CCT Chairman Danladi Umar Dismisses Asset Declaration Cases Against Former Councillors
Chairman of the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT), Danladi Umar, has dismissed three cases against former Kuje Area Council ward councillors over alleged breaches in asset declaration.
The Code of Conduct Bureau (CCB) had filed the suits, claiming the councillors failed to submit their asset declaration forms within 90 days of leaving office.
However, the defendants argued that they had submitted the forms, but the CCB refused to collect them, citing elapsed time.
Justice Umar, flanked by other tribunal members Hon. Agwadza W. Atedze and Hon. Juliet A. Anobor, ruled in favour of the defendants, stating that the issue was not non-submission but rather timely submission.
The Tribunal emphasised that the CCB should have collected and verified the forms instead of declining them.
It also noted that there’s a distinction between failure to submit entirely and failure to submit within the stipulated time.
The CCB should have allowed the defendants to explain their late submission before prosecuting them.
The ruling by the tribunal highlights the importance of procedural fairness and the need for regulatory bodies to exercise discretion when dealing with technical infractions.
In delivering the judgment at the CCT courtroom, Justice Umar, joined by Tribunal members Hon. Agwadza W. Atedze and Hon. Juliet A. Anobor, ruled against the suits brought by the CCB.
The tribunal also ordered the defendants, within seven clear days of the judgement, to proceed to the nearer CCB office to declare their assets as required by law.
Violation of the order by the defendant, according to Justice Danladi, shall be considered serious with severe criminal sanctions by the tribunal.
PRNigeria observes that the judgment involved complaints from the CCB about three former councillors who allegedly did not declare their assets upon leaving office.
The CCB claimed the councillors failed to return their asset declaration forms on time.
However, the defendants argued they had submitted the forms, but CCB officials either rejected them or refused to collect them due to missed deadlines.
The Tribunal clarified that the key issue was not a complete failure to submit the forms, but rather the timing of the submissions.
It noted the CCB did not accept the forms to review them, which could have allowed for necessary verifications before pursuing prosecution.
The Tribunal stressed that the CCB’s actions were premature, as they did not permit the councillors to explain any delays. Ultimately, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the defendants, stating that the CCB should have engaged with them to assess the validity of their late submissions before taking legal action.
By PRNigeria
