Walter Onnoghen before the Code of Conduct Tribunal. The FG and the AGF contended that Onnoghen’ trialwas personal to him and could only involve the Supreme Court, wherean appeal arises from the Court of Appeal on a decision reachedeither during or after the trial at the CCT. Their position is contained in a notice of objectionthey filed against a suit instituted at the Supreme Court by Cross RiverState. The state government, in their originating summons,queried the propriety of Onnoghen’s trial before the CCT andurged the Supreme Court to declare it illegal on the grounds that itwas only the National Judicial Council that could exercise disciplinarypowers over a serving judge. In their objection, the FG and AGF listed asdefendants in the suit, argued that the subject of the case did not qualifyas a dispute between the Cross River State and the Federal Government, asenvisaged under Section 232(1) of the Constitution.