greenify:
Pls i will beg everyone on this forum to stop commenting on this guy post. Avoid d guy post as if he is not existing. We are only allowing him to spread his wings.

JuanDeDios:


Someone opens a thread calling a very senior national judicial officer "the useless Danladi Umar of the CCT" in the first line and Seun, Lalasticlala or Lalasticlara pops it on the front page! Ok o.

chukwudi44:
3 pages and yet no one is able to offer a legal rebuttal to my write-up!! This is amazing!!! All I see is market women tantrums all over the place.If you want the EFCC,CCB etc to fight corruption simply ask them to do their groundwork very well.The CCB did not do theirs and will definitely lose out at the supreme court.It dosent matter what anyone of you thinks,the letters of the law will be strictl interpreted in deciding this case

chukwudi44:


No dear he will never resign but will rather sit out and fight out to the supreme court.The CCT struck it out but I assure up it will not be the same at the supreme court. This fact was even alluded by a CCB member in my earlier thread here https://www.nairaland.com/2633889/saraki-ccb-member-says-chairman

chukwudi44:


Buhari would have wished he was in a banana republic where he would have the powers to do as he likes unfortunately for him we are in Nigeria a country governed by laws

rusher14:


[b]The 1999 Act does not require invitation.

"noted that the CCB/T Act was enacted in 1989 as Decree No. 1 of 1989 and that the Act and Section 3(d) thereof were patterned after the 1979 Constitution, which in Paragraph 15(1)(d) of Part 1 of the 5the Schedule to the 1979 Constitution.
The CCB noted that the effect of Paragraph 15(1)(d) of Part 1 of the 5the Schedule to the 1979 Constitution is that once a public officer, who contravened any provision of the Code of Conduct is invited and he/she makes a written statement, admitting the contravention, the CCB would be incapacitated and would not be able to try such public officer or refer the case to the CCT.
“This provision of the 1979 Constitution was however adopted in Section 3(d) of the CCB/T Act when the CCB and CCT were established in 1989. This absurd situation led to the failure of the CCB and CCT under the 1979 Constitution.
“This deficiency has however been corrected in the 1999 Constitution, with the deletion of the provision, in the 1979 Constitution and the Code of Conduct Decree N. 1 of 1989, to the effect that once a written admission is made by the erring public officer, no reference should be made to the tribunal.
“Paragraph 3(e) of Part 1 of the 3rd Schedule to the 1999 Constitution provides that: ‘The Bureau (CCB) shall have power to…receive complaints about non-compliance or breach of the provisions of the Code of Conduct or any law in relation thereto, investigate the complaint and, where appropriate, refer such matters to the CCT.’
“Under the 1999 Constitution, the CCB needs not request the erring public officer to either admit or deny the allegation of breach of the Code of Conduct,” CCB said,
It argued that in view of the provision of Section 1(3) of the 1999 Constitution, the provision of Section 3(d) of the CCB/T Act, which was Decree No. 1 of 1989 cannot override the clear provisions of Paragraph 3(e) of Part 1 of the 3rd Schedule to the 1999 Constitution.[/b]

rusher14:


[b]The 1999 Act does not require invitation.

"noted that the CCB/T Act was enacted in 1989 as Decree No. 1 of 1989 and that the Act and Section 3(d) thereof were patterned after the 1979 Constitution, which in Paragraph 15(1)(d) of Part 1 of the 5the Schedule to the 1979 Constitution.
The CCB noted that the effect of Paragraph 15(1)(d) of Part 1 of the 5the Schedule to the 1979 Constitution is that once a public officer, who contravened any provision of the Code of Conduct is invited and he/she makes a written statement, admitting the contravention, the CCB would be incapacitated and would not be able to try such public officer or refer the case to the CCT.
“This provision of the 1979 Constitution was however adopted in Section 3(d) of the CCB/T Act when the CCB and CCT were established in 1989. This absurd situation led to the failure of the CCB and CCT under the 1979 Constitution.
“This deficiency has however been corrected in the 1999 Constitution, with the deletion of the provision, in the 1979 Constitution and the Code of Conduct Decree N. 1 of 1989, to the effect that once a written admission is made by the erring public officer, no reference should be made to the tribunal.
“Paragraph 3(e) of Part 1 of the 3rd Schedule to the 1999 Constitution provides that: ‘The Bureau (CCB) shall have power to…receive complaints about non-compliance or breach of the provisions of the Code of Conduct or any law in relation thereto, investigate the complaint and, where appropriate, refer such matters to the CCT.’
“Under the 1999 Constitution, the CCB needs not request the erring public officer to either admit or deny the allegation of breach of the Code of Conduct,” CCB said,
It argued that in view of the provision of Section 1(3) of the 1999 Constitution, the provision of Section 3(d) of the CCB/T Act, which was Decree No. 1 of 1989 cannot override the clear provisions of Paragraph 3(e) of Part 1 of the 3rd Schedule to the 1999 Constitution.[/b]

Jhappy:
We all want an independent senate, but not one headed by an unscrupulous looter! Why can't u get it? The head of any house will alws dictate d principles upon which d house is run! Look at how him and his hicks are buying jeeps at twice their price! Just take a look at how they re removing projects tyhat re suppose to benefit Nigerians from d budget for their own selfish interest! We will not suport a Senate that wants to be independent for its own selfish and unscrupulous reasons!

