ABUJA: Toba Owojaiye reporting
The Nigerian Senate has wielded its constitutional powers to remove Danladi Umar as Chairman of the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT), citing unacceptable acts of misconduct and behavior unbecoming of a public officer.
The decision, based on Section 157(1) of the 1999 Constitution, as amended, followed an overwhelming vote, with 74 senators signing and 10 others present in support of his removal—totaling 84 members.
Truth Live News gathered that the motion to remove Umar was championed by Senate Leader, Senator Opeyemi Bamidele (APC, Ekiti Central), and seconded by Senator Mohammed Tahir Monguno (APC, Borno North).
According to the Senate, Umar’s conduct fell short of the ethical and moral standards required of his position, a role tasked with enforcing public morality and accountability in governance.
It was titled, “Invocation of the provision of Section 157 (1) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999, as amended for the removal of the Chairman of the Code of Conduct Tribunal.”
According to Bamidele, ‘The Senate: Notes that the Code of Conduct Tribunal is one of the key components of Federal Institutions in the country, saddled with the sacred statutory responsibilities of maintaining high standard of morality in the conduct of government business and to ensure that the actions and behaviours of public officers conform to the highest standards of public morality and accountability;
“Also notes that a statutory institution of such magnitude is expected to be an epitome of moral rectitude and should be seen to uphold the virtues of integrity, probity and accountability.
However, the conduct of Mr. Yakubu Danladi Umar, who is the Chairman of the Tribunal has fallen short of the requisite standard of a public officer to conduct the affairs of such Tribunal;
“Concerned that the Senate has been inundated with series of petitions and allegations of corruption/misconduct against the Chairman, a situation that necessitated the 9th Senate, through the Senate Committee on Ethics, Code of Conduct and Public Petitions to invite him to series of its investigative hearings in order to unravel the circumstances surrounding those allegations.
This dismissal is the culmination of a series of controversies surrounding Umar.
Accusations against him include corruption, misappropriation, absenteeism, and even physical altercations.
Notably, he once made headlines for engaging in a public brawl with a security guard in Abuja, which was widely criticized as unbecoming of a judicial officer.
Additionally, Umar was reportedly under investigation by multiple anti-corruption agencies, including the EFCC, ICPC, and DSS.
The Senate’s Ethics, Code of Conduct, and Public Petitions Committee had previously summoned Umar to address these allegations.
However, his lack of cooperation—attending only one hearing and avoiding subsequent invitations—fueled suspicions of guilt and further undermined his credibility.
Adding fuel to the fire are speculations about political motives behind Umar’s ouster.
Critics suggest that the confirmation of Abdullahi Usman Bello as the new CCT Chairman earlier in the year by the Senate and President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s involvement may point to a broader agenda to consolidate control over key federal institutions.
Some conspiracy theorists allege that Umar’s removal was orchestrated to pave the way for a more pliant leadership at the CCT, one that aligns with the current administration’s political strategy.
Others highlight his controversial past, including alleged favoritism in high-profile asset declaration cases, which may have finally caught up with him in the Senate’s quest to restore integrity to the tribunal.
While Umar’s removal might signal the Senate’s commitment to rooting out corruption and misconduct in federal institutions, critics argue that it also exposes the vulnerabilities of the CCT to political interference.
The Tribunal, a critical arm in maintaining public accountability, must now work to rebuild its reputation under Abdullahi Usman Bello.
This development raises questions about the broader implications of Umar’s tenure and removal.
How many cases might have been compromised under his leadership? And will his departure signal a genuine reform of the institution, or is this merely a shift in political alliances?
Danladi Umar’s removal is a watershed moment for the Code of Conduct Tribunal, marking an end to years of controversy. While his ouster may be celebrated as a victory for accountability, the political undertones surrounding the decision invite scrutiny.
For the public, the hope remains that the Tribunal under new leadership will finally live up to its mandate of upholding the highest standards of public morality and justice.