Should President lose his power over Conduct Bureau?

The Senate may have stirred the hornet’s nest by stripping the President of his powers over the Code of Conduct Bureau/Tribunal (CCB/T). Was its decision informed by the ongoing trial of its president, Dr Bukola Saraki, for alleged false assets declaration? Or was it done with sincerity of purpose? ADEBISI ONANUGA examines the intricacies of the Senate’s amendment of the CCB/T Act, which is awaiting the concurrence of the House of Representatives.

If the Senate has its way, the President will be stripped of his powers over the Code of Conduct Bureau/Tribunal (CCB and CCT) in the impending constitution amendment. Its Committee on Review of the 1999 Constitution has recommended that the President’s power be transfered to the National Assembly and the Judiciary. The panel’s recommendation is awaiting the concurrence of its House of Representatives counterpart before it will be sent to the President for assent.

The recommendation is contained in the report, submitted last Thursday, to the Senate by the panel’s chairman, Deputy Senate President Ike Ekweremadu.

If the President assents to the bill, his powers over the CCB/T would be transferred to the National Assembly and the Judiciary.

The CCT has special powers. It is the only court that can order the trial of an elected person or a public officer for violating the Code of Conduct. It can order them to vacate office or bar them from holding office for 10 years, or direct them to forfeit assets found to be in contravention of the law.

Establishment of CCB/CCT

The CCT was established by Section 15(1) of the Fifth Schedule of the 1999 Constitution. It provides: “There shall be established a tribunal to be known as Code of Conduct Tribunal, which shall consist of a Chairman and two other persons.”

Section 15 (2) states: “The Chairman of the tribunal must be qualified to hold office as a Judge of a superior court in Nigeria and shall receive such remuneration as may be prescribed by law.”

Section 15 (3) says: “The Chairman and members of the Code of Conduct Tribunal shall be appointed by the President in accordance with the recommendation of the National Judicial Council (NJC).”

Section 18 (1) provides: “Where the Code of Conduct Tribunal finds a public officer guilty of contravention of any of the provisions of this Code, it shall impose upon that officer any of the punishments specified under sub-paragraph (2) of this paragraph and such other punishment as may be prescribed by the National Assembly.”

(2)”The punishment which the Code of Conduct Tribunal may impose shall include any of the following: vacation of the office or seat in any legislative house as the case may be; disqualification from membership of a legislative house and from the holding of any public office for a period of 10 yearsl; seizure and forfeiture to the state of any property acquired in abuse or corruption of office.”

18 (3): “The sanctions mentioned in sub-paragraph (2) hereof shall be without prejudice to the penalties that may be imposed by any law if the offence is criminal in nature.”

Under the CCB/T Act, public officers are defined as the President and the Vice-President; Governors and Deputy-Governors; the Senate President and Deputy Senate President; Speaker of the House of Representatives; Speakers and Deputy Speakers of Houses of Assembly and legislators.

Others are the Chief Justice of Nigeria; Justices of the Supreme Court; Court of Appeal; other judicial officers and all members of the staff of courts of law; Attorneys- General of the Federation and States; Ministers and Commissioners; Service Chiefs of the Armed Forces; Inspector-General of Police, all members of the police and security agencies; Secretary to the Government and Head of the Civil Service, including permanent secretaries and members of the civil service, either Federal or State. Others are Ambassadors, High Commissioners and officers of Nigerian missions, among other public servants.

Although Section 4(2) of the 1999 Constitution, as amended, vests the National Assembly with the powers to make laws for the peace, order and good governance of the country, many observers, see the proposed stripping of the President of his powers over CCB/T in bad faith. To them, it is morally wrong, against the background of the ongoing trial of the Senate President, Bukola Saraki, at the CCT and President Muhammadu Buhari’s anti-corruption fight.

Saraki is facing a 16-count charge of false declaration of assets, money laundering, operation of foreign accounts while in office as governor of Kwara State and collection of salaries as governor four years after the expiration of his tenure.

Despite public outcry, the Senate amended Section 18(1) and (2) of the CCB/T Act.

For instance, Section 18 (1) of the Act says: “The President may, by order, exempt any cadre of public officers from the provisions of this Act if it appears to him that their position in the public service is below the rank, which he considers appropriate for the application of those provisions. But with the new amendment by the Senate, the word, “President” was replaced with “National Assembly” and “him” to read “it”.

Also, Section 18 (2) is now: “to enable the National Assembly (instead of the President) do the conferment of additional powers (if need be) on the Bureau to enable it function more effectively.”

The bill, in addition, stripped the President of the powers of exempting public officers from investigation and trial. It gave that power to the National Assembly.

