Saraki vs CCT: SAN warns commentators against contempt of Supreme court.

A Senior Advocate of Nigeria and former president of the Nigerian Bar Association, NBA, Joseph Daudu, has warned commentators on the ruling of the Supreme Court that directed the Code of Conduct Tribunal to ‘tarry awhile’ to enable it look into the appeal of the President of the Senate, Bukola Saraki, to be weary of contempt of court.


Daudu was reacting to reports alleging that the Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Mahmud Mohammed, will set up a new panel to handle the case.

“I am instructed to add that these comments and similar write-ups are treading dangerously on boundaries of Contempt of the Supreme Court. It is obvious that this orchestrated backlash against a correct decision of the Court is aimed at intimidating the Court and may the day never come when such a hallowed Court will succumb to mob action or intimidation,” Daudu noted.

The legal luminary, added that the disbandment of the panel has nothing to do with the purported outcry against the ruling of the Supreme Court as reported by the newspaper.

“It is not correct that the panel that correctly granted a stay of proceedings is being disbanded because of the purported outcry against the ruling of the Supreme Court. Indeed, his lordship the Hon. Mr. Justice Fabiyi JSC who presided, drew the attention of my learned brother silk Mr. Rotimi Jacob SAN when he was urging the Court to state the specific date to which the appeal will be adjourned, to the inability of the Panel as constituted to give a date because there was already a request in the brief of argument that a Constitutional Panel be constituted made up of Seven (7) Justices to hear the appeal. The said paragraph 2 of our Appellant’s brief of argument is hereby reproduced for ease of reference thus: “Respectfully my lords, it is against this majority decision that the Appellant has appealed through a 7-ground notice of appeal located at page 1268-1278 of the printed record. The issues raised by those grounds are matters of serious constitutional significance which may require the Supreme Court to be constituted in the way and manner prescribed by Section 234 of the Constitution which prescribes thus: ‘For the purpose of exercising any jurisdiction conferred upon it by this Constitution or any Law, the Supreme Court shall be duly constituted if it consists of not less than five Justices of the Supreme Court: Provided that where the Supreme Court is sitting to consider an appeal brought under 233(2)(b) or (c) of this Constitution, or to exercise its original jurisdiction in accordance with section 232 of this Constitution, the Court shall be constituted by seven Justices.”

“Consequently, the request for a constitutional panel was made by the undersigned in our brief or argument. Normally and most lawyers should know this; when a request for a panel of 7 Justices is made in a paragraph in the brief of argument, it is only the Chief Justice of Nigeria (who is presently out of the country) that can constitute such a panel. It is therefore most mischievous, to report and allude to “Judiciary Sources” to misinform and blackmail with a veneer of credibility”.

“Furthermore, the write-up in issue quoted some disenchanted lawyers who have gone on to describe the decision of the Supreme Court staying proceedings of the CCT as an “illegality”. That is most unfortunate as decency and elementary regard for the finality of the decisions of the Supreme Court should restrain every citizen of this country particularly a legal practitioner from using such base and scurrilous language against the highest court of the land. It is a known legal axiom that a decision of the Supreme Court of Nigeria cannot be illegal in any form or manner as it is binding on all persons and authorities in this country. If a person is aggrieved by the decision of the Court, the only approach is to wait for an opportunity to arise and such a person can ask the Court to overrule itself or depart from its earlier decision. No amount of political inclination or rascality should prompt or compel a lawyer or even a layman to employ such uncouth language against the Supreme Court of Nigeria”.