– The embattled Senate president has traced the genesis of his travails to a political disagreement with “some people”, over a Muslim-Muslim ticket in the build-up to the 2015 general election
– In the midst of all the uproar, it is safe to ask if Saraki should resign from his post
NAIJ.com believes Senate President Bukola Saraki’s problems started on the eve of the inauguration of the eighth Senate.
In the run up to the National Assembly elections the APC leadership had sought to influence the elections to favour certain zones in the country.
But when all negotiations to reach this end failed, the APC leadership enlisted the help of President Muhammadu Buhari to hold a meeting with the members of the National Assembly and convince them to obey the party’s directive.
However, the APC leaders did not see what was coming the next day, dubbed the D-day.
On the scheduled date of the National Assembly election, June 9, 2015, members of the ruling party APC honoured an invitation by President Buhari to a meeting at the International Conference Centre (ICC) but Bukola Saraki, in his wisdom, chose not to attend; a decision which secured him the Senate presidency, but also saw him stepping on the proverbial banana peel.
With 12 other “rebel” APC senators holding a sitting with the 47 PDP senators, Saraki was elected Senate president while Senator Ike Ekweremadu from the PDP was elected his deputy.
READ ALSO: Ibrahim says Saraki’s trial motivated by Kwara politicians
The genesis of the ‘legislative coup’
The APC senators had held a mock election for the purpose of choosing the party’s candidate for the June 9 election of the Senate president and the deputy. The election took place at the International Conference Centre, Abuja, on the night of Saturday, June 6.
Senator Ahmed Lawan of Yobe state was nominated for the position of the Senate president, while Senator George Akume, Benue state, was selected as his running mate.
However, Senator Saraki and his supporters boycotted the voting. As a result, Lawan secured 32 votes, while Akume scored 31. Two votes were declared invalid.
Mala Buni, the returning officer of the election, announced the official results of the poll: “Messrs Lawan and Akume are now the recognised candidates of the APC for the office of Senate president and deputy respectively.”
But Senator Saraki’s group reacted swiftly to the APC mock elections in a statement published in the early hours of Sunday, June 7.
The group cited the open ballot system adopted for the mock election as its reason for boycotting the election, describing it as “primitive and undemocratic”.
One thing was certain from then on; the ruling party was divided ahead of the June 9 National Assembly elections. Could the main opposition party the PDP take advantage of this? They sure did!
A meeting of the PDP on the eve of the inauguration of the 8th Senate adopted Senator Saraki as the Senate president, in exchange for the deputy slot in the Senate.
The all-night meeting came to a conclusive end in the morning after heated arguments for and against Saraki, with the agreement that all PDP members should cast their votes for Saraki in exchange for support for Ike Ekweremadu as the deputy Senate president. In the same way they plotted for Yakubu Dogara to emerge as the speaker.
Ike Ekweremadu sworn in as deputy Senate president
And just as scripted, the PDP got their permutations right as Saraki was elected Senate president while Ike Ekweremadu was elected deputy Senate president after getting 54 votes to defeat Senator Ali Ndume of the APC, who polled 20 votes. The result meant that for the first time in the history of Nigeria, there was going to be bipartisan leadership in the National Assembly. But the worst was yet to come.
Bukola Saraki sworn in as Senate president
The naming of principal officers for the 8th Senate on June 25 added salt to the APC’s wound. Saraki refused to honour the party’s position, hence re-enacting the controversy that threw him up as Senate president on June 9.
Chief John Odigie-Oyegun, the national chairman of the APC, had on June 23 written to Saraki stating the party’s choice of principal officers of the Senate.
The APC had nominated Ahmad Lawan as Senate majority leader, George Akume as deputy majority leader, Olusola Adeyeye as chief whip, and Abu Ibrahim as deputy chief whip. However, Saraki, on Thursday, June 25, announced Ali Ndume as majority leader, Bala Na’Allah as deputy majority leader and Francis Alimikhena as deputy chief whip after the various APC Senate caucuses nominated them.
