As reactions continue to trail the removal of Justice Yakubu Danladi Umar from office as Chairman of Code of Conduct Tribunal, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Prof. Akinseye George has submitted that the Nigerian Senate lacks power to remove the CCT Chairman from office.
The senior lawyer cited relevant sections of the Constitution 1999 and insisted that the Senate acted in error by removing Danlami Umar from office as Chairman of the Code of Conduct Tribunal.
CAPITAL POST recalled that Senate on Wednesday broke into a close door session to discuss the removal of CCT Chairman which has already been slated on the Order Paper.
The motion was sponsored by Senator Michael Bamidele Opeyemi who is the Senate leader and a lawyer.
For the removal of CCT Chairman, Prof. Akinseye argued that Sections cited by the Senate has nothing to do with CCT, but that of CCB, insisting Senate’s lack of power to remove Danladi Umar.
Akinseye maintained: “I have just read section 157(1) and (2) of the 1999 Constitution relied upon by the Senate to sack the CCT chairman. Section 157 (1) of the 1999 Constitution does not give powers to the Senate to remove the Chairman of the Code of Conduct Tribunal. For emphasis, Section 157 (1) provides that a person holding the offices to which this section applies may only be removed from that office by the President acting on an address supported by two-thirds majority of the Senate praying that he be so removed for inability to discharge the functions of the office (whether arising from infirmity of mind or body or any other cause) or for misconduct.
“Under Section 157 (2), a list of the offices that the senate can exercise its powers under Section 157(1) include that of the Code of Conduct Bureau, the Federal Civil Service Commission, the Independent National Electoral Commission, the National Judicial Council, the Federal Judicial Service Commission, the Federal Character Commission, the Nigeria Police Council, the National Population Commission, the Revenue Mobilisation Allocation and Fiscal Commission and the Police Service Commission.
“The Code of Conduct Tribunal is missing from the list. And I know that while the Code of Conduct Bureau is an executive body, the Code of Conduct Tribunal is a judicial body. The Senate can’t remove the Chairman of the Code of Conduct Tribunal. For the Chairman of the Code of Conduct Tribunal to be removed, there must be compliance with the provision of section 17 of the Fifth Schedule to the 1999 Constitution. Specifically, Section 17(3) of the Fifth Schedule to the 1999 Constitution provides:
“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 praying that he be so removed for inability to discharge the functions of the office in question (whether arising from infirmity of mind or body) or for misconduct or for contravention of this Code.
“We have to follow the constitution. This is democracy. You may not like the face of the person there but you will need to follow the process. Otherwise, we will all be endangered. So, in my view, the Attorney General of the Federation should advise Mr President to follow the constitution. And the man who has been appointed will also need to follow the constitution. What goes round comes round. They must follow the constitution. It will be on record that Mr President who is a known democrat is disregarding the constitution. And I don’t think he will do that. They should call his attention to that.
“And if the President goes ahead and it is challenged in court, the process will be reversed. Unless there is something they know that we don’t know. But as far as the letter of the constitution that I can read and interpret is concerned, you cannot remove the chairman of the code of conduct tribunal without two third from each house. We must follow the constitution.”
