Thread by @ChidiOdinkalu

The gist of the story & clear intent to work to pre-determined outcome in the CJN #Onnoghen matter is buried in dates. The petition against CJN Onnoghen was dated 7 January. It was actually stamped into the office of the Chairman of the Code of Conduct Bureau (CCB) on 9 January

On the same day, 9 Jan, according to the ex-parte order of the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT), which only became public yesterday, after the purported suspension of CJN #Onnoghen, the @Buhari administration filed a petition with the CCT for his removal

It's quite clear that there was no time between the receipt of the petition by the CCB & the referral to the CCT. Under the law, the obligation to verify claims made in asset declaration forms belongs exclusively to the CCB. This cld not have bn done before charges were filed.

Curiously, the application to remove #Onnoghen dated 9 January, predates the filing of the charges against him, which did not happen until over 24 hours later on 10 January.

When a motion is filed in a court or tribunal, it bears the name of the lawyer or person filing it. The motion has to be formally moved or argued on a date fixed by the court. In this case of #Onnoghen, the motion for his removal bears no name & the order doesn't say who moved it

So, to sum things up, #Nigeria's President @MBuhari, who has no recent memory of having obeyed any court order, purports to procure the removal of the CJN based on a petition that was not investigated, a charge that was not prosecuted & an ex-parte application that was not moved