The tribunal asked the prosecutor to go file more competent charges
The Code of Conduct Tribunal on Friday struck out the suit filed against the Provost of Federal College of Education, Kontagora, Niger, Nathaniel Odediran, for want of diligent prosecution.
Delivering judgment on the matter in Abuja, Chairman of the Tribunal, Danladi Umar, held that the charges brought against the provost by the prosecution were defective.
Mr. Umar led Justices Robert Udo and Agwadza Atedze to arrive at the unanimous judgment.
“This tribunal unanimously holds that the prosecution has failed to prove its case against the defendant by filing incurably defective charges against him.
“Accordingly, the court aligns with the preliminary objection raised by the defence counsel in his submission that the charges filed against his client were defective in law.
“In view of this and in line with the provisions of Section 36, Sub-section 6 (a) of the 1999 Constitution, and in consonance with Section 202 of Criminal Procedure Code, I hereby strike out the charges,” Mr. Umar said.
The chairman ordered the prosecuting counsel, Abbas Ibrahim, to go back and properly prepare fresh charges against the defendant. He said the order was subsequent to the wish of the prosecutor in line with the provisions of the law.
Mr. Odediran was on June 13, arraigned before the Tribunal in case no: CCT/ABJ/07/12, for abuse of office.
The prosecuting counsel had said that Mr. Odediran used his position as the Provost to influence contract awards to various companies amounting to more than N150 million.
This, the prosecutor said, contravened the provisions of the Public Procurement Act of 2007, punishable under Section 23 of Code of Conduct Bureau and Code of Conduct Tribunal Acts.
The defence counsel, led by Paul Eshiemomoh, had filed preliminary objection against the competency of the charges against the defendant.
“The charges are defective and have no basis in law to stand.
“We, therefore, pray the tribunal to strike out the charges to avoid wasting its time and government resources’’, he had argued.