Saraki: Tribunal fixes July 13th for ruling on disqualification of Danladi Umar

The defense team handling the trial of the Senate President, Bukola Saraki had again accused the chairman of the Code of Conduct Tribunal, Danladi Umar of been biased in his ruling.

Bukola Saraki is standing trial on a 16-count charge on corruption and alleged acquired assets beyond his legitimate earnings.

Bukola Saraki through his counsel, Paul Erokoro had earlier filed a fresh motion seeking the Chairman to recuse himself in further participation of the ongoing trial.

The motion of biasness is supported by the affidavit of 26 paragraphs sworn by Olufemi Balogun.

“The Fundamental point in this motion is that our beloveth chairman would no longer be possible to comply with section 36 (1) of the Administration Criminal Justice Act which requires fair hearing”

It is no longer possible for him to be fair to both parties in the suit.

Counsel to EFCC, Rotimi Jacobs said the application brought by his learned friend is similar to one that is already moved by the defendant in April.

The defense has a pending appeal at the court of appeal saying that the Tribunal chairman should not take over the job of the court of appeal since the prayers of the defendant at the appeal court is to disqualify self from trial.

“Any statement that is not proved through the record of the court would be seen as totally inadmissible in evidence.

In the earlier application the defendant had contended that because the tribunal chairman was under investigation by the Federal Government, the chairman is likely to be blackmailed by the defense.

How can a judge say “I am not happy with the delayed tactics of the defense and so it would not reduce the consequences that awaits you in the ongoing trial” Erokoro said

He argued that the prosecution has not disputed the fact that the chairman made this above statement neither as the chairman filed a counter affidavit disputing this statement in anyway.
‘It is therefore agreed to all that the chairman made this statement’ he said

It is our fear that the presiding Judge has already made up his mind to convict the defendant whether or not there is evidence. He said

In view of this, he should no longer participate in the hearing of the matter, so some other judge should be appointed to take over the case.

“We hope to convince the chairman to step away from the trial”

Rotimi explained that the chairman in his statement meant that the matter must come to an end uphelding that he was not prejudicial in any way.

“I urged my lord to dismiss the motion because it is an abuse of the court process and also an intention to delay trial”

After listening from both ends, the trial was further adjourn to July 13 for continuation of trial.

Subscribe to our mailing list and get interesting stuff and updates to your email inbox.