Sunday Oguntola reports on undercurrent moves by Senate President Bukola Saraki and his deputy, Ike Ekweremadu, to escape prosecution in the alleged senate forgery case
THE battle lines were drawn long ago. To Senate President, Bukola Saraki, and his deputy, Ike Ekweremadu, it is a clear case of no-retreat, no-surrender. Their ongoing trial on alleged conspiracy and forgery of 2011 Senate Standing rules is a political battle that must be won at all costs.
Investigations last week revealed that the duo of Saraki and Ekweremadu are perfecting measures aimed at ensuring they survive what they consider as “deliberate onslaught against their offices and persons by vested forces in the presidency.”
The Senate President and his deputy were arraigned last Monday alongside former Clerk of the Senate, Salihu Abubakar Maikasuwa, and Deputy Clerk Benedict, Efeturi, before Justice Yusuf Haliru on a two-count charge of criminal conspiracy and forgery.
They were granted conditional bail with the case adjourned to July 11. It was learnt that Saraki and Ekweremadu have designed strategies aimed at wriggling their way out of a case that can potentially send them to a maximum term of 14 years upon conviction.
Theory of political persecution
Checks showed that the two Senate principal officials have resolved to deploy all ammunition within their armoury to ensure the case is dismissed or they escape prosecution.
Part of their plans, according to investigation, is to present the case as clear political persecution and victimisation. A source said this will not only curry public sympathy but also portray the current administration as fighting the opposition Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), which produced Ekweremadu.
“One good thing is that the Deputy Senate President is a member of the PDP. This is the time his emergence becomes critical to the sustenance of the Senate leadership.
“This kind of onslaught was envisaged and this explained why he came into the picture. If only the Senate President is involved, the government will make it look like a house-cleaning, more so Senator Saraki is a member of the All Progressives Congress (APC).
“But since Ekweremadu is also involved, it has a political angle, which is that the current administration can be easily accused of fighting the opposition figures in this dispensation. Nobody hears that and not become tickled,” the source stated.
Playing the opposition card
Ekweremadu is already primed to harp on this ‘battle against opposition party’ theory. In his letter to the United Nations, US Congress, United Kingdom, European Union Parliament and Foreign Missions, titled Re: ‘Trumped- up charges against the presiding officers of the 8th Senate: Nigerian democracy is in grave danger,’ last week, Ekweremadu pointed out the opposition party was being emasculated.
According to him: “The list of the accused persons appears to have been politically generated because you cannot by the documents attached, relate any of our names to the offence for which we are now being charged.
“You may also wish to judge for yourself whether this trial orchestrated against me is not a political trial, calculated to witch-hunt, barefaced intimidation and a clear attempt to emasculate the parliament and silence me as the leader and highest ranking member of the opposition in Nigeria.”
This ploy, multiple sources from the camp confirmed, is to whip the international community into a bullish mood in interpreting and analyzing the development.
Winning the international community over
One of them said: “The international community likes opposition parties; it always considers opposition parties as important, especially in growing democracies likes ours. Until it won last year, the APC was well-perceived in the international community.
“So, the PDP has to win its way into the hearts of key international figures and actors in the political scenes. The more we cry persecution, the more they look our way and consider our plights as simple political persecution.”
Our correspondent also learnt that the defence team has been told to concentrate on the technicalities of the case while the Senate leadership focuses on the political angles. Part of this involves attempting to change the narratives so as to divert attention from the case itself.
This, it was gathered, is why the Saraki-Ekweremadu’s camp has been eager to dismiss the case as an assault against the National Assembly. By deliberately using words such as ‘coup’ and ‘subversion’ in describing the case, their camp is aiming at appealing to emotions, as against the logics behind the case.
Institutionalising the case
Chairman, Senate Committee on Media and Public Affairs, Senator Sabi Abdullahi, in a statement, had described the case as unconstitutional and a clear attempt to subvert the principle of separation of powers as well as checks and balances by the current administration.
He said: “It is clear that the Attorney-General and party leaders behind this action either lack the understanding of the underlining principles of constitutional democracy, the concept of separation of powers, checks and balances and parliamentary convention or they just simply do not care if the present democracy in the country survives or collapses in their blinded determination to get Saraki and Ekweremadu by all means necessary, including abuse of office and sacking the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.
“We must make it clear here to the individuals in the executive arm and party leadership behind these plot not to mistake the maturity and hand of cooperation being extended to the Presidency by the legislature as a sign of weakness.
“The National Assembly bent backwards to accommodate various infractions and inefficiencies in pursuit of inter-arms cooperation and national interest. We did not follow up the various infractions because we believe there are bigger issues which the government has to attend to in order to ensure that every Nigerian has food on his table and live comfortably in a secure environment.”
Stressing the independence of the Legislative arm, it is hoped that it will resonate with fellow lawmakers across the globe who may be enlisted to help out.
Abdullahi added: “To now take a matter that was resolved on the floor of the Senate to the police and then make it form the subject of a criminal prosecution of freely elected legislators beats all imagination of free thinking men all over the world.
“The implication is that any matter that fails on the floor of the National Assembly will now be taken to the Police, thereby endangering every senator and House member.
“This current move clearly runs contrary to the doctrine of separation of powers and checks and balances, which are fundamental to the successful operation of the presidential system of government.
“It runs counter to the principle outlined by the Supreme Court in Adesanya Vs Senate case, where it was held that nobody should seek to use the courts to achieve what he or she has failed to push through on the floor of the National Assembly.
“This present effort, therefore, is clearly a coup against the legislature with the ignoble aim to undermine its independence and subject the law making institution to the whims and caprices of the executive. It is a plan to return Nigeria to the dictatorial era which we have, as a nation, voted to reject.
