers, private citizens, individuals are free to observe proceedings and it remains to be comprehended if the group leader has ever bothered to visit the CCT during trial of public officers to keep himself abreast of the many cases tried so far.
“This would have helped him in not dissipating energy for nothingness, particularly as a lawyer, he should be interested in the CCT cases.
“It is advised that the group leaders, individuals or interested individuals should explore the Freedom of Information Act to obtain information on activities of government agencies before rushing to the media,” he said.
According to him, this will help them to speak from the point of authorities as records will always be made available following the due processes.
He said the CCT had tried failed asset declaration cases of public officers across board with judgements delivered within the ambit of the law.
He said from the aforementioned, it was easier to deduce those sponsoring the group to issue spurious and misguided statements against the person of the Honourable Justice.