The ongoing trial of the senate
president, Dr. Bukola Saraki, and his deputy, Senator Ike Ekweremadu, is
said to have slowed down the senate from performing its duty, FISAYO
FALODI writes
Not a few people expected that the
eighth National Assembly would focus its attention on seven priority
areas to engender probity and discipline in governance when the upper
legislative chamber was inaugurated on June 9, 2015.
Some of the priority areas were the
petroleum industry bill, probe of financial misconduct suspected to have
been swept under the carpet (N195bn pension fraud), fight to ensure
legislative independence and drive a reform that would evenly spread the
nation’s wealth suspected to have been hijacked by the rich few, among
others.
This is beside the senate’s three
cardinal objectives of improving governance, improving business and
improving the livelihood of the current senate.
But one year after the senate was
inaugurated for responsive lawmaking function and other oversight
activities, the upper legislative chamber has yet to properly settle
down to work, let alone point out any of the priority areas it has
achieved a resounding success.
The apparent non-performance of the senate is, perhaps, due to the series of crisis rocking the lawmaking body.
The crisis began amid the euphoria that
greeted the declaration of the ruling All Progressives Congress as the
winner of the last presidential election.
The two principal officers of the
senate, Dr. Bukola Saraki and Senator Ike Ekweremadu, who emerged as the
senate president and the deputy senate president in controversial
circumstances have been at the centre of the crisis. The two men have
been facing trial for various criminal activities since they emerged as
the senate president and deputy president respectively.
Saraki is facing multiple trials ranging
from false declaration of assets when he was in office as the Kwara
State governor to conniving with Ekweremadu and others to forge the
Senate Standing Orders 2015 to pave the way for them to emerge as the
senate principal officers. Ekweremadu is equally being tried for alleged
conspiracy and forgery.
However, both Saraki and Ekweremadu did
not only dismiss the allegations as an attempt by the executive
(Presidency) to remove them from their positions because they emerged as
the senate principal officers against the candidates of the Presidency,
they said the trial would subvert the nation’s democracy and desecrate
the senate.
Saraki, in a statement he personally
signed, vowed to fight the current battles confronting him to the end,
adding that he would be glad to end up in jail rather than surrender the
leadership of the senate to the “nefarious agenda of a few
individuals.”
The senate president also alleged that
there was a government within the government of the Muhammadu Buhari’s
administration which he claimed seized the apparatus of executive powers
to pursue nefarious agenda.
But the Presidency said it found Saraki’s claim “ridiculous” and “preposterous.”
Similarly, Ekweremadu said his trial
would afford Nigerians to see that the charges preferred against him
were “nothing but meretricious thrash.”
Insisting that the trial was political
and could endanger democracy, the deputy senate president said, “Let us
make no mistake about this: it is not Senator Ike Ekweremadu or Senator
Bukola Saraki or the other accused persons that are on trial; rather the
hallowed democratic principles of the separation of powers, rule of
law, the legislature, and indeed democracy itself are on a ridiculous
trial.
“Mere anarchy is unleashed upon the
land, but our courage must not fall apart. No condition is permanent and
nothing lasts forever.”
With the postponement of the trial till
July 11, 2016 by Justice Yusuf Halilu of the Federal Capital Territory
High Court sitting in Jabi, it is believed that the prosecution may have
rattled the two principal officers of the senate in no small measure.
This is because it is not sure that the court will dispense with the
trial on the adjourned date to enable the two men to provide credible
leadership for their colleagues in the senate as well as support the
executive, which they have seen as their detractor, to find solution to
the myriad of challenges confronting the country.
The ongoing trial, some observers
believe, have now become an albatross to the senate. They expressed
concern that the prosecution, if not dispensed with on time, might have
devastating consequences on the polity.
A political observer, Mr. Dare Adeiya,
noted that the consequence of the prosecution had already been felt in
the poor quality of the senate performance in the last one year.
Adeiya’s view was contrary to Saraki’s
position which eulogised his colleague senators for the achievements the
upper legislative body had recorded. The senate president praised the
senators for having achieved the feat on June 9, 2015, when the senate
marked its first anniversary.
Adeiya dismissed the commendation as
empty phrases. He said that the senate, which he claimed did not have
enough time to discharge any meaningful responsibility since its
inauguration because of the intractable leadership crisis rocking it,
had not “really started any serious legislative business that could
promote the interest of the country.”
Although Adeiya condemned perpetration
of criminal activities in any form, he urged expeditious dispensation of
the trial to enable Saraki and Ekweremadu to concentrate on their
duties.
He said the trial had exposed many members of the senate as a “bunch of people who are not really ready to serve.”
