
SENATE CHAMBER
By Henry Umoru & Joseph Erunke
ABUJA—STRONG indications has emerged that the Senate is desirous of quickly amending the Code of Conduct Tribunal and Bureau Act to remove them the from the apron strings of the Presidency, with the bill scaling second reading yesterday.
The House of Representatives had concluded legislative process on the bill and had sent it to Senate for concurrence, which took place yesterday.
The House of Representatives had in May 2016 considered and passed some amendments to the Code of Conduct Bureau, CCB, and Code of Conduct Tribunal, CCT, Act.
Being a House Bill, the promoters of the proposed legislation are seeking Senate concurrence to forward it to the President for assent.
At plenary in the Senate yesterday, the bill was listed for concurrence in the order paper and it was referred to Senate Committee on Ethics, Privileges and Public Petitions.
The amendment of the Act, as passed by the House read: “In section 4 (2) of the amended Act, the National Assembly will now be responsible for appointing members of staff of the bureau and exercise control over them, and not the President.
‘’In the amended version, section 3 of the Act now has a paragraph which stipulates: “Upon complaints of any breach or where it appears to the bureau that there is a breach of the provision of this Act, the person concerned shall be given particulars of such non-compliance or breaches to explain before any reference to the tribunal.”
Saraki had challenged his trial at the CCT on the grounds that he was not given a chance to explain himself by the bureau before a case was filed against him at the tribunal.
It would be recalled that as part of moves to amend the CCT ACT, the Senate, last week resurrected the controversial amendment of Code of Conduct Bureau, CCB, and Tribunal Act Bill.
With the Senate’s decision to amend the Act, the bill last week scaled first reading.
The bill was presented in April 2016 by Senator Peter Nwaoboshi, Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, Delta North.
Disclaimer
Comments expressed here do not reflect the opinions of Vanguard newspapers or any employee thereof.