The Code of Conduct Tribunal, led by its Chairman, Danladi Yakubu Umar, fixed the date in Abuja on Friday after taking the argument for and against the motion, moved by Agabi challenging the jurisdiction of the Tribunal.
The Prosecuting Counsel, Rotimi Jacobs (SAN), responded to Agabi.
Jacobs had earlier objected the move by Agabi to adopt his motion, contending that the time for such is not ripe.
He averred that the intent of Section 220, 221 and 396 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act 2015 is to expeditiously deal with criminal matters without taking recourse to motions that are technical in nature at the expense of the substantive matter before the Tribunal.
He said: “We have to respect the Act since the motion can only be considered along with the substantive matter as alluded by the ACJA 2015.
“The defence can wait till the end of hearing in the final address and the objection can be entertained and ruling be given at the final judgment.”
Jacobs cited the case of Audu versus FRN, urging the Tribunal to grant permission to him to call for his witness in order for the court to proceed with the case.
The defence argued that since they are the ones brought under suspicion and are desirous to proceed with the case to exonerate themselves from the said charges, the proceedings must be guided by law and the motions not be trivialized and ignored.
Umar ruled that the motion can be heard and fixed for Thursday for ruling.
He added that ruling on the motions raised are fundamental matters that border on jurisdiction.
He called on the parties to be rest assured that justice would be done for the stability of the nation.
The Prosecuting Counsel, Rotimi Jacobs (SAN), responded to Agabi.
Jacobs had earlier objected the move by Agabi to adopt his motion, contending that the time for such is not ripe.
He averred that the intent of Section 220, 221 and 396 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act 2015 is to expeditiously deal with criminal matters without taking recourse to motions that are technical in nature at the expense of the substantive matter before the Tribunal.
He said: “We have to respect the Act since the motion can only be considered along with the substantive matter as alluded by the ACJA 2015.
“The defence can wait till the end of hearing in the final address and the objection can be entertained and ruling be given at the final judgment.”
Jacobs cited the case of Audu versus FRN, urging the Tribunal to grant permission to him to call for his witness in order for the court to proceed with the case.
The defence argued that since they are the ones brought under suspicion and are desirous to proceed with the case to exonerate themselves from the said charges, the proceedings must be guided by law and the motions not be trivialized and ignored.
Umar ruled that the motion can be heard and fixed for Thursday for ruling.
He added that ruling on the motions raised are fundamental matters that border on jurisdiction.
He called on the parties to be rest assured that justice would be done for the stability of the nation.
No comments:
Post a Comment