Rallying for its leadership, without addressing the alleged forgery at its election, only diminishes the Senate
Closing ranks for legislative sovereignty cannot be a bad idea. For one, the presidential system sits on a strong pillar of clear separation of powers; and its handmaiden, checks-and-balances. The legislature is therefore constitutionally primed as a bulwark against executive excesses.
For another, by Nigeria’s unfortunate political history, the legislature is the least developed, no thanks to a relay of military coups that lay this polity prostrate in the past. Each time a coup d’état broke the democratic order, only the legislature got buried under its rubble. The executive continued in business — and even purported to constitute itself into some junta legislative assembly, rolling out decrees. So, did the judiciary, many times condemned to interpreting harsh laws.
So, if the current 8th Senate of the Federal Republic is ultra-sensitive on its independence, the least it expects of other stakeholders is empathy. We grant the Senate that — so long as its angst is founded on solid legality, sound morality and crystal-clear conscience.
Which is why we wonder what the Senate hopes to achieve by its current vote of confidence in its leadership, under Senate President Bukola Saraki, despite a police investigation which showed Senator Saraki and his deputy, Ike Ekweremadu, might have been elected by crooked procedure.
Even with the slightest whiff of illegality, what is that vote of confidence worth? That the Senate, supposed bastion of law, embraces a leadership that came about via an alleged willful rape of its own rules? Or that, even with the unsavoury direction of police investigations into the matter, the majority in that distinguished chamber are unapologetically venal? We sincerely hope not!
These are the allegations, which police investigation has all but confirmed as a “forgery”. On June 9, the extant Senate rule, at the legislature’s prorogation, was Standing Orders 2007 (as amended). For the Saraki/Ekweremadu elections however, Standing Orders 2015 (as amended) — the alleged forgery — was used.
Thereafter, a segment of the Senate petitioned the police, alleging an illegal insert into “Standing Orders 2007 (as amended)”, gave birth to the “forgery” dubbed “Standing Orders 2015 (as amended)”, claiming no such amendment existed. Across party lines, many members of the 7th Senate confirmed indeed that the extant rule, as at the end of the 7th Senate, was Standing Orders 2007.
Besides, the process to amend Standing Orders is clear: a senator pushing the amendment would write the senate president; his proposed amendments, if approved by half of the seated (after forming a quorum) would be debated at plenary. After the debate, two-thirds would then agree before the amendment is passed.
So, if “Standing Orders 2007 as amended” was the signing-off rule at the 7th Senate, and the 8th Senate was prorogued the day senators Saraki and Ekweremadu were “elected” to their posts, who then sat to amend “Standing Orders 2007 as amended” to produce “Standing Orders 2015 as amended”?
This is the notorious query awaiting an urgent answer — and not even a million “votes of confidence” can wish it away, if the Senate must retain Nigerians’ trust and respect.
Now, let us get something straight: politicians play games; and we hold no brief for any of the blocs across the divide. The bloc that screams “party supremacy” as its war cry has its motive. So does the bloc that yells “legislative independence”. None of them we dare say, from the configuration of Nigeria’s current real-politik, would probably bow to principle qua principle, if that principle is not laced with some current power exigency. That is unfortunate; and only further political evolution in the right direction would cure it — hopefully with time.
But political rascality and alleged forgery, a willful and premeditated crime to illicitly and illegally skew the process, are not quite the same thing. That is the unflattering situation staring at the Senate, “vote of confidence” or not.
That is why those trying to launder this alleged crime must clamber off their silly horse. Even if Saraki and Ekweremadu didn’t know of the forgery — if proven — that alone cannot clear them of culpability. At best, they would be receivers of stolen goods, and a terrible moral burden to the Senate.
Even then, as motives go, they both would appear not beyond fair suspicion. Saraki “won” the election with the whole 49 opposition senators and a smattering of his own ruling party senators, at a time when majority of his own party senators were away at an aborted meeting with President Muhammadu Buhari. Ekweremadu is a beneficiary from the alleged forgery; and he was, as former deputy senate president, also part of the National Assembly management under the ancien regime. Former Senate President, David Mark, also among the bulk PDP senators that supported the Saraki-Ekweremadu election, is also in the loop. So, is the Clerk of the National Assembly, Alhaji Salisu Maikisuwa, the highest ranking bureaucrat in the National Assembly management.
So, the least the Senate could do, for its own collective sanity and brand equity, is quietly letting the law run its full course — instead of some laughable bluff and bluster, masquerading as “vote of confidence”.
If indeed forgery is judicially proven, there is technically no leadership to pass — or refuse — a vote of confidence. An election erected on a crooked law cannot stand. If, however, all within legitimate suspicion are cleared, the Senate would have demonstrated its robust commitment to law and due process.
In ancient Athens, the Areopagus — the equivalent of the modern Senate — was peopled by nobles of high learning and even higher character. In Rome, the Senate, despite the proclivity of individuals, was home to the finest of Romans. The Nigerian Senate cannot afford a lesser pedestal, in this crucial era of building Nigerian democracy.
That is why it must toe the path of patriotism and nobility, not venality and banality, in this latest scandal of alleged forgery involving its leadership.
