A senior lawyer, Femi Falana, has called on the
Speaker of the House of Representatives,
Yakubu Dogara, not to support the move to
amend the Code of Conduct Bureau and Code of
Conduct Tribunal Act, saying passing such a
legislation will be illegal and unconstitutional.
In a letter dated April 15 and addressed to Mr.
Dogara, Mr. Falana said the fact that the
National Assembly is commencing deliberation
on amending the CCB and CCT Act at a time the
Senate President, Bukola Saraki, is being
prosecuted under the same statute is improper.
“In view of the ongoing trial of the Senate
President, Dr. Bukola Saraki before the Code of
Conduct Tribunal over the alleged failure to
declare his assets the hasty move to amend the
Act is insensitive, suspicious, self serving and
opportunistic. It is also illegal and
unconstitutional in several respects,” Mr. Falana
wrote.
The Senior Advocate of Nigeria also argued that
Mr. Saraki’s decision to remove himself from
presiding over the Senate whenever the body
wants to deliberate the amendment is not a
sufficient excuse to make the process legal.
“Secondly, notwithstanding that the Senate
President has decided not to preside over the
plenary in the Senate whenever the bill is being
debated the whole exercise is a clear violation of paragraph 1 of the Code of Conduct for Public
Officers enshrined in Part 1 of the Fifth Schedule
to the Constitution which stipulates that “A
public officer shall not put himself in a position
where his personal interest conflicts with his
duties and responsibilities,” he said.
Mr. Falana said the amendment, if passed into
law, will be illegal because its objectives had
already been addressed in the Constitution.
“Thirdly, section 3 of Act which the National
Assembly seeks to amend has become spent.
Senator Nwaoboshi was reported to have said
that he was proposing an amendment to section
3 of the Act to provide ‘for an opportunity for the person whose rights and obligations may be
affected to make representations to the
administering authority before that authority
makes the decision affecting that person.’ With
respect, section 3 of the Act is in pari materia
with Paragraph 3(e) of Part 1 of the Third
Schedule to the Constitution. To that extent,
section 3 of the Act is inoperative and invalid in
every material particular. In Attorney-General of
Abia v Attorney-General of the Federation (2001)
17 WRN 1 the Supreme Court held:
“Where the provision in the Act is within the
legislative powers of the National Assembly but
the Constitution is found to have already made
the same or similar provision, then the new
provision will be regarded as invalid for
duplication and or inconsistency and therefore
inoperative. The same fate will befall any
provision of the Act which seeks to enlarge,
curtail or alter any existing provision of the
Constitution. The provision or provisions will be
treated as unconstitutional and therefore null
and void.
“In the light of the authoritative pronouncement
of the Supreme Court on lack of legislative
powers on the part of the National Assembly to
enact laws which have similar provisions to
those of the Constitution section 3 of the Act has
become a duplication of the relevant
constitutional provision. Consequently, its
proposed amendment is illegal and
unconstitutional. In other words, without
amending the relevant provisions of the
Constitution the proposed amendment of the Act is an exercise in futility. As the proposed
amendment cannot alter, enlarge or curtail the
relevant provisions of the Constitution the
Senate ought not to continue to waste precious
time and resources on the illegal exercise.
“Since the Constitution has prohibited the
enactment of ex post facto laws in
circumstances of this nature the National
Assembly ought to know that the ongoing moves to amend the Act cannot have any effect on thecelebrated trial of the Senate President. Having solemnly sworn to strive to preserve the
Fundamental Objectives and Directive Principles
of State Policy contained in the Constitution the
members of the National Assembly should stop
subverting the obligation of the Federal
Government to “abolish all corrupt practices and abuse of power,” he said.
Mr. Falana, therefore, prevailed on Mr. Dogara
to desist from giving the bill any backing, adding
that doing so will be an exercise in futility.
“In view of the foregoing, we are compelled to
urge the House of Representatives ably led by
your good self not to lend its weight to the illegal amendment of the Act. You may wish to remind your colleagues in the House that when the Corrupt Practices and other Related Offences Act 2000 was amended in 2003 on account of theinvestigation of allegations of corrupt practices involving the leadership of the Senate the Federal High Court set aside the amendment as it violated the Constitution. As the same fate certainly awaits the Bill to amend the Code of Conduct Bureau and Code of Conduct Tribunal Act it is hoped that the House will persuade the Senate to terminate further debates on it.”
The National Assembly has been criticised since
Mr. Nwaoboshi (PDP-Delta State) moved a
motion last week to amend the CCT and CCB Act
which guides conduct of public office holders.
Many Nigerians argued that the lawmakers are
trying to change the law to save one of their
own, Mr. Saraki, who has been standing trial for
alleged false asset declaration since September
2015.
“If you don’t assist your neighbour when his
house is burning, it will extend to yours,”
PREMIUM TIMES reported Senator Biodun
Olujimi (PDP-Ekiti State) as saying, during the
second reading of the bill on Thursday.

www.premiumtimesng.com/news/top-news/201920-falana-speaker-dograra-dont-support-senates-ploy-amend-anti-corruption-law.html

Lawyers in d house pls help explain why Falana says its illegal! On what grounds is it illegal? We need to know so we can unite against d evil plans of d senate! With every fibre of our being we shall resist this evil plot by these evil senators who clearly do not want any progress for this country! Lalasticlala come see wetin falana talk o!

common sense alone is enough for someone to make the right decision, interpretation of the constition often compromise sensitive case like this.

Dogara, just like many of their colleague in the house, knows that Saraki is almost politically shiprecked and drowning fast. going onboard with such fellow spell doom for them both.

I Hereby Welcome Nigerians To Change Era

falana on point

Why?

Sunky200:
common sense alone is enough for someone to make the right decision, interpretation of the constition often compromise sensitive case like this.

Dogara, just like many of their colleague in the house, knows that Saraki is almost politically shiprecked and drowning fast. going onboard with such fellow spell doom for them both.

I Hereby Welcome Nigerians To Change Era

I just hope Dogara knows he shouldn't get involved in saraki's mess else it will consume him as well

Lips sealed

Where all d lawyers?

NOETHNICITY:
Where all d lawyers?

Conc. stuff for 'charge and bail'.

if falana sincerely believed that the proposed amendment is illegal why is he begging Dogara not to support it ,he should have waited for the court to determine the legality or otherwise of the amendment.