freeze001:


You see, in a democracy imperfect as ours is, justice must be done and seen to be done. The provisions of the law are clear.

For stopping the trial:
1. The issue he raised was jurisdiction of the tribunal as to constitution of the panel. The CCB Act says 3 judges constitute a panel. The intention of the law for providing an odd number even in the appellate courts is so that in the event of dissenting judgements, there will always be a majority which becomes the binding judgment. However, the law also says 2 judges can form a quorum and on the basis of this, his appeal was quashed at the Supreme Court. He had the right of appeal which he rightly exercised.

2. Another issue raised was the condition precedent set by the tribunal with Tinubu which is also a set down precedent in the Act that the declarant must be informed and his statement or clarification to issues raised by the CCB must be received in writing by the CCB. Where the CCB is satisfied by the clarification of any issues raised, there will be no need to proceed to the tribunal but where it is not satisfied, it can approach the tribunal and that written statement by the declarant is one of the mandatory documents with which to institute an action at the tribunal and which vests it with the jurisdiction to entertain the matter.

This was not complied with in Tinubu's case on the basis of which the tribunal chairman dismissed the charges against Tinubu. The same situation played out in Saraki's case as he wasn't informed nor given the opportunity to respond as statutorily required before he was served with notice to appear before the tribunal.

Again he had the right to rely on the precedent set by the tribunal and the extant provisions of the law. The same chairman that ruled on Tinubu's case chose to overrule himself rather than comply with the law and its own precedent. Legally the tribunal has no power to act as an appellate court unto itself and can no longer rule on a previous judgment because it is functus officio. Still that has been done and the matter continues.

3. Asking the chairman to recuse himself on grounds of bias: In law, even the slightest whiff of bias established by a defendant against a judge allows issues to be resolved in his favor upon appeal. The possibility of and actual bias is frowned upon very strongly. Saraki rightly pointed out the possible bias of the tribunal due to his pending issues with EFCC, the same EFCC which is testifying against Saraki.

My point with the above is that with an independent judiciary, all these issues raised on appeal can overturn the decision of the tribunal upon appeal. It would then be on apparently technical grounds to those who don't understand these things because jurisdiction is fundamental. If that happens, u all will still say the judiciary is the problem!

The FG has not done it's job well because it doesn't seek justice but political vendetta and equity will not be used as a cloak for fraud. A defendant has every right to explore every legal avenue for justice, it must not be interpreted as an admission of guilt or an attempt to evade justice.

The law simply requires that he who comes to equity must come with clean hands and the Prosecution must always be mindful so its actions do not amount to a nullity.

You are wasting your time on a group of block heads.... Nothing you will say to them wld make dem see the reality of things. I don't know how the comprehensive capacity of an average Nigeria youth sink this low.

For court cases you would usually need to fill form OC1 and order the official guaranteed copy. If my memory serves me right the official copy is about 15 pounds..

SLIDEwaxie:
yeah, it gives me orgamsz...
U knw, Igbos being the owner of 90% of the whole Nigeria state.

Is that an attempt on sacarsm or a joke? Its phucking dry mate

gabbytabby:
https://eservices.landregistry.gov.uk/www/wps/portal/!ut/p/b1/hc7LDoJADAXQb_EL2pkOMC5BFIiCb4XZGIyE-ACMIRL5etGdGqS7JufeFhREDElqupDUhxBUHt-PaVweizy-vHal74hLwZjgriTdQE8bOcRWGqGgBkR_gMO68lsIUeyWJ3n1H2U4qQf31amec__mVIG95sFtWPmlOztsFmvLtK3tQOxhmeRNTn1VT0cmemRNxw7NOaL-Az5vS94BXr-_AbaMiRC4RZZA1DCjrUduBGTqMhHnhVulvd4TSBqmOQ!!/dl4/d5/L0lDU0lKSmdwcGlRb0tVUW9LVVEhL29Gb2dBRUlRaGpFQ1VJZ0FJQUl5RkFNaHdVaFM0SldsYTRvIS80RzNhRDJnanZ5aERVd3BNaFFqVW81Q2pHcHhBL1o3XzMyODQxMTQySDgzNjcwSTVGRzMxVDUzOFY0LzAvMzI0ODk1MzY5OTcyL3NwZl9BY3Rpb25OYW1lL3NwZl9BY3Rpb25MaXN0ZW5lci9zcGZfc3RydXRzQWN0aW9uLyEyZlF1aWNrRW5xdWlyeUluaXQuZG8!/

Unfortunately, guy man didn't make his property record public. Here is the result of the search, thus I can't proceed to the payment.

http://newsdiaryonline.com/cct-trial-witness-continues-testify-saraki-buharis-allies-watch-closely/
CCT Trial: Witness Continues To Testify Against Saraki As Buhari’s Allies Watch Closely

By Abdullahi Mohammed
The first prosecution witness in the ongoing trial of the Senate President, Dr. Bukola Saraki, before the Code of Conduct Tribunal, Mr. Michael Wetkas, continued with his testimony on Wednesday at the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT)

freeze001:
When people say all this drama is political persecution because Saraki bucked the norms of party supremacy and clinched the seat of Senate president, the crazies who are officially tagged zombies come out to scream fight against corruption and corruption fighting back.