Furthermore in the new amendment, heads of the CCB and CCT will be reporting to the National Assembly while the CCB is to draw the attention of those who breached the laws of the bureau or non-compliance to the provisions of the Act before resorting to the CCT for prosecution, “provided that where the person concerned makes a written admission of such breach or non-compliance, no reference to the Tribunal shall be necessary”.

In addition, the President’s power on appointment of chairman and members of the tribunal, on recommendation of the NJC as contained in Section 20 (4) of the Act, was also taken away by the lawmakers by subjecting such appointments to the Senate for confirmation.

Lawyers’ reactions

Observers, however, see the decision of the Senate, which they termed as absurd, as an attempt to cover up their iniquities and corrupt activities, pointing out the fact that the law should be amended to protect the poor masses, and not public officers, whose assets were not genuinely acquired.

They wondered whose interest the decision of the senate was meant to serve or whether the decision was aimed at self serving. Others felt worried concerning what it portends for President Buhari’s fight against corruption.

Those who spoke on the new development included Dr. Joseph Nwobike (SAN); Vice President, Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), Monday Ubani; a member of Ogun State Judiciary Council, Abayomi Omoyinmi and former NBA Ikeja Branch Welfare Officer, Samson Omodara.

According to Dr. Nwobike, “since the Code of Conduct Tribunal exercises judicial powers, it should not be under the executive arm of the government. The amendment, he said, was consistent with the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria”.

But to others, the decision of the Senate did not protect the public. Ubani insisted that, “notwithstanding, the provisions of Section 4(2) of the 1999 Constitution, as amended, which gives power to the National Assembly to make laws for the peace, order and good government in the federation or any part of the federation thereof, in carrying out this onerous constitutionally vested responsibilities, the legislators must ensure, and the represented must also be convinced that the law/s being enacted is/are for the “peace, order and good government in the country”.

He said: “Having arrived at this premise that the above stated objectives are the irreducible minimum for law making by the Nigerian legislators, then we can go ahead to juxtapose this assertion with the recent move to amend the laws governing the Code of Conduct Tribunal when one of the principal members of that legislative assembly is undergoing trial before that same tribunal.

“Even if the alleged amendment is altruistic, but for the fact that a principal member of that body is being tried by that tribunal, the so called suggested amendment will be seen as self serving and not one meant for the peace, order and good government in the country. In summary, therefore, the amendment may turn out to be in the interest of the country, but the timing of this new amendment is questionable and taking into account recent verbal threats by some of the legislators that they will come up with a shocking amendment puts the entire process into serious doubt about its genuineness.

“It is important that we point out this fact that law making should not be targeted at any individual, either for or against, at any point in time. If there is any such law, it defeats the primary purpose of law making, which is for the interest and health of the country.

“Let us even examine in details what is being suggested by way of amendment. What is the mischief this suggested amendment set to cure? Was it that the powers of the Executive being exercised over the CCT were abused? And if yes, by whom and in what manner? Was there enough input of critical stakeholders before this suggested amendment was regarded as the best option for us as a nation? What is the guarantee that the CCT under the judiciary will be the required solution to the mischief that the legislators are seeking to correct? So many questions begging for answers.”

Omoyinmi said the decisions of the Senate Committee on Review of the Constitution recommending the removal of CCT under the presidency and putting it in under the judiciary obviously, is without doubt, blot with ulterior intent on the committee part. This, perhaps, the senate committee did in view of the trial of the Senate President and thought will serve their overall interest in the national assembly. Omoyinmi said he did not see them achieving much in whatever motive behind their recommendations that will change the concept behind setting up the CCT in the first place, whether it is under the presidency or the judiciary.

“If under the judiciary the CCT will function in line with its objectives and powers derived under the constitution. It will not shy away from its role in trying public officers, who refute any aspect of the code of conduct for public officers as laid down in the fifth schedule part 1 of the 1999 Constitution,” he said.

Omodara argued that the framers of the 1999 Constitution knew the appropriate thing by allowing the CCT to be under the control of the Presidency.

To him, ”the recent amendment is curious and suspicious in view of the trial of the Senate President. “It is entirely within the purview of the Senate to amend the Constitution, but this one is not well intentioned by my own judgement and assessment,”he said.

The Way Out

Ubani suggested that the Senate Committee on Constitution Amendment should seek further input and debate the said proposed amendment in order to arrive at a more enduring and lasting reforms on the CCT. Laws, especially the ones that involve the constitution, which is the ground norm, should not be made under sentiment, but on a well thought out process after wide consultation with critical stakeholders whose input will create wider acceptability of such law/s in the polity.

Omoyinmi said if the recommendations sail through, the judiciary should see it as an additional responsibility in its duties to administering justice without fear or favour.

Source: Nation