Saraki's Lawyer Berates Punch Newspaper

The lawyer of the Senate President, Joseph Daudu on Thursday berated the Punch newspaper on a publication alleging that the Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Fagbuyi, on his accord was re-constituting the judicial panel of the supreme court to hear the appeal of Bukola Saraki.

This was disclosed in a letter sent to Naij.com which was dated Thursday, November 19 2015.

ADVERTISING

The front page publication which was titled Saraki’s case: CJN to set up Fresh Supreme Court Panel insinuated that the CJN was reconstituting a fresh panel because they did not have confidence in the Supreme court.
Therefore, the counsel to Saraki clarified that he was the person who requested for the reconstitution of the panel.
He wrote in part: “Consequently, the request for a constitutional panel was made by the undersigned in our brief or argument.
“Normally and most lawyers should know this; when a request for a panel of seven Justices is made in a paragraph in the brief of argument, it is only the Chief Justice of Nigeria (who is presently out of the country) that can constitute such a panel.
“It is therefore most mischievous, to use the platform of your widely read national daily to peddle such misinformation of grave proportions.


“Alluding to “Judiciary Sources” as you have done is an acknowledged Journalistic sharp practice and subterfuge to cloth your misinformation and blackmail with a veneer of credibility.”
He also wrote that it was unfortunate that the publication quoted some lawyers who tagged the decision of the Supreme court staying proceedings of the CCT as a form of “illegality”.
He added that the article is simply aimed to discourage the court over its decision and that these comments and similar write-ups are treading dangerously on boundaries of Contempt of the Supreme Court.
“It is obvious that this orchestrated backlash against a correct decision of the Court is aimed at intimidating the Court and may the day never come when such a hallowed Court will succumb to mob action or intimidation,” he wrote.
“If this type of action or nonsense persists, I will be compelled to bring Contempt proceedings against all those commentators who by their actions seek to prejudice the final outcome of the appeal through intimidation or skewed reportage of facts