Not holding brief as to whether he's innocent or not but it's just so friggin clear there's more to this than 'fighting corruption'.
Let the drama keep unfolding

I would love to have you under my lash!. Apparently you are of the position that as long as you did not catch the thief with oil and soup leaking from his mouth.. the fact that he broke into your kitchen and he is holding the empty pot in his hands (with no one in sight) is not enough to arrest him. where is lashly

forray:


You are wasting your time on a group of block heads.... Nothing you will say to them wld make dem see the reality of things. I don't know how the comprehensive capacity of an average Nigeria youth sink this low.

Actually, it is you that has a low comprehensive capacity not the other way round. There are 13 counts and you seem to base your judgement on the possible failure to prove just 1 out of 13 counts.

Must someone be guilty of all 13 counts? Does even failing to get a conviction imply that the EFCC failed in their case? Did the fact that EFCC proved it's case against Ibori prevent the Naija Judge from acquitting him while the UK Judge sent him to the gaol.

Akainzo:


My guy, I am quite surprised at how Count 11 out of a 13 Count charges shows that the proceedings are politically motivated. Haba!

Everywhere in teh world, an accused can be found guilty of Count 1, Not Guilty on Count 2, Guilty of Count 3 and Guilty of Count 4. It is normal.
However, the report as presented by this journalist is quite a half-truth and it is intended to serve people looking for excuses to blame the Govt. The witness clearly stated that he got the evidences of the transfers, and corroboration of the UK personnel to determine that the property was bought by Saraki. What he said was that he did not see the physical mortgage papers for the transactions.

The question to ask is this: How did GTB finance a mortgage and claim not to have copy of the mortgage documents?
The only way is simple: when the transaction is fraudulent and when one is trying to hide the facts.

This report up there from the stable of the "Common Sense" Senator, a known supporter of Saraki is junk reporting.

Wetkas, who is also an operative of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) and the lead witness in the case, admitted that he never asked the defendant about the mortgage alluded to in Count 11, and neither did he see the mortgage agreement to confirm the ownership of the property in question.

The EFCC witness also admitted to the fact that no current evidence shows the location and/or description of the property referred to in Count 11 (No. 37 A Global Road, Lagos) as he was not entirely sure if the Global Road in question was in Ebute Meta, Lagos or Ikoyi, Lagos.

Read this carefully and see whether it tallies with what you've just written.

He never asked the defendant about the mortgage, neither sought for nor saw a mortgage deed or document and wasn't entirely sure of location of the property. What manner of investigation is that? How do they plan to substantiate the charge if they couldn't ascertain even location at the time of cross examination?

Nonsense! Part of cross examination is to discredit the witness. The moment they are able to portray the witness as unreliable and possibly a liar or unprofessional, it is capable of tainting and weakening his testimony on other charges.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MGl0yYtgru4

[size=14pt]Saraki's defence team should conclude their cross-examination, says Counsel to EFCC[/size]

@akainzo every property must be registered such that it is not optional.

I have seen that it is there just put 7 or 8 as the case may be in the no and Sw1w 8jq in post code.

everydayperson:


I would love to have you under my lash!. Apparently you are of the position that as long as you did not catch the thief with oil and soup leaking from his mouth.. the fact that he broke into your kitchen and he is holding the empty pot in his hands (with no one in sight) is not enough to arrest him. where is lashly

Issues like these require proof beyond reasonable doubt. Circumstantial evidence must be corroborated. His presence in the kitchen raises sufficient basis for an action but if I cannot trace the soup physically to him, there is enough reason to test his blood or the contents of his stomach. If e no show, I go hol am for breaking and entering.

Akainzo:


Actually, it is you that has a low comprehensive capacity not the other way round. There are 13 counts and you seem to base your judgement on the possible failure to prove just 1 out of 13 counts.

Must someone be guilty of all 13 counts? Does even failing to get a conviction imply that the EFCC failed in their case? Did the fact that EFCC proved it's case against Ibori prevent the Naija Judge from acquitting him while the UK Judge sent him to the gaol.