In his letter dated June 25, Saraki was said to have explained to the party that the APC Senate caucuses had already taken a decision on the matter before he received Odigie-Oyegun’s letter.
Saraki’s letter reads: “The said letter (Oyegun’s letter) was received after various APC zonal caucuses had taken their decisions to candidates as principal officers of the senate in line with parliamentary convention and the extant provisions of the senate standing orders 2015 as amended.
“Furthermore, whilst one is strongly persuaded to toe party line and act in accordance with the suggested party position, regrettably clear provisions of our extant rules and standard parliamentary convention have not given me that leeway to act otherwise.
“Therefore, my hands are tied in the circumstances and I seek your understanding in this regard.”
At this point, the APC hierarchy dubbed Saraki’s defiance as a rebellion against the party.
The leadership of the APC decided it was time to take the bull by the horns and discipline an “over-ambitious” Saraki.
Saraki’s trial and trips of judgment shopping
Saraki came under intense pressure after he assumed the Senate presidency against the directive of his political party, the APC and President Muhammadu Buhari, and all hell broke loose on September 15 as the federal government charged him before the code of conduct tribunal in Abuja over allegations of false and improper declaration of assets allegedly acquired during his tenure as the governor of Kwara state from 2003 to 2011.
The 13-count charge against Saraki was filed before the tribunal by the Code of Conduct Bureau through the office of the attorney general of the federation.
Count one accused Senator Saraki of making “false declaration in the assets declaration form for public officers on assumption of office as Governor of Kwara state by making an anticipatory asset declaration in that you claimed to have owned and acquired No. 15A and N0. 15B McDonald Ikoyi, Lagos through your company Carlisle Properties Limited in the year 2000 when the said property was actual fact sold by the Implementation Committee on Federal Government landed property in the year 2006 to your companies Tiny Tee Limited and Vitti Oil Limited for the aggregate sum of N396, 150, 000.”
According to the charge sheet, Saraki also allegedly operated an American Express credit card account during his tenure as governor, to which he allegedly wired at least $3.4 million from a Nigerian account. The law bars public officers from operating foreign bank accounts while in service.
However, getting Saraki to come to court for his trial was not as easy as the federal government had envisaged. The Senate president and his lawyers embarked on trips of judgment shopping, as he approached one court after the other to clear himself and to block his trial from being held.
In his first bid to stop his arraignment, the Senate president, through his lawyer Joseph Daudu (SAN), approached the Federal High Court sitting in Abuja asking for a declaration that the tribunal had no power to try him.
Daudu had asked the tribunal to suspend its sitting to allow the Federal High Court, which he contended was superior to the CCT, to decide the case on its jurisdiction on September 18, when the trial of Saraki was scheduled to begin.
However, the prosecuting counsel, Rotimi Jacobs, rejected the request, arguing that the new Administration of Criminal Justice Act forbids suspension of trial pending determination of interlocutory appeals.
Justice Dandladi Umar, the chairman of the tribunal agreed with prosecuting counsel and ordered that Saraki be present in court for commencement of his trial the next day. But the Senate president was surprisingly absent the next day.
When he eventually appeared, Saraki’s lawyer also strenuously tried to prevent his client from entering the dock to enter his plea to the 13-count charge. Daudu pointed out that proceedings at the CCT cannot be classified as a criminal trial going by paragraph 18(1) of the Fifth Schedule to the 1999 constitution.
To back up his argument, he noted that if the CCT found that a public officer contravened any provision of the Code of Conduct, such a person could be punished by being asked to vacate the office he/she occupies, disqualification, seizure and forfeiture of the assets in contention, or made to suffer any other penalty as may be imposed by the National Assembly.
But he was opposed by the prosecution counsel, Rotimi Jacobs, who argued that trial at the CCT is criminal in nature. Justice Umar upheld the submissions of the prosecutor and held that the charge against Saraki was criminal in nature and that trial at the CCT was criminal in nature. Thus, Saraki was practically forced to enter the dock to plead to the charges on September 22, 2015.
