Umar, Agwaza and CCT
by Olu Onemola
On the 24th of June 2011, when erstwhile President, Goodluck Jonathan, appointed Barrister Atedze Agwaza to serve as a member of the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) - Nigeria’s pioneer anti-corruption tribunal - there was applause in many quarters, as Barrister Agwaza, in his previous engagements as a solicitor, had distinguished himself as a man of integrity.

This is why it came as no surprise to many, when in 2014, following allegations of a N10 million bribery scandal against the Chairman of the CCT, Dan Ladi Umar, Agwaza, and his other counterpart on the tribunal at the time, retired Justice Robert Odu, wrote a strongly-worded memo to the Secretary of the Government of the Federation (SGF), stating that the reputation of the tribunal was being called into question by Umar’s alleged unscrupulous dealings.

Agwaza and Odu, in their joint letter, mentioned that the allegation of Dan Ladi Umar receiving N10 million to quash the case against a defendant, had been widely reported in the media, and embarrassing comments from legal practitioners over the shocking development, was tainting both their (Agwaza’s and Odu’s) reputations - as they had been adjudged guilty by affiliation by the court of public opinion.

In 2015, following what has been described in many quarters as “politically-motivated inaction” by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) in the case involving Dan Ladi Umar, the CCT under Umar indicted the Senate President, Dr. Bukola Saraki, on charges relating to his assets declaration forms from 2003. When the case commenced, Agwaza and Umar were the only two people left on the tribunal, however, for much of the beginning of the case, observers noticed that it was Dan Ladi Umar who was running the show - without consulting Agwaza on any of the rulings.

However, as the case began to take illogical turns by setting precedents that made legal observers like Dr. Olisa Agbakoba (SAN), Chief Emeka Ngige (SAN) and Chief Mike Ozekhome (SAN) to call to question the motivations behind the case, Agwaza began to speak more frequently during the tribunal hearings.

Be that as it may, although the relationship between Dan Ladi Umar, the EFCC and Saraki have been well-documented in the media in recent times, with analysts highlighting the fact that the EFCC forced Umar to institute the case against the Senate President, after the Senate began to investigate the EFCC for diverting recovered funds, it has become time to ask ourselves what the motivating force behind Agwaza is - as he has not only been a party to the legal inconsistencies that have been set in the case, as a member of the tribunal, as his joint-letter in 2011 implied, he too is also guilty by affiliation.

For example, in 2007, the CCT dismissed charges against the former Vice-President, Atiku Abubakar, stating the non-adherence to Section 3, paragraph D of its establishing act, that states that all individuals must be first given an opportunity to either confirm or deny allegations bordering on their assets declaration by the Code of Conduct Bureau, before any trial could be instituted by the CCT. In 2011, this same legal precedent set the grounds for the dismissal of the case against former governor of Lagos State, Chief Bola Ahmed Tinubu.

Nevertheless, in a clear-cut case of self-indictment, the CCT overturned its own legal precedents by stating that the precedent clause that was used to let Atiku and Tinubu off the hook were simply made in error. Agwaza, sat on the bench on the day that Dan Ladi Umar read out that ruling. Although, some say he looked visibly displeased at the verdict, by remaining silent, he too is equally culpable in the conspiracies that have played out thus far.

At this point, it is important that Nigerians who wish to see that justice is served in the case involving the Senate President, do not only focus on Dan Ladi Umar as the instigator and initiator of all the legal discrepancies that have been exhibited. We must also turn to Agwaza, who earlier in his tenure, seemed to care about the reputation of the CCT, but has remained silent in recent times as the law has been turned upside down in the case involving the Senate President.

As the case continues, it is important that Agwaza is reminded that by virtue of his seat on the tribunal, association is perception, and perception is ultimately reality. In this regard, the reality is that he is equally as compromised as Dan Ladi Umar. Hence, it is safe to say that the CCT, has finally and completely lost its way.