CCT Chairman: The Missteps of Lawmakers and Lawyers on Constitutional Matters
By Haroon Aremu
As a concerned young Nigerian, it’s disheartening to witness lawmakers and esteemed legal practitioners grapple with fundamental constitutional principles—especially regarding the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT).
It is astonishing that those tasked with crafting laws and interpreting them could exhibit such a glaring misunderstanding of the legal framework that governs their actions. The recent attempts by the Nigerian Senate to remove Mr. Danladi Umar, Chairman of the CCT, serves as a case in point.
In their misguided effort, the Senate invoked Section 157 of the 1999 Constitution, mistakenly applying it to the CCT. This section is pertinent to the Code of Conduct Bureau (CCB) and other executive bodies, but it has no bearing on the CCT, which operates under a different constitutional framework. As noted by PRNigeria’s fact-checking team, the remedial actions regarding judicial bodies such as the CCT require broader legislative consensus than the Senate alone can muster—specifically, a two-thirds majority from both the Senate and the House of Representatives, a detail curiously overlooked by the lawmakers.
Further complicating matters, the Senate suggested Mr. Abdullahi Usman Bello as Umar’s potential successor. However, it must be emphasized that Mr. Bello was appointed to lead the CCB, not the CCT. Moreover, constitutional stipulations require that the CCT Chairman possess qualifications akin to those of a judge of a superior court—qualifications which Mr. Bello notably lacks. This misstep reflects either a profound ignorance or a blatant disregard for the constitution.
It’s also alarming to observe the Senators conflating the roles of the CCB and the CCT, erroneously linking Umar’s situation to that of Bello. Their claims regarding the 9th Assembly’s investigations into Umar also deserve scrutiny, especially given that they appear to stem from a petition filed by a security guard concerning an unrelated incident—ironically, even after an anti-corruption agency had already cleared him of any wrongdoing.
Adding a layer of complexity to the situation is the media’s role in disseminating information. While there was widespread coverage of the Senate’s resolutions, many outlets failed to substantiate or fact-check their claims against the Constitution. This lapse in journalistic vigilance contributes to the propagation of misinformation, thereby undermining public trust in our governance systems.
The situation becomes even more troubling when senior lawmakers defend their misguided actions. The 1999 Constitution (as amended) clearly delineates that the appointment of the CCT Chairman and its members must follow the National Judicial Council’s recommendations, which should be informed by the Federal Judicial Service Commission. Thus, any motion to remove the CCT Chairman necessitates formal attention from both legislative chambers, not simply the Senate.
Read Also:
To complicate an already delicate situation, the newly elected President of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), Afam Osigwe (SAN), boldly claimed that the Senate adhered to constitutional protocols. Such statements from a figurehead of the legal profession raise questions about the level of legal literacy within our ranks.
Even more alarming was the endorsement from renowned human rights lawyer Femi Falana, also a Senior Advocate of Nigeria. By supporting the Senate’s push for Umar’s removal, Falana and others reveal a troubling trend where senior legal practitioners sidestep constitutional requirements, jeopardizing the sanctity of Nigeria’s judicial and legislative systems.
In light of these developments, distinguished legal scholars such as
Professor Mamman Lawan Yusufari, a former Dean of the Faculty of Law at Bayero University Kano (BUK), Professor Yemi Akinseye-George, the Executive Director of the Centre for Socio-Legal Studies, and Dr. Wahab Shittu have denounced the government’s handling of the CCT issue. They described these actions as blatant violations of constitutional mandates, calling on the Attorney-General of the Federation, Prince Lateef Fagbemi, SAN, to provide guidance to President Bola Tinubu on adhering to constitutional pathways for such significant personnel decisions.
Senior Advocate of Nigeria Yunus AbdulSalam further criticized the misinterpretation of the Constitution, labeling it alarming and indicative of a dangerous lack of diligence within both the executive and legislative branches. He remarked, “Their unconstitutional and desperate attempt to remove the CCT Chairman undermines the spirit of the Constitution and poses a serious threat to democratic integrity.”
It takes a whole week before the Senate admitted and corrected the procedural error by invoking the correct constitutional provisions, including Paragraph 17(3) of the Fifth Schedule and Section 22(3) of the Code of Conduct Bureau and Tribunal Act.
This entire debacle serves as a clarion call for lawmakers to strictly observe constitutional provisions. Legal protocols should never be compromised for political convenience. Moreover, the media must enhance its accountability in fact-checking claims that significantly influence national governance.
The independence of the judiciary and the integrity of the legislative process are cornerstones of Nigeria’s democracy; they must be protected from missteps and oversights, both from lawmakers and in media coverage. This incident reinforces that constitutional provisions are not mere guidelines; they are the foundation of a functioning democracy. The Senate’s actions reflect a troubling ignorance that could jeopardize the integrity of Nigeria’s legal system. As a nation, we must recommit ourselves to upholding the rule of law and rigorously adhering to constitutional procedures to safeguard judicial independence and the health of our democratic framework.
Haroon Aremu Abiodun is a co-author of ‘Youth Service for National Stability: A Corpers’ Chronicle.’ He can be reached at [email protected].