Like I said, really terrible level of comprehension...... Freeze001 didn't say saraki was innocent...... All freeze001 is saying is that FG and EFCC should take their time in carrying out proper investigation instead of going to embarrass themselves in court. Let me tell u something, no matter how guilty a person is, if u can't convince the Judge, that guilty person will definitely walk free. They are bundling this cases and doing a poor job at handling dem all. Y not handlee one at a time and do a good job at it. I hope now u understand? The way they are rushing these cases one wld think they have a hiding agenda.

Just imagine somebody already saying freeze001 is pained Cause of Jonathan election loss. I was force to wonder how is Jonathan related to what is been said? Very poor ability to comprehend

SLIDEwaxie:
there's no sticking out of the subject with what he said.

Na only u?

When was the last time the yorubas protested against the thieves who were being haunted by their actions?

Each one of them is a thief, but whoever has the turn to face his crimes, why protest against that?

Soz the guy is still on the topic!

Recently, some sets of deranged individuals blew up pipelines again ( that part always for me laffin every time it happens) and asked for kanu to be released (agreed, that is still pertinent), and dasuki (I am lost here ) is to be released too.

Now, u're claiming witch hunting as if you're making sense...

Talk abt a guy whose name appeared in the world corruption scandal and whose assets and riches denies him bluntly. Someone whose resources was concentrated on stopping the court trial and ure talking witch hunting. When are we going to stand up as a youth and ask for these thieves to be killed?

I guess that's a dream...with people like u playing a part..

13% derivatives since the time of OBJ and u guys are still blaming the feds for your woes while u sing praises of ur looters.

Your allocation is at times 10 times of other states and your States are not even bigger than the ones collecting paltry allocation and yet, whenever one if your looters are picked up, u start collecting 500naira and start throwing sticks in the air!!!

Why do u like derailing a thread... SMH for u

freeze001:


Issues like these require proof beyond reasonable doubt. Circumstantial evidence must be corroborated. His presence in the kitchen raises sufficient basis for an action but if I cannot trace the soup physically to him, there is enough reason to test his blood or the contents of his stomach. If e no show, I go hol am for breaking and entering.

There are statements of fact either backed by evidence or the version of witness statements that the judge believes to be true.

erosimo:


Why do u like derailing a thread... SMH for u

dude. C'mom..don't make me appear like the scapegoat here na

SARAKI, THE FACE OF CORRUPTION

Na dem go tire nah! Imagine the people that said they prosecuting a criminal but has no evidence against the said offence.

freeze001:


You see, in a democracy imperfect as ours is, justice must be done and seen to be done. The provisions of the law are clear.

For stopping the trial:
1. The issue he raised was jurisdiction of the tribunal as to constitution of the panel. The CCB Act says 3 judges constitute a panel. The intention of the law for providing an odd number even in the appellate courts is so that in the event of dissenting judgements, there will always be a majority which becomes the binding judgment. However, the law also says 2 judges can form a quorum and on the basis of this, his appeal was quashed at the Supreme Court. He had the right of appeal which he rightly exercised.

2. Another issue raised was the condition precedent set by the tribunal with Tinubu which is also a set down precedent in the Act that the declarant must be informed and his statement or clarification to issues raised by the CCB must be received in writing by the CCB. Where the CCB is satisfied by the clarification of any issues raised, there will be no need to proceed to the tribunal but where it is not satisfied, it can approach the tribunal and that written statement by the declarant is one of the mandatory documents with which to institute an action at the tribunal and which vests it with the jurisdiction to entertain the matter.

This was not complied with in Tinubu's case on the basis of which the tribunal chairman dismissed the charges against Tinubu. The same situation played out in Saraki's case as he wasn't informed nor given the opportunity to respond as statutorily required before he was served with notice to appear before the tribunal.

Again he had the right to rely on the precedent set by the tribunal and the extant provisions of the law. The same chairman that ruled on Tinubu's case chose to overrule himself rather than comply with the law and its own precedent. Legally the tribunal has no power to act as an appellate court unto itself and can no longer rule on a previous judgment because it is functus officio. Still that has been done and the matter continues.

3. Asking the chairman to recuse himself on grounds of bias: In law, even the slightest whiff of bias established by a defendant against a judge allows issues to be resolved in his favor upon appeal. The possibility of and actual bias is frowned upon very strongly. Saraki rightly pointed out the possible bias of the tribunal due to his pending issues with EFCC, the same EFCC which is testifying against Saraki.

My point with the above is that with an independent judiciary, all these issues raised on appeal can overturn the decision of the tribunal upon appeal. It would then be on apparently technical grounds to those who don't understand these things because jurisdiction is fundamental. If that happens, u all will still say the judiciary is the problem!

The FG has not done it's job well because it doesn't seek justice but political vendetta and equity will not be used as a cloak for fraud. A defendant has every right to explore every legal avenue for justice, it must not be interpreted as an admission of guilt or an attempt to evade justice.

