WILL the trial of Senate President Bukola Saraki commence as scheduled on Wednesday (tomorrow)?

The answer to that question was lost in legal conundrum on Monday, barely 48 hours before Saraki is billed to appear at the Code of Conduct Tribunal to answer 13 charges of false asset declaration between 2003 and 2011 when he was the governor of Kwara State.

The Court of Appeal in Abuja on Monday adjourned indefinitely its judgment in an appeal filed by the Senate president, challenging the validity of the charges against him before the CCT.

However, another panel of the Court of Appeal in Abuja, which had earlier promised to deliver its judgment on the case before the next scheduled appearance of the Senate President before the tribunal on October 21 did not sit on Monday. No new date was fixed for the judgment as lawyers, journalists and a large number of people interested in the case met the courtroom already locked by 2pm when the three-man panel was scheduled to sit on Monday.

The development has sparked uncertainties about the CCT's proceedings on Wednesday, when Saraki's trial has been scheduled to commence. Both the prosecution lawyer, Mr. Rotimi Jacobs (SAN); and the defence lead counsel, Mr. Joseph Daudu (SAN), said they did not know the status of Wednesday's proceedings at the CCT.

They said they were confused. Jacobs, who also represents the respondents to Saraki's suit at the Court of Appeal, told Punch correspondent in a telephone interview on Monday that he could not confirm whether or not the CCT proceedings would go on as scheduled.

"We don't know yet. We don't know if the Court of Appeal will deliver its judgment before the tribunal's next adjourned date," he said.

Daudu also expressed similar concern when contacted by Punch correspondent on Monday. "We don't know yet. We are confused too, but it is our work to straighten it out. So I can't tell you anything now," Daudu said.

The appeal court justices, led by Justice Moore Adumein, had on Friday heard and adjourned Saraki's appeal till Monday for judgment. Saraki had on September 22 pleaded not guilty to the 13 charges preferred against him by the Code of Conduct Bureau.

He had filed an appeal against the ruling of the Justice Danladi Umar-led tribunal on the grounds that it wrongly assumed jurisdiction on the case when it came before it on September 18. But another senior lawyer in Saraki's camp, Mr. Mahmud Magaji (SAN), who indicated that Saraki would not be at the tribunal on Wednesday, said that the tribunal had no reason to conduct proceedings in the matter until the Court of Appeal delivered its judgment.

"The matter is before the Court of Appeal, we have argued our brief and judgment has been reserved. So how can a lower court sit over the same matter?" he argued.

When asked if Saraki would appear before the tribunal on Wednesday, he said, "How can he? It seems you don’t understand this issue. The matter is already before the Court of Appeal. We must allow the Court of Appeal to decide it either way before the trial at the tribunal can continue."

But a Lagos lawyer, Mr. Jiti Ogunye, insisted that the CCT had no reason to halt Saraki's trial in view of the fact that there was no specific order of stay of its proceedings and the new Administration of Criminal Justice Act 2015, which provides that criminal proceedings cannot be stayed.

He said, "The Court of Appeal has not granted any order of stay of proceedings of the tribunal. As a matter of law, by virtue of the provisions of the new law in town, which is the Administration of Criminal Justice Act 2015, which is the law guiding the proceedings of the trial of Senate President Bukola Saraki, we can conclude that the law does not envisage that the Court of Appeal would stay its proceedings."

Another lawyer, Mr. Wahab Shittu, in a separate telephone interview with Punch correspondent, said since there was no subsisting order of proceedings, the CCT had no reason to halt the trial. "There is no order for stay of proceedings. I think what we should be insisting on is that the proceedings of the tribunal must be fair," Shittu said.

But a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Dr. Joseph Nwobike, who said the proceedings of the CCT was not purely criminal, even with the provisions of the ACJ Act barring stay of proceedings in criminal trials, it would be better for the CCT to await the judgment of the Court of Appeal before continuing with Saraki's case.

Nwobike said, "It will be better for the Code of Conduct Tribunal to await the judgment of the Court of Appeal. But under the new Administration of Criminal Justice Act 2015 if the tribunal is of the view that its proceedings are criminal proceedings, it is entitled to proceed with the proceedings not withstanding that the interlocutory appeal has been heard.

"But that will depend on whether or not the proceedings of the tribunal are criminal in nature. In my humble view, the tribunal's proceedings are not criminal, they are quasi-criminal." A large number of people interested in the case, including journalists, had waited at the entrance of the courtroom ahead of the 2pm scheduled for the judgment of the Court of Appeal on Monday.

One of the defence counsel, Mr. Kehinde Eleja (SAN), who addressed journalists on the development, said he had been able to reach the court registrar who informed him that the judgment was not ready. He said a new date would be communicated to the parties when the judgment was ready.

At the hearing of the appeal on Friday, the Court of Appeal had struck out an application for stay of the CCT proceedings filed by Daudu, Saraki’s lead counsel. The appeal panel said it would amount to judicial waste of time if it went ahead to hear the appeal and had to deliver a separate ruling on it after the main appeal had been heard.

The Senate President is challenging his trial at the CCT on many grounds, including that the panel of the CCT, comprising two judges instead of three, is not properly constituted. He is also contending that the CCT, not being a court, could not exercise judicial powers and that the charges filed at the time an Attorney General of the Federation had not been appointed were incompetent.

But the respondents to the appeal - the CCT, the CCB, the Federal Ministry of Justice and a ministry's lawyer, Mr. Muslim Hassan, who signed the charges - had through their counsel, Jacobs, asked the Court of Appeal to dismiss the appeal. Jacobs said the appeal lacked merit and was based on misconception and wrong interpretation of the law.