Asset declaration: Saraki knows fate on Thursday

 The Code of Conduct Tribunal ( CCT ) has fixed Thursday March 24 to deliver ruling on whether or not the trial of the Senate President Olubukola Abubakar Saraki, over alleged false declaration of assets will go on. The Chairman Code of Conduct Tribunal ( CCT ), Danladi Yakubu Umar on Friday afternoon said that […]

Asset declaration: Saraki knows fate on Thursday
Asset declaration: Saraki knows fate on Thursday

 The Code of Conduct Tribunal ( CCT ) has fixed Thursday March 24 to deliver ruling on whether or not the trial of the Senate President Olubukola Abubakar Saraki, over alleged false declaration of assets will go on.

The Chairman Code of Conduct Tribunal ( CCT ), Danladi Yakubu Umar on Friday afternoon said that the trial was a very serious matter adding that after the Thursday  March 24 ruling, the tribunal "will proceed from there whatever happens".

The ‎Supreme Court had in its judgement asked the Senate President to go and face his trial at the tribunal.

The Senate President was ar­raigned before the Code of Con­duct Tribunal (CCT) last year on a 13-count charge of false declaration of assets while he was the governor of Kwara State between 2003 and 2011.

Saraki a two-term Governor of Kwara State filled as required by law four asset declaration forms and submitted same to The Code of Conduct Bureau  ( CCB ).

Following investigation it was alleged that Saraki corruptly acquired many properties while in office as Governor of Kwara State but failed to declare them in the CAB forms earlier filled and submitted to the relevant authorities.

It was also alleged that Saraki made anticipatory declarations of assets upon his assumption of office as Governor of Kwara State which he acquired later.

Based on the alleged violations of the Code of Conduct laws for public officers, the CCB  initiated a criminal proceeding against Saraki before the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT).

However, Saraki has pleaded not guilty to all the charges. He has also challenged the competence of the tribunal to try him, saying that the case was not initiated through a due process of law.