Abuja — The Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) yesterday ordered the police to arrest former chairman of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), Mallam Nuhu Ribadu, and detain him in their custody.

A three-member panel of the tribunal led by its chairman, Justice Constance Momoh, made real their threat to issue a bench warrant on Ribadu should he refuse to honour its invitation to come and answer to charges of alleged failure to declare his assets, as required of a public servant while he was in office.

But Ribadu said the order for his arrest was a wild goose chase, as it might be difficult to enforce the order when he was not in the country, adding that a bench warrant was not appropriate in the circumstance.

Ribadu, who spoke through his counsel, Sola Egbeyinka, told newsmen immediately after the order was given that it might be difficult to enforce the order, because he was not in the country; so, a bench warrant was not appropriate in the circumstance. According to the counsel, the prosecution should have applied itself to the Extradition Act, instead of dragging the tribunal to issue a bench warrant as if the accused was in Nigeria .

At the last sitting, Justice Momoh had dismissed Ribadu's application for a stay of proceedings in the matter.

Momoh had at the last sitting warned that if Ribadu failed to show up at the next sitting (yesterday), the tribunal would issue a bench warrant for his arrest, because his trial had suffered several adjournments.

His counsel, Egbeyinka, told the CCT that the prosecution refused to furnish the accused with a copy of the Assets Declaration Form to prepare his defence, even after writing two request letters.

Countering his submission, the prosecution counsel, Ahmed Kyari said the requested document could not be released without express permission from the National Assembly.

Asked why Ribadu was absent, Egbeyinka said his client could suffer from jeopardy, if he was denied vital documents to prepare his defence, hence the appeal to the prosecution.

The tribunal chairman who was already palpably angry, told him that the business of the day was different from the new argument raised, adding that, "There is a limit to human endurance."

In a brief ruling, Momoh said, "in line with the order we gave at the last sitting that if the accused failed to appear today that we shall issue a bench warrant of his arrest, we are making good that order. We are hereby formally making a bench warrant on the accused person to appear before the tribunal.

"The prosecution shall effect the warrant. It shall be addressed to the appropriate authority; the inspector general of Police for execution. Upon arrest, if the tribunal shall not be in session, he (Ribadu) shall be in Police custody," she added.

She consequently adjourned the matter to December 4, 2009 for trial.

Ribadu's lead counsel, Femi Falana, had told the tribunal to stay action, because his client was contesting its decision to assume jurisdiction in the matter at the Court of Appeal, Abuja .

Falana maintained that the tribunal was an extension of the Executive arm of government and therefore, the chance of Ribadu getting justice was dim.

Besides, he contended that the tribunal was not properly constituted in line with section 36 (1) of the 1999 Constitution.

He said: "There is Presidency written on your signboard, your registration card bears the logo of Presidency, AGF is the one prosecuting and he is the judge at the same time. Until your independence is guaranteed and you are detached from Presidency, there will be no justice."

Falana challenged the tribunal, saying that it appeared to be playing out a pre-determined script.

He argued that the tribunal was violating the laws of natural justice as well as the constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. Referring to section 36 (1) of the constitution, he reminded the judges that a court or other tribunal established by law must be constituted in such manner as to secure its independence and impartiality.

Citing the tribunal's signboard, its location, and such paraphernalia as the licence plates on its cars, he observed that the body did not meet the requirement for an independent court. He reminded the tribunal that all its members were appointed and paid by the Presidency, a party to the case involving his client. He further argued that the complicity of the tribunal and the apparent partiality of its members had undermined its legitimacy and ability to discharge its duty fairly and equitably.

Falana had also told the tribunal that there was need to guarantee the safety of his client because a killer squad went after him last year and he only escaped within thin lines and this was the reason why he relocated abroad.

He further told the judges that they could not issue a bench warrant for his client's arrest since Ribadu is not in hiding. He reiterated that the only legal option is to seek his extradition from the UK, his current place of residence. He argued before the tribunal that he believed that the government was not interested in getting Ribadu to appear in a proper legal manner, because the officials of the current regime wish to hurt his client without being legally held responsible for it.