The Supreme Court judgment that gave the green light for the trial of Senate President, Bukola Saraki, is an institutional ambush of great magnitude that has reignited the political tensions that trailed the inauguration of the 8th National Assembly. What is more, the verdict could open the dark secrets of the APC government and compromise Nigeria’s determination to march to a new nation. Granted that the apex court might still have the opportunity to reexamine the case, the trial of Saraki at the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT), would obviously overheat the polity, given the controversy that trailed Saraki’s emergence as Senate President on June 9, 2015. Saraki’s political rebellion and ambitious quest for self-preservation angered entrenched political forces in the ruling APC, and his subsequent indictment by the CCT was widely perceived as politically-motivated revenge by his opponents, who vowed to get their pound of flesh and teach him a lesson. So, the stage is now set for another clash of the titans.
What is also not in doubt is that the fault lines in the National Assembly would be further expanded, because should the APC try to upstage him, PDP Senators would happily rally behind Saraki, and play the role of spoiler, just as the pro-Saraki APC lawmakers would provide him with moral support. Some APC hardliners have already started hinting at the possibility of Saraki’s removal, saying, his conviction by the CCT is a done deal. But the APC should reconsider ditching Saraki at this time because as things stand, the party has virtually no leverage over Saraki. A master himself of political intrigues, Saraki will not go down without a fight. He would happily act as the undertaker to dismantle the APC political machine even if that means national unity and political stability could suffer collateral damage. Issues like the 2016 budget and other bills from the executive will all be dead on arrival. The headache will be too much a distraction for the Buhari administration.
Nobody queries the right of the Code of Conduct Bureau (CCB) to summon any citizen for questioning, especially when allegations of the abuse of public office are made against him or her. However, it was obvious that the CCT did not handle the case of Saraki in a manner that freed it of criticism. Sadly, such sloppiness sabotages the efficiency of the CCT and mocks the fight against corruption. Already the trial has been tainted by political motivation. Although Saraki now has the opportunity to prove his innocence, it is worth-noting that no member of the class of 2003 governors has been subjected to scrutiny based on the averments on the asset declaration forms at the CCB. Mischief or malicious intent may be secondary to an issue of criminality but the question of public morality and fairness must always be raised when national interest is at issue. The Supreme Court might not have taken into consideration these ramifications before it decided to wash its hands off the matter, in order not to be seen to be protecting the high and the mighty of society.
In charging Saraki to the CCT, the CCB alleged that Saraki falsified the assets declaration form he filed while Governor of Kwara State. The alleged falsification pertains to where Saraki is said to have deliberately made anticipatory declarations. The ancillary charges border on the operation of a foreign bank account while in office as a public servant and acquiring wealth beyond his legitimate earnings. The manifest absence of sincerity of purpose stems from the fact that the alleged offences were said to have been committed over 12 years ago when Saraki served as the governor of Kwara State. This holds the potential of eroding the moral high ground from which the CCT intends to prosecute the case. It is this time lapse and condemnable shoddiness of the CCB in the performance of its duties that has jarred public consciousness.
In his appeal to quash the charges against him by the CCB, Saraki’s legal team headed by Chief J. B. Daudu (SAN), argued that the CCT failed to avail itself of Paragraph 15(1) to the Fifth Schedule of the 1999 Constitution, as amended. The two-member panel of the CCT presided over by Justice Danladi Umar, was not adequately composed to try him, stressing that it fell short of the constitutional requirement of three. What would happen in the event of a split decision? And given the ominous timing after he emerged Senate president under very controversial circumstances, Saraki seemed inclined to believe that the trial was politically-motivated. He therefore contended in his appeal to the Supreme Court that not being a court, the CCT was not constitutionally empaneled to handle criminal trials or equipped with the powers to dock him. Saraki further contended that the absence a substantive Attorney General of the Federation (AGF), made the CCT defective and therefore incompetent.
The prosecution led by Rotimi Jacobs (SAN), averred that the issues raised by Saraki in his objection lacked merit because a prima facie case had been actually established against the Senate president. Jacobs invoked Section 4(2)(b) of the interpretation Act, explaining that the first step to be taken by Saraki was to answer to the charges and clear his name, before challenging the procedure and legitimacy of the trial. The senior advocate insisted that Saraki was appropriately charged before the CCT. Delivering the lead judgment, Justice Walter Samuel Onoghen held that the CCT was properly constituted and has the jurisdiction to handle the trial of Saraki.
But to all intents and purposes, the apex court verdict did nothing but protect due process and the rule of law. Since the facts of the substantive matter were not before the Supreme Court, the apex court was only invited to rule on the preliminary objections raised by the accused. The justices are well aware that in the fullness of time, the trial might eventually make its way back to the Supreme Court as an appeal against the judgments of courts of subordinate jurisdiction. But the possible implications appear too frightening, especially given the fact that the Senate, which Saraki presides as chairman, had seen some sort of normalcy and stability. It may not be as much as the person of Saraki as the issue of national interest, political stability and the cause of the economic development of the country.
All said and done, the Supreme Court verdict seems to be a well-orchestrated ambush against Saraki, but even more so to the entrenched power centers in the APC, including President Buhari, who took in stride, Saraki’s impudence and cheeky public display of self-serving arrogance. The battle lines have been drawn, but herein lies the danger for the whole country. Saraki’s political perfidy might precipitate the roof to collapse on his head and that of the nation. Nigerians will be watching to see how Saraki handles the travails of his trial because in politics, unlike anything else, the end seems to always justify the means!
Normal.dotm
0
0
1
1025
5843
huhuonline
48
11
7175
12.0
0
false
18 pt
18 pt
0
0
false
false
false
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:”Table Normal”;
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:””;
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin-top:0in;
mso-para-margin-right:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt;
mso-para-margin-left:0in;
line-height:115%;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:”Times New Roman”;
mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;}