READ ALSO: Saraki wars with EFCC even as destroyed evidence stirs dust
Senate President Bukola Saraki, docked before the tribunal in Abuja on September 22, 2015
The Senate president pleaded not guilty to the charges and the CCT fixed a date for the commencement of the trial.
Saraki’s appeal court setback
Determined to ensure that the case would not go ahead, Saraki filed a suit at the Court of Appeal to challenge his trial. In the suit, Saraki challenged the powers of the CCT to try him. He specifically challenged the composition of the tribunal, arguing that three and not two members should form a quorum for the purpose of its sitting to exercise its jurisdiction.
Saraki also challenged the legality of the charges proffered against him as he complained that the charges ought to have been endorsed by the attorney general of the federation.
However, on October 30, 2015, a three-man panel of the Appellate Court, in a split 2:1 decision delivered the latest judicial setback for Saraki when they held that his appeal lacked merit.
Justice Moore Adumein, who presided over the panel, read the majority judgment and resolved that all the six issues raised in the appeal went in favour of the federal government and the CCT.
The judge rejected the contention of Saraki that the CCT, being an inferior body to the Federal High Court, ought not to have proceeded with his trial despite an order by the court.
Saraki’s final setback at the Supreme Court
Still determined to stop his trial even before it took off, Saraki appealed the judgment of the Court of Appeal.
In the appeal filed at the Supreme Court, the Senate president asked the apex court to determine if Danladi Umar, the chairman and a member of the tribunal could legally conduct proceedings when the constitution says it must be constituted by two members and a chairman.
He also asked the court to determine whether the tribunal was right to have assumed jurisdiction to try him.
In the argument before the Supreme Court on December 3, Saraki’s lawyer said the CCT was wrong to have assumed jurisdiction over the Senate president’s trial, because it was not properly constituted.
However, Rotimi Jacobs, the federal government’s lawyer asked the court to dismiss the appeal. He argued that the court was properly constituted and had the jurisdiction to try Saraki.
After listening to the arguments of the lawyers, the apex court asked the CCT to suspend the trial of Saraki pending delivery of its judgment.
But while it looked like victory was smiling on Saraki and his supporters, the Supreme Court came back with its verdict on February 6.
The panel of the apex court presided over by the Chief Justice of Nigeria agreed that contrary to the claims of lawyers to the Senate president, the CCT had the power to try criminal cases and the sitting of the CCT consisting of the chairman and one member was valid.
Drama in Saraki’s trial
Following the Supreme Court’s ruling that dismissed the appeal of Saraki to stop his case at the CCT, the federal government proposed eight witnesses who would testify against him when his trial on 13 counts of false assets declaration started.
The list shows eight proposed witnesses who were said to have been involved in the investigation of the four forms in which Saraki had allegedly made false declaration of his assets between 2003 and 2011 during his two terms as governor.
Those listed by the prosecution to testify against him included Yahaya Bello, Michael Wetkas, Mustapha Abubakar Musa, Nura Ali Bako, Adamu Garba, Samuel Madojemu, Abdulrahaman Bayo Dauda and Nwachukwu Amazu.
Some of the witnesses were said to be detectives of the EFCC who investigated the four forms submitted to the bureau by Saraki as a two-term governor.
However, the drama that has attended the on-going trial of the Senate president has continued to make major headlines.
From the day Saraki was docked before the tribunal, till the last adjourned date, April 21, 2016, there has been one form of drama or another, with the last being Justice Danladi Umar’s directive to armed policemen to arrest one of the defence lawyers.
Justice Umar had threatened to commit one of Saraki’s lawyers, Raphael Oluyede for contempt. Oluyede had refused to sit down when Umar asked him to and even confronted the chairman over his powers to have him arrested.
READ ALSO: Panama Papers: Will Saraki, Mark lead the nation into chaos?
