The Supreme Court, this morning, stayed further hearing on the 13-count criminal charge pending against the Senate President, Dr. Olubukola Saraki, before the Code of Conduct Tribunal, CCT.
The apex court, in a ruling today, directed the Justice Danladi Umar-led tribunal to suspend the trial to enable it to hear and determine the substantive appeal that Saraki lodged before it.
This was even as the prosecuting counsel, Mr. Rotimi Jacobs, SAN, entered an undertaking before the apex court that “no unusual step will be taken by the federal government”, in relation to the matter.
In their ruling, a five-man panel of Justices of the Supreme Court led by Justices John Fabiyi, held: “It is imperative to state that all the parties, including the Code of Conduct Tribunal, should tarry a while to enable this court to determine the appeal before it.
Bukola Saraki in Court: Senate President Bukola Saraki at Code of Conduct Tribunal shortly after his lawyers walkout of the Court during court sitting in Abuja. Photo by Gbemiga Olamikan.
“In effect, further proceeding at the CCT should be stayed pending the hearing of the appeal. Hearing date will be communicated to all the parties”, Justice Fabiyi ruled.
All the other members of the apex court panel also concurred with the lead ruling.
Saraki is in his appeal marked SC/852/2015, praying the apex court to invoke its powers and quash the 13-count criminal charge that was preferred against him by the federal government.
Besides, he wants the Supreme Court to set aside the judgement of the Abuja Division of the Court of Appeal which on October 30, gave the government the nod to open its case by call witnesses to testify against him.
In the appeal he filed through his team of lawyers led by Mr. J.B. Daudu, SAN, the embattled Senate President, applied for: “An order staying further proceedings in Charge No: CCT/ABJ/01/2015 between Federal Republic of Nigeria vs Dr. Olubukola Abubakar Saraki fixed for hearing on 5th and 6th of November, 2015 pending the determination of the appeal pending before the Supreme Court against the judgment of the Court of Appeal dated 30th October, 2015.”