Adeiya backed his claim with the
frequent trooping of the senators to the court to show solidarity for
Saraki anytime the senate president appeared in the court.
He said, “Senators could use the
precious time they are spending in court to meet at their various
committee levels to deliberate on the issues that are affecting the
country so that Saraki and his deputy could face their trial.”
An analyst, Mr. Victor Iyoho, suspected a
foul play in the trial. He agreed with Saraki that the executive was
behind the whole saga. He saw the trial as an attempt to remove Saraki
and Ekweremadu from their positions at all cost by the executive.
Iyoho, however, identified Nigerians as
the real victims of the saga because their lives had not been positively
affected by the continued trial.
He said, “It is very unfortunate that at
this time in the life of the current administration, this is still
happening. The government is busy chasing shadows!
“According to the constitution that we
are operating, the principal officers of the National Assembly are to be
elected by members of that body and not by the Presidency. By the
posture of this government, the fear that the President will be a
dictator is being confirmed.
“That the polity should not be
unnecessarily heated up, I will advise the Presidency to take its hands
off this matter. If the Presidency wants Saraki out as the senate
president, it should play its politics well and use the senators to do
so, as it was the case during the administration of former President
Olusegun Obasanjo.”
The role of the judiciary is also said
to be critical in the trial. The senate president had described the
action of the Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of
Justice, Abubakar Malami, who charged him and others to court for the
alleged forgery as misguided.
For the judiciary to be seen as being
fear to all parties in the matter, Iyoho asked the third arm of
government to be above board.
He said, “The judiciary, being the
arbiter in this case, should be seen to be above board. It should remind
the executive that it is the senators and not the Presidency that
should elect their leaders. The Presidency should also be concerned with
how to salvage its sagging image as it has so far failed in fulfilling
its social contract with Nigerians.”
The analyst agreed that the trial would
slow down the performance of the eighth senate, he nevertheless foresaw
that Saraki and Ekweremadu would later enjoy more sympathy and support
than the Presidency could garner from the National Assembly and the
general public.
The Chapter 2 of the constitution which
stipulates that the role of the government shall be the promotion of the
welfare and security of the people can only be effectively determined
when the executive, the legislature and the judiciary are allowed to
independently perform their responsibilities.
A social commentator, Mr. Taiwo
Akinlami, said the trial did not only slow down the performance of the
senate contrary to the expectation of the people, but also distracted
the leadership of the senate.
He said, “I don’t think the senate has
been able to hold the executive accountable to its electoral promises;
the senate has not been able to play the role of check and balances
effectively and I think that the reason is the leadership crisis and
other controversies rocking the legislative body.
“The distraction, which has a lot of
political undertone, has been a major burden on the leadership of the
current senate. That has definitely affected the ability of the upper
legislative chamber to deliver on its oversight function as clearly
stated in the constitution.
“This has now become a pathetic
situation as Nigerians should begin to ask questions on their
expectations from the people being funded with the commonwealth.”
Akinlami, however, doubted the
possibility of arriving at a credible and equitable justice in the trial
because of what he described as the polarisation of the nation’s
institutions of governance.
He said, “Sometime, the judiciary is a
willing tool in the hands of the politicians. When it comes to the
funding of the judiciary and the administration of justice, the
executive plays a major role.
So, you find out that he who pays the piper calls the tune.”
The Board Chairman, International
Society for Civil Liberties and the Rule of Law, Mr. Emeka Umeagbalasi,
urged that the law, while the trial lasts, should not be applied
selectively and vindictively.
While stressing that nobody, no matter
his or her political, economic, military and social position, must be
treated as if he or she is above the law, Umeagbalasi said the trial of
Saraki and Ekweremadu had not added any value to the growth and the
advancement of the country since it (the trial) began.
He said, “The trial is highly political
and vindictive. Crime of forgery exists in the country’s criminal codes,
but the question is: does the act in the instant case constitute actual
crime of forgery?
‘The act in question is that the Senate
conducted its internal leadership poll with its own written rules and
the Presidency was dissatisfied to the effect that those it wanted to
emerge never made it leading to executive interference and instigation
of some senators to allege forgery of the Senate rules. It was the same
rules that were used in the House of Representatives internal leadership
poll, yet heaven has not let loose till date.
“Again, where can we place the mere
National Assembly rules in the realm of Nigeria’s Criminal Codes? Are
they substantive or supplementary? What are the prescribed criminal
penalties for altering the Senate Rules in Nigeria? Who investigated the
so-called Senate Rules forgery”? And where is the report?”
0 comments:
Post a Comment