“Sit down, I say sit down, sit down,” Umar shouted at him but Oluyede refused to yield to the order. Umar got angrier: “I will commit you for contempt.” An unyielding Oluyede responded: “No, you cannot.”
“Ok, where are the police? Arrest him, and take him out,” Umar ordered.
But for the timely intervention of the prosecutor, Rotimi Jacobs (SAN), Oluyede would have been taken away.
The testimony of the lead prosecution witness, Michael Wetkas, an EFCC officer, has also been regarded as one of the highpoints of the drama at the CCT. Wetkas is the head of a three-man team the anti-graft agency constituted in 2014 to investigate six separate petitions lodged against Saraki in 2012.
However, Wetkas told the Danladi Umar tribunal that his team did not investigate the petitions listed as Exhibits 11, 12 and 13 which form the basis for prosecuting the Senate president for false assets declaration.
Exhibit 11, which was dated May 22, 2012, contained a petition written by the Kwara Freedom Network inviting the EFCC to investigate the Kwara state Universal Basic Education Board.
The witness had, while giving evidence in chief, told the tribunal that the petition by the Kwara Freedom Network triggered the investigation. He, however, made a u-turn during cross-examination to say that his team did not investigate the petition.
Exhibit 12, which was dated May 7, 2011, was addressed to the chairman of the EFCC asking the anti-graft agency to investigate the Kwara state government on borrowings for projects described as phoney.
Exhibit 13 was a petition, dated June 7, 2012, which dwelt on the mismanagement of local government revenue in Kwara state between 2003 and 2011. When asked whether in the course of investigation he had sought an audience to speak with the accountant general of Kwara state, the witness said he had not, as that was not part of his assignment.
Also asked whether he had invited any official of the Kwara state government in the course of the investigation, the witness said he had not. When asked whether he had another written document to corroborate the petition written by the Kwara Freedom Network, the witness said he did not have any other documents.
Further asked why he tendered documents he did not investigate, the witness said he did not tender the exhibits on his own but that they were tendered through him by the prosecution.
Is Saraki being prosecuted or tried?
The CCT chairman’s sudden decision to postpone Saraki’s trial until May despite his initial insistence that it will continue daily until it is concluded, has raised eyebrows.
Sources have claimed that the long postponement is expected to be used to broker a deal between the two warring APC camps.
Saraki had said in a letter to Dele Momodu that although many people believed he was on trial because he emerged Senate president against the wishes of the leadership of his party, that was not his only offence.
“I have also been accused of helping to frustrate some people’s opportunity to emerge as President Muhammadu Buhari’s running mate. But I have no problem with anybody.
“They also know what this trial is all about. They believe I am being victimized because they have expressed their right to choose their own leadership. This is why I am not in any way perturbed by my absence in the chambers during this trial.
“Because I was not imposed on the Senate, I feel confident that the Senate will protect its own choice whether I am present or not. It is never about me.
“It is about the independence of the legislature. It has always been so since 1999. It is so today and it would be so in 2019, it would be so in 2023, and as long as we practice a democracy that operates on the principle of separation of powers,” Saraki said.
The Senate president, Bukola Saraki, during the code of conduct tribunal (CCT) trial.
Should Saraki resign or not?
The victory of the APC during the last general elections may not have been possible without courageous strategists like Saraki who lent their political weight in favour of the party.
As a Senator in the 7th Senate, Saraki may have brought the attention of Nigerians to the fraud perpetrated by the last administration in the name of fuel subsidy; he may have led five other governors of the PDP into the APC, a development that successfully turned the political tide against the PDP; he may have led scores of senators to cross over to the APC on the floor of the Senate; but just like every typical Nigerian politician, he has continued to stubbornly hang on to his position, despite his adversaries hitting him with all they have.
It would be wise of him to step aside, for now, as Senate president. But should he emerge victorious from his travails, he should be reinstated to the office with honour and without questions.
The post Analysis: Saraki’s ‘legislative coup’ and the ugly repercussions appeared first on Nigeria News today & Breaking news | Read on NAIJ.COM.