Alleged N390 Million Fraud: Kano Anti-Corruption Chairman Drags CCT to Appeal

images 2024 04 04T140104.492

The Chairman, Kano State Public Complaints and Anti-Corruption Commission (PCACC), Barr. Muhuyi Magaji has appealed against the ruling of the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT).

The three-member tribunal, headed by Justice Danladi Umar, had, on Thursday in Abuja, ordered Magaji’s suspension following allegations of misconduct preferred against him by the Code of Conduct Bureau (CCB).

Although, Barr. Rimin-Gado has challenged the jurisdiction of the CCT to hear the matter, Justice Umar, dismissed the motion, thereby held that the tribunal had the competence and jurisdiction to hear the case.

READ ALSO: 

Alleged N390 Million Fraud: CCT Orders Suspension of Chairman Kano Anti-graft Agency, Muhuyi Rimin-Gado

The CCT Judge therefore directed Gov. Abba Yusuf and the Secretary to the State Government (SSG) to appoint the most appropriate officer to take over as acting chairman of the commission, pending the hearing and determination of the case.

He held that Magaji cannot continue to discharge the duties and responsibilities of his office while facing trial, to avoid any interference with the case.

Dissatisfied with the ruling, Magaji, through his counsel, Mr Adeola Adedipe, SAN, approached the Court of Appeal, Abuja.

In the notice of appeal dated and filed on 5th April, by Adedipe, the senior lawyer gave five grounds why the appeal should be allowed and the CCT’s ruling be set aside by the appellate court.

He argued that the CCT erred in law, when it denied his client a right to a fair trial, fair hearing and right to be presumed innocent, by making an order directing him to step aside as the chairman of PCACC, thereby determining his guilt, at an interlocutory stage.

He described the ruling as “a miscarriage of justice”, argued that the tribunal erred in law, when without the requisite jurisdiction, it granted the reliefs sought by CCB, giving specific orders to Gov. Yusuf and SSG, “knowing fully well that they are not parties to the present charge as constituted; it thereby occasioned a miscarriage of justice.”

NAN

Exit mobile version