17. That in closing the trial of the criminal procedure instituted in connection with the case, the investigating judge pointed out that there were serious and corroborating indications standing against Hama Amadou and testifying that he was accomplice to the offence of fraudulently offering children to women who were not their biological mothers, committed by his wife Adizatou Amadou Dieye, forgery of civil documents through falsification of the birth certificates of LilianGuel and Lalia-Fadima, use of forged civil documents by tendering false birth certificates for the purpose of procuring passports for the said two children. 18.That being the President of the National Assembly, and therefore a member of the state parliament, the trial judge transferred the casefile on the proceedings to the Public Prosecutor to enable the procedure to follow its course as required by law. 19.That applying that procedure meant that the Applicant had to be brought to trial. 20.That recognising that the Bureau of the National Assembly was incompetent to authorise him to be brought to trial, and that the authorisation for arrest did not constitute removal of parliamentary immunity, Hama Amadou and a group of opposition parliamentarians brought the case before the Constitutional Court. 21.That by Judgments of 4 and 9 September 2014, the Constitutional Court the then Bureau of the National Assembly was competent, outside its session periods, to authorise the arrest of a parliamentarian, and that the authorisation for arrest given by the Bureau of the National Assembly constituted a removal of parliamentary immunity. 22.That in conclusion, the Honourable Court is principally requested to declare that it has no jurisdiction to hear the case, and alternatively, it is prayed to declare that the Application is inadmissible on the ground Translator : E. Nkansah 7