“It is a dangerous trend with grave implications for the survival of our democracy and the integrity of the component institutions.”
Play the victim
Perhaps alarmed by the attempt to make the charges look like an offensive against the National Assembly, the Secretary to the Government of the Federation, Engr. David Babachir Lawal, quickly countered by saying only Saraki and three others were on trial and not the National Assembly.
He said: “It is not the Senate of the Federal Republic of Nigeria that is involved and definitely not the House of Representatives. To bring the National Assembly as a body into this court case is totally unwarranted.
“It can only be for other purposes and reasons outside the investigation and legal proceedings.
“A case of forgery is usually preferred against individuals. This is not different. As was the case with a former Speaker of the House of Representatives, who was accused of certificate forgery, what he did was to resign, honourably.
“The matter did not even go to court. In that particular case, it was never orchestrated as a matter for the National Assembly. The individual involved did not drag the entire legislature into the matter.”
But the Saraki/Ekweremadu’s camp is determined to drag the entire Senate, even National Assembly into the case. It is a well-calculated strategy to give the impression that it is primarily about forced change of leadership.
There are reasons for this. One, the Senate leadership is sure it can never be removed through majority votes. Even the Senate Chip Whip, Professor Olusola Adeyeye attested to this.
He said: “If politics is a game of number, Saraki has the number in the Nigerian Senate (and) let nobody deceive himself. In the current situation, it is impossible because a majority is not enough to remove him (and) by the rules of the Senate, you need 2/3 to remove a presiding officer. That number will not come.”
The Saraki/Ekweremadu’s camp is aware only a criminal prosecution can remove it from the Senate leadership. It is therefore desperate to rally round all lawmakers to its plights so that the case can be perceived as a collective indictment.
Senators, who originally should abstain from making public statements on the case in court, have openly taken sides because of this psychological reengineering. The ploy has succeeded in portraying Saraki as a persecuted figure whose ordeal automatically translates to an affront against the Senate and National Assembly, by extension.
A disturbed Adeyeye said: “Our own rules in the Senate forbid us from discussing matters in the court. Those who support our Senate President (Dr. Bukola Saraki) should have given him all the support he needs so as to provide for himself, the best defence in the court of Nigeria.”
Legal angles
But the legal teams have also been told to prepare hard to puncture technicalities involved in the case. This part, it was gathered, was conceived after the failure to influence the police report, which release was delayed for several months.
The report with reference CR: 3000/X/FHQ/ABJ/VOL.186/88 dated July 14, 2015 established:
Senate Standing Order 2015 as amended was given to Senators on June 9, 2015
The contents of the Senate Standing Order 2015 as amended” are substantially different from the Senate Standing Order 2011 as amended.
The Senate Standing Orders 2015, which was used to inaugurate the 8th Senate on the 9th of June 2015, was ordered by the leadership of the 7th Senate without following Section 110 of the Senate Rules 2011 as amended.
The practice where some group of Senators amends the Rules of the Senate without following legal procedures is criminal.
The report said: “On the 9th of June, 2015, a document titled “the Senate Standing Order 2015 as amended” was distributed to Senators of the 8th Senate for their inauguration as members.
“The contents of the Senate Standing Order 2015 as amended are substantially different from the Senate Standing Order 2011 as amended. Sections 2 (IV), 3(3) E, I, ii, iii, G AND H, 5 and 7 of the Rules are different in the two Orders.
“The Senate Standing Order 2015 as amended was used by the clerks of the National Assembly and the Senate as the Senate Standing Orders to inaugurate and conduct elections into the offices of the presiding officials of the Senate, viz the Senate President, the Deputy Senate President, etc.
“The testimonies of some members of the 7th Senate, including that of the Chairman of the Business and Rules Committee and Senators of the 7th Senate, indicate that the Senate Standing Order 2011 was not amended during the tenure of the 7th Senate which ended on the 8th of June, 2015.
“The procedure for the amendment of the Senate Standing Order as contained in Section 110 of the Senate Standing Order 2011 as amended stipulates that any amendment to the Senate Standing Orders should be in line with the following procedures:
Any Senator desiring to amend any part of the Rules or adding any new clause shall give notice of such amendments in writing to the President of the Senate giving details of proposed amendment.
The President shall within seven working days cause the amendment to be printed and circulated to members. Thereafter it shall be printed in the Order Paper.
The mover or movers of the amendment shall be allowed to explain in details the proposed amendments, thereafter in details the proposed amendments, thereafter the Senate shall decide by majority votes whether the amendment should be considered.
If the decision is to consider the amendments, then another date shall be set aside by the Rules and Business Committee, whereby opportunity would be given to Senators to further propose amendments but must strictly be confined to the original amendments. Two- third majority shall decide the amendments but must strictly be confined to the original amendments.
Two third majorities shall decide the amendments and such amendments shall form part of the Rules of the Senate.
The legal team, it was learnt, had already told Saraki, Ekweremadu and others to insist they were never invited by the police unlike the Unity Forum Senators who were contacted during the investigations.
There are also plans to file multiple appeals against the criminal proceeding under the guise that it will distract the Senate President from performing his constitutional roles. Saraki applied the same measure in his ongoing false asset declaration trial at the Conduct of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) to buy time.
An insider also alleged that the positive report of the proceedings at the court in favour of the accused in some sections of the online media is part of the well calculated survival strategies of the two principal officers of the senate. This is because Saraki and Ekweremadu consider it the greatest battle of their political careers. It is a fight they must win to survive or loss at a great political and personal cost.