The purported charges do not constitute charges within the meaning of the Law.- A response on behalf of CJ
(i) The document dated 14/11/2012 contains no charges in Law.
The letter dated 14/11/2012 was delivered to our client’s official residence at approximately 7 pm on 14/11/2012 asking her to respond to the 14 alleged charges by the 22/11/2012, which is approximately one week’s time.
(1) The select committee has no jurisdiction to exercise judicial powers which in this instance it purports to do.
(2) Without prejudice to (1) above the purported inquiry violates the Rule of Law, which is the basis of governance and the gravamen/ foundation upon which the sovereign people have decided that they be governed and their judicial power exercised.
The aforesaid matters would be dealt with briefly hereinafter and more fully if necessary.
SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 24, 2012
(i) The document dated 14/11/2012 contains no charges in Law.
(ii) The purported charges even if proved do not constitute proved misbehavior within the meaning of Article 107(2) of the Constitution and therefore cannot result in the impeachment of our client.
(iii) The purported charges do not constitute charges within the meaning of the Law.
(iv) The purported Standing Orders have no legal validity in Law.
(iii) The purported charges do not constitute charges within the meaning of the Law.
(iv) The purported Standing Orders have no legal validity in Law.
Dear Sir,
We regret that our client was not provided with more time.
The letter dated 14/11/2012 was delivered to our client’s official residence at approximately 7 pm on 14/11/2012 asking her to respond to the 14 alleged charges by the 22/11/2012, which is approximately one week’s time.
By letter dated 15/11/2012 sent by us on behalf of our client, and our client by our letters dated 16/11/2012 and 17/11/2012, requested further time to respond to the 14 alleged charges.
The request of our client for further time has not been permitted.
In the limited time available, we respond as hereinafter. We request that the details asked for be furnished, and request further time to respond more fully.
Our client denies the purported charges. Our client is totally innocent of the purported charges which are baseless, groundless and frivolous.
Our client has at all times been independent, and has refused to bow to pressure.
In the circumstances, I request that an inquiry be held by lawfully appointed body consisting of lawfully appointed body consisting of eminent and independent persons not politically affiliated.
Our client is convinced that she will be exonerated at such an inquiry.
We state that the select committee has no jurisdiction to hear and determine the impeachment motion for the following inter alia reasons:-
(1) The select committee has no jurisdiction to exercise judicial powers which in this instance it purports to do.
(2) Without prejudice to (1) above the purported inquiry violates the Rule of Law, which is the basis of governance and the gravamen/ foundation upon which the sovereign people have decided that they be governed and their judicial power exercised.
The aforesaid matters would be dealt with briefly hereinafter and more fully if necessary.
SOVEREIGNTY IS IN THE PEOPLE Read more »
