The Supreme Court has described the Rivers State commission of inquiry that indicted former governor Rotimi Amaechi, as a mere fact-finding body with no powers to engage in the trial of anybody for anything whatsoever.
A seven-member of justices of Supreme Court in a unanimous judgment, said the findings of the probe panel are not enforceable in law.
The decision of the apex court was contained in the appeal No: SC/911/2017, lodged before it by Amaechi who is a presidential candidate of All Progressives Congress(APC), against the governor of Rivers State, the attorney general of the state, the judicial commis- sion of inquiry and others.
In the judgment rendered by Justice Emmanuel Agim, the apex court went further to hold that the Rivers State com- mission of inquiry “is not an adjudicatory body and so does not try or determine disputes as to any rights or obligations of liabilities.
Justice Agim said: “A com- mission of inquiry is a fact-finding or information seeking body. It carries out fact-finding or information seeking by the process of impartial investigation to find out certain facts or information about the subject of the inquiry.
“It is mere commonly used in public governance as part of the administrative process to facilitate public governance.
“The purpose of the investigation is to find out the facts or gather facts on the subject matter of the inquiry.”
The apex court held that “in doing so, it is not trying any person for the commission
of any misconduct or crime.
It does not engage in the trial of any person for anything. It merely gathers facts on the subject of the inquiry.”
The apex court judgment ends the contention and controversy over Amaechi’s alleged criminal indictment by Wike’s probe commission in favour of Amaechi, the presidential aspirant of APC.
Even if it (the commission) makes findings of facts that are adverse to a person (Amaechi), such adverse findings do not amount to a conviction for an offence or determination of his right and obligation. They remain mere finding of facts on the basis of which it would
make recommendations to the appointing authority who may accept or reject them.
If it rejects them, the matter ends there. If it accepts them and decides to take necessary action on the accepted recommendation, the white paper accepting the recommendation can be challenged in court.”
However, the apex court also rule that, “the accepted recommendations (of the commission) are not enforce- able like a court decision. So, a commission of inquiry is not a court. It is not a criminal investigation agency such as EFCC, ICPC and police.
“The designation of the commission of inquiry set up as a judicial commission of inquiry and the fact it was headed by a serving or retired judicial officer cannot invest it with judicial powers or character and did not change its nature as a fact-finding or information seeking body with no power to adjudicate, or in any manner determine any rights or obligations or try any person for the commission of a crime. crime.
“It is not a civil or criminal trial. The purely fact-finding function of a commission of inquiry is what defines its nature and character as an administrative investigation and a non-judicial body.
“It is also our very view and we hold that the 3rd respondent (the judicial commission of inquiry) is a fact-finding and an investigative body. Generally, a body exercising powers which are merely investigative in character and which do not have any legal force.
“The description of such body as a judicial commission of inquiry does not change its character from being a fact-finding body.”
“With this judgment, the Supreme Court has clearly vindicated Amaechi and cleared him of all purported or alleged indictment by the Governor Wike’s commission.”
