Babatunji Wusu –
- There is confusion at the CCT as both Danladi Umar (former chairman) and Mainasara Kogo (newly appointed chairman) claim leadership of the tribunal.
- President Bola Tinubu appointed Kogo as chairman on July 13, but the controversy surrounding Umar’s removal has created a leadership vacuum, causing delays in tribunal activities.
- Tribunal staff are uncertain about who to follow, as no formal directive or appointment letter has been provided.
- Legal disputes regarding Umar’s removal are ongoing, with a Federal High Court case questioning the constitutionality of the Senate and House resolutions.
- Legal experts highlight concerns about the legitimacy of Kogo’s appointment, noting that it lacks formal approval from the National Judicial Council (NJC) and Senate confirmation.
The Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) is embroiled in confusion as both Danladi Umar and Mainasara Kogo assert leadership over the tribunal. This situation has created a leadership vacuum and a slowdown in tribunal activities, particularly concerning ongoing corruption cases involving public servants.
In July 2023, President Bola Tinubu appointed Mainasara Kogo as the new CCT chairman, replacing Danladi Umar. However, the removal of Umar has sparked significant controversy. Despite this, Umar continues to visit the tribunal and engage with staff, causing confusion about who is in charge. This has led to a lack of clarity among tribunal staff, with some expressing uncertainty about which leader to follow, citing the absence of a formal directive or official appointment letter.
Legal experts have raised concerns over the procedural irregularities surrounding both Umar’s removal and Kogo’s appointment. The Nigerian Constitution requires a two-thirds majority in both houses of the National Assembly to remove the CCT chairman, which did not occur in Umar’s case. Furthermore, Kogo’s appointment lacks formal National Judicial Council (NJC) approval, and there has been no Senate confirmation or formal inauguration, making his leadership questionable.
While legal disputes regarding Umar’s removal continue in the courts, experts argue that the President’s announcement of Umar’s removal may not be valid without the necessary legislative support. These irregularities have caused significant disruption at the tribunal, with cases adjourned and a backlog of files left unattended.
This confusion has left staff members awaiting clear instructions, with no formal resolution on who is in charge of the tribunal. The case remains under intense scrutiny as legal proceedings continue to address the matter.
