- Says trial should be under a new CCT Chairman
By Alex Enumah in Abuja
The Court of Appeal in Abuja last Friday struck out the false assets declaration charges brought against a former Comptroller of the Nigerian Customs Services (NCS), Rasheed Taiwo Owolabi at the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT).
The court in a judgment delivered on an appeal filed by Owolabi, challenging the jurisdiction of the tribunal to entertain the allegations against him also barred the Chairman of the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT), Danladi Yakubu Umar, from participating in the further trial of Owolabi.
According to the appellate court, the charge against the ex-customs boss can only be revived when the tribunal has been re-constituted.
Owolabi was arraigned before the tribunal on allegations of false asset declaration but turned around to accuse chairman of the tribunal of demanding N10million bribe to pervert justice.
Delivering judgment, Justice Tinuade Akomolafe-Wilson, held that there was no way the ex-customs chief can get fair judgment at the tribunal under the chairmanship of Umar, having written a petition against him to the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) accusing him of demanding for bribe.
The Appeal Court held that Umar having been thoroughly investigated by EFCC and partly indicted in the findings, would naturally create a real likelihood of bias against his accuser in the minds of right thinking people.
Justice Akomolafe-Wilson held that the fear of denial of fair hearing raised by Owolabi was justifiable while the issue of fair treatment was fundamental that it cannot be waived aside.
The court noted that although the EFCC did not arraign Umar on the strength of Owolabi’s petition, it cannot be doubted that the petition has caused some humiliation against the CCT chairman, hence the likelihood of bias against the defendant.
“The fact that the chairman was absolved from prosecution over the allegation of bribery made against him by the appellant does not justify the refusal of the tribunal to recuse Umar from the trial of the appellant.
“No matter how strong the character of Judex might be, he should not sit as a judge over the case of an accuser.
“It is even noteworthy that the chairman was not completely absolved of blame in the petition filed against him to the EFCC. Though, the EFCC after investigation could not get sufficient fact to prosecute the chairman, yet he was vilified for a most unethical and highly suspicious conduct on his part.
“Let me state here that having regards to the investigating report of EFCC, the bias cannot by any stretch of imagination said to have been intestinally instigated by the appellant as a play to escape prosecution as being contested by counsel to the respondent.
“It is settled that justice must not only be done, it must manifest and be seen to have been done. A court must never place itself in a situation where the confidence reposed in it by the public to do justice to all parties before it in all circumstances is eroded.
“The stream of justice must be kept clean and clear without any suspicion of pollution.
“Justice cannot be said to be carried out in a case where the chairman of a tribunal who has been accused of graft from the appellant over a charge in which the chairman is presiding, still goes ahead to adjudicate over the case involving his accuser.
“I hereby set aside the decision of the CCT delivered on October 20, 2016 and strike out the charge against the appellant pending when the tribunal is reconstituted with another chairman,†the court held
