Media
- Home
- Details
Abuja – His Lordship, Hon. Justice Sanusi Kado of the National Industrial Court of Nigeria, sitting in Abuja has endorsed the removal of Dr. Ademola Adebo and four others as members of the Code of Conduct Bureau by the federal government, endorsed the appointment of Muhammad Isah as Chairman and 9 others as members of the Code of Conduct Bureau (CCB).
The court held that Dr. Ademola Adebo and four others (claimants) can be removed from office upon completion of 5 years tenure beginning from the date of their appointment or they can be removed from office upon attainment of age of 70 years irrespective of number of years served or they can be removed based on an address of two thirds majority of the Senate under section 157 (1) of the Constitution as amended.
The claimants sought against defendants among others; A DECLARATION that the letter titled NOTIFICATION OF DISENGAGEMENT AS CHAIRMAN OF CODE OF CONDUCT BUREAU with reference number SGF.19/S.24/C.S/VOL/192 dated 14th June 2017 purportedly removing the Claimants as members of the Code of Conduct Bureau is unconstitutional, illegal and of no effect.
A DECLARATION that all steps taken by the Senate Federal Republic of Nigeria -2nd Defendant in the screening and confirmation of the 4th - 13th Defendants as members of the Code of Conduct Bureau are void in the absence of any vacancy (from the zones of the claimants) as provided by the Third Schedule, Part 1 of the 1999 Constitution.
Claimant witness stated that his appointment and that of his colleagues would terminate on attaining the age of 70 years and showed that he was not yet 70 years old as a 14th July 2018 that the President was wrong to assume that their appointment was for a 5-year tenure.
Claimant stated that Muhammad Isah and 9 others (4th- 13th Defendants) were wrongly appointed by the President, Federal Republic of Nigeria -1st Defendant to replace the Claimants in the Bureau even when no vacancies existed that their employment has statutory flavor.
That It will also be in the interest of Justice for this Honourable Court to grant an order of perpetual injunction restraining the 2nd defendant from confirming 4th to 13th defendants as members of the Code of Conduct Bureau, unless for the purpose of filing available vacancies.
In the alternative, should this Honourable Court find that it will be impossible to order for reinstatement, it is in the interest of justice for the Court to make an Order directing the first and third defendants to pay all salaries, furniture allowance, severance allowance and other entitlements with effect from 14th June 2017 until reinstatement or until exit office at 70 years of age.
Senate stated that upon the confirmation of their nominations, the 1st Defendant appointed the Claimants as members of the CCB on 30th April 2010 for a five (5) year term as provided for by the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended). This fact was duly conveyed to each of the Claimants in the letter which that of 10th July 2014 purports to replace.
However, the claimants submitted that the 1st defendant did not put any machinery in motion that could have enabled the 2nd Defendant to remove the Claimants from office and having not done so, the 2nd Defendant had no cause to remove the Claimants.
Claimants further submitted that the defendants did not adduce evidence to establish that their appointment is for a 5-year tenure.
Counsel to the President and the Attorney General of the Federation (The 1st and 3rd defendants) submitted that 1st defendant has the power under the executive powers of the government and under section 157 to disengaged the claimants and relieve them of their appointment as was done. Counsel urged the court to hold that the disengagement of the claimants was in accordance with the law.
Furthermore, The 4th – 13th defendant filed a notice of preliminary objection challenging the jurisdiction of the court to entertain this suit on the grounds that the reliefs are not within the jurisdiction of the court and none disclosure of cause of action.
After careful evaluation of all the processes filed, and the submissions of the learned Counsel from both sides, the Court presided by Hon. Justice Sanusi Kado assumed jurisdiction and dismissed preliminary objection for lacking merit and held that the suit as presently constituted is not an abuse of process.
“In the circumstance, I am of the view that the 4th – 13th defendants are necessary parties. There is also the need for them to be in this suit so as to be bound by the outcome of this litigation.
“There seems to be some consensus on most of the facts. The area of disagreement between the parties is in the interpretation of the applicable provisions of the Constitution that regulates the appointment of the claimants.
“My understanding of the community reading of the provisions of sections 153(1), 155(1)(c), 157 and Part 1 of the Third Schedule to the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999, as amended is that in the context in which these sections are used, the claimants, in this case, can be removed from office upon completion of 5 years tenure beginning from the date of their appointment or they can be removed from office upon attainment of age of 70 years irrespective of number of years served or they can be removed based on an address of two thirds majority of the Senate under section 157 (1) of the Constitution as amended.”
“To hold otherwise will do great violence to the Constitution and intention and intendment of makers of the Constitution.
“In view of my finding, it is my view that the claimant does not have any term left to serve their appointment as per CTC of votes and proceedings of the Senate and appointment of the claimants was for five years and having served for more than five years without a renewal cannot maintain any claim against the defendants in this case.
The court dismissed the suit in its entirety for lacking merit.
