Senate President Abubakar Bukola Saraki has again shutdown the sitting of the Senate as his case at the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) comes up today.
At the end of yesterday’s sitting, Saraki said the sitting has been adjourned to November 10.
In an interview, Senator Dino Melaye said the sitting was adjourned to enable adhoc committees work on their reports.
“The sitting was adjourned to Tuesday to enable four adhoc committees complete their reports and submit next week,” he said.
Saraki was alleged to have operated foreign accounts while being the Governor of Kwara State and transferred the sum of $73, 223.28 from his GTB domiciliary account to an American Express account.
In the charge sheet, Saraki was further alleged to have made anticipatory declaration and false declaration in the Assets Declaration Form for Public Officers on assumption of office as the executive Governor of Kwara State in 2003 in respect of some Lagos properties.
The trial of the Senate President, Bukola Saraki, would continue today before the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT), Abuja.
Saraki is standing trial on a 13-count criminal charge preferred against him by the Code of Conduct Bureau (CCB) over alleged false assets declaration.
Chairman of the Code of Conduct Tribunal, Justice Danladi Umar had adjourned till November 5 and 6 to enable the tribunal await the judgment of the Appeal Court, where Saraki had challenged the jurisdiction of the tribunal to try him.
However, the Court of Appeal, Abuja division last Friday, October 30 dismissed Saraki’s appeal in a split decision of two Justices to one.
The Appeal Court held that the charge against the senate president was in order.
Saraki on Tuesday finally approached the Supreme Court to appeal against the judgment of the Court of Appeal, which affirmed the jurisdiction of CCT to try him.
He is praying the Supreme Court to stop his trial over the alleged offences pending the determination of his appeal.
His lawyer, Mr. Joseph Daudu (SAN), urged the apex court to set aside the judgment of the appeal court on the grounds that it erred in law when it affirmed the competence of the proceedings of the Tribunal.