MabraO:


Gradually sanity would be restored in d judiciary

chukwudi44:


Bros surprisingly I am neither!!! I am just a Nigerian fighting for the independence of the legislative arm of Government!!! We cannot afford to have a rubber stamp senate in this dispensation

chukwudi44:
It is already obvious that Danladi Umar of the CCT is biased so I am not expecting any sensible judgement from him,he can as well deliver his Tinubu written judgment tomorrow for all I care.Unfortunateley for him and his paymasters, this case would still be adjudicated up to the supreme court before it is rested.

The main thrust of my argument which I am sure the supreme court will interpret very well is section 3(d) of the CCT act which was not complied by the CCB before rushing to the kangaroo tribunal

the sction stipulates;

Section 3(d) of the CCB Act states that: “The functions of the Bureau shall be ….to receive complaints about non-compliance with or breach of this Act and where the Bureau considers it necessary to do so, refer such complaints to the Code of Conduct Tribunal established by Section 20 of this Act in accordance with Section 20 to 25 of this Act.

“Provided that where the person concerned makes a written admission of such breach or non-compliance, no reference to the Tribunal shall be necessary.”

The CCB was supposed to get back to Saraki and reconfirm the declarations stated in his form. This was the same premise upon which Tinubu was freed.Danladi umar obviously acting out a script by his paymasters have already overruled himself on the Tinubu Judgement.But how these portion of the act is interpreted by the supreme court is what will finally decide the case

Kiakia:
I thought the dude who posted this gibbrish was about to take us on a legal journey on how his master will meander through the legal web to be in the clear but I was disappointed after reading the first line of his meaningless post. Even if his pay master wll eventually get reprieve at the apex court, he will still be in prison custody serving the sentence of the tribunal should he be convicted of the offences he is charged with. Either way, it is a no win situation for Saraki.

chukwudi44:


The CCT has no powers to send anyone to jail dear!! Irrespective of what the biased CCT judge rules,Saraki will remain in power and appeal the judgement.

garfield16:


One willing to sell his soul to the highest bidder, an allrightsir or an abobaku. one with no moral compass who tries to use technicalities to justifiy immoral behavior is known as a chuwkudi44


Your mother warned you about chuwkudi44s, dont be a chuwkudi44!

chukwudi44:
It is already obvious that Danladi Umar of the CCT is biased so I am not expecting any sensible judgement from him,he can as well deliver his Tinubu written judgment tomorrow for all I care.Unfortunateley for him and his paymasters, this case would still be adjudicated up to the supreme court before it is rested.

The main thrust of my argument which I am sure the supreme court will interpret very well is section 3(d) of the CCT act which was not complied by the CCB before rushing to the kangaroo tribunal

the sction stipulates;

Section 3(d) of the CCB Act states that: “The functions of the Bureau shall be ….to receive complaints about non-compliance with or breach of this Act and where the Bureau considers it necessary to do so, refer such complaints to the Code of Conduct Tribunal established by Section 20 of this Act in accordance with Section 20 to 25 of this Act.

“Provided that where the person concerned makes a written admission of such breach or non-compliance, no reference to the Tribunal shall be necessary.”

The CCB was supposed to get back to Saraki and reconfirm the declarations stated in his form. This was the same premise upon which Tinubu was freed.Danladi umar obviously acting out a script by his paymasters have already overruled himself on the Tinubu Judgement.But how these portion of the act is interpreted by the supreme court is what will finally decide the case

Ayomivic:


this matter had been settled, let your leader defend himself on the accusations leved against him.

PassingShot:
[s][/s]
Trashy trash!

chukwudi44:


Settled by who exactly? Does the trial no end at the CCT? They will be no basis for thiis trial if the higher courts rule against the CCB

989900:
Abobaku1

garfield16:



Anybody with a tag line aka personal text in his profile that states " Buhari is so dull that even after he forged WAEC certificate,he still gave himself F9" is not someone coming to an argument from a position of objectivity.


Someone who goes as far as top put Akpabio and Wike as his profile picture is obviously someone who glorifies looting and thuggery in our politics. Don't get me wrong there are bad elements on both sides of our politics but if you are the sort of person that puts people like these on a pedestal, I don't have time to engage you. He can discuss his points with himself. We need less of these people in our politics not raising them on a pedestal.

I only wish we were in a military era so that his paymasters (both in APC and PDP) can be locked up and waterboarded before facing a firing squad on bar beach.

chukwudi44:

the sction stipulates;

Section 3(d) of the CCB Act states that: “The functions of the Bureau shall be ….to receive complaints about non-compliance with or breach of this Act and where the Bureau considers it necessary to do so, refer such complaints to the Code of Conduct Tribunal established by Section 20 of this Act in accordance with Section 20 to 25 of this Act.

“Provided that where the person concerned makes a written admission of such breach or non-compliance, no reference to the Tribunal shall be necessary.”

The CCB was supposed to get back to Saraki and reconfirm the declarations stated in his form . This was the same premise upon which Tinubu was freed.Danladi umar obviously acting out a script by his paymasters have already overruled himself on the Tinubu Judgement.But how these portion of the act is interpreted by the supreme court is what will finally decide the case

No reference will be made to the tribunal if and only if, the accused BY HIMSELF realized his error and corrected it......... NOT AFTER HE IS CAUGHT PANTS DOWN! This is where your argument FAILS WOEFULLY