The bureau which has the legal responsibility of vetting assets forms submitted to it by public office holders held that there was no petition or complaint of false asset declaration against the Senate President hence his assets forms were not subjected to probe by the CCB.
A director in the CCB and prosecution witness in Saraki’s trial Samuel Madujemu informed the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) that the trial of Saraki was instigated outside the CCB.
Answering questions while under cross examination by Saraki’s lead Counsel Kanu Agabi SAN, the witness who is the head of the investigation department of the CCB admitted that Saraki trial was at the instance of the AGF and the EFCC in 2015.
Madujemu explained that Saraki was neither investigated nor invited to the CCB for any clarification on the asset forms he submitted because there was no complaint to that effect and because he (Saraki) had already made his asset forms in oath.
The witness told the tribunal that the issue of CCB inviting anybody for clarification on submitted forms was discretional to the chairman of the bureau.
In the instant case, Madujemu revealed that the chairman of the CCB did not consider it necessary to invite Saraki before he was charged before the tribunal.
He insisted that it was the AGF in 2015 that briefed the CCB chairman on the need to put Saraki on trial in conjunction with the EFCC hence, the second collaborative investigation team was put in place for the purpose.
Answering a question, he admitted that he was not present when the AGF briefed the CCB boss but that he was briefed by the CCB chairman after the meeting with the AGF.
“I was not a member of the EFCC team that investigated Saraki in 2006 and I cannot speak for that team. The outcome of the 2006 was found wanton and so, another team was put in place to continue from whey they stopped. In 2015 when I was co-opted into the investigative team, all we had was oral instruction and our report was made orally to the CCB.
“On the documents so far tendered at the tribunal against Saraki, the documents were sourced by the EFCC operatives on the joint investigative team and I cannot speak for them here. In fact, I am not familiar with every aspect of the exhibits tendered because we in the CCB did not generate them.
“Our role was mainly to compare the asset forms of the defendant with the finding of the EFCC team”, the witness said.
Meanwhile, the continuation of cross examination has been adjourned to March 21 and 22, 2017
No comments:
Post a Comment