The law simply requires that he who comes to equity must come with clean hands and the Prosecution must always be mindful so its actions do not amount to a nullity.

Please my dear sister, stop trying to educate these idiiots. They are not at the same level with you. As much as you have tried to simplify the issues you raised, they will still not grasp them, due to their lack of proper knowledge.

Everything you have said so far is 100% right. It is only those who have no understanding of the legal system that are arguing with you. I am so proud of you. You have a new fan.

Too many daft youths on NL. The Milanguy, is a simpleton.

Osehnetworld:
s lik ds Paul usoro s more active Dan KANU agabi , d game ve changed sinx he took over d cross examination

The guy is a sound and intelligent calm lawyer, handsome young man doing his work

NapoIeon:
a very tantalizing refreshing great news for my friend chukwudi44 cktheluckyman and a shame to bloody hypocrites like modath omenka and co

good news popping out nowadays

magu is a bastard vagabond monkey

Buhari is a terrorist

Death to apc
let them burn
i hate Buhari the rapist terrorist vagabond bastard kunu sipping daura cattle rearer with fura d'nunu and roasted suya infested brain

what a clear symptoms of intermittent insanity..Recieve sense

freeze001:


You see, in a democracy imperfect as ours is, justice must be done and seen to be done. The provisions of the law are clear.

For stopping the trial:
1. The issue he raised was jurisdiction of the tribunal as to constitution of the panel. The CCB Act says 3 judges constitute a panel. The intention of the law for providing an odd number even in the appellate courts is so that in the event of dissenting judgements, there will always be a majority which becomes the binding judgment. However, the law also says 2 judges can for a quorum and on the basis of this, his appeal was quashed at the Supreme Court. He had the right of appeal which he rightly exercised.

2. Another issue raised was the condition precedent set by the tribunal with Tinubu which is also a set down precedent in the Act that the declarant must be informed and his statement or clarification to issues raised by the CCB must be received in writing by the CCB. Where the CCB is satisfied by the clarification of any issues raised, there will be no need to proceed to the tribunal but where it is not satisfied, it can approach the tribunal and that written statement by the declarant is one of the mandatory documents with which to institute an action at the tribunal and which vests it with the jurisdiction to entertain the matter.

This was not complied with in Tinubu's case on the basis of which the tribunal chairman dismissed the charges against Tinubu. The same situation played out in Saraki's case as he wasn't informed nor given the opportunity to respond as statutorily required before he was served with notice to appear before the tribunal.

Again he had the right to rely on the precedent set by the tribunal and the extant provisions of the law. The same chairman that ruled on Tinubu's case chose to overrule himself rather than comply with the law and its own precedent. Legally the tribunal has no power to act as an appellate court unto itself and can no longer rule on a previous judgment because it is functus officio. Still that has been done and the matter continues.

3. Asking the chairman to recuse himself on grounds of bias: In law, even the slightest whiff of bias established by a defendant against a judge allows issues to be resolved in his favor upon appeal. The possibility of and actual bias is frowned upon very strongly. Saraki rightly pointed out the possible bias of the tribunal due to his pending issues with EFCC, the same EFCC which is testifying against Saraki.

My point with the above is that with an independent judiciary, all these issues raised on appeal can overturn the decision of the tribunal upon appeal. It would then be on apparently technical grounds to those who don't understand these things because jurisdiction is fundamental. If that happens, u all will still say the judiciary is the problem!

The FG has not done it's job well because it doesn't seek justice but political vendetta and equity will not be used as a cloak for fraud. A defendant has every right to explore every legal avenue for justice, it must not be interpreted as an admission of guilt or an attempt to evade justice.

The law simply requires that he who comes to equity must come with clean hands and the Prosecution must always be mindful so its actions do not amount to a nullity.

Excellent points... Legal guru in the house!!!

forray:



Like I said, really terrible level of comprehension...... Freeze001 didn't say saraki was innocent...... All freeze001 is saying is that FG and EFCC should take their time in carrying out proper investigation instead of going to embarrass themselves in court. Let me tell u something, no matter how guilty a person is, if u can't convince the Judge, that guilty person will definitely walk free. They are bundling this cases and doing a poor job at handling dem all. Y not handlee one at a time and do a good job at it. I hope now u understand? The way they are rushing these cases one wld think they have a hiding agenda.

Just imagine somebody already saying freeze001 is pained Cause of Jonathan election loss. I was force to wonder how is Jonathan related to what is been said? Very poor ability to comprehend

By this your epistle, one would want to believe that so called Serious and Advanced countries don't have their prosecutors losing cases in the law courts. Stop blowing too much grammar on the issue of one count out of 13 counts.

You aren't telling me what is new, everyone knows that once you get charged, it can either be "Guilty" or "Not Guilty".