BY HENRY UMORU

AFTER two weeks of holiday, the Senate, on Tuesday, resumed but the resumption was not smooth against the backdrop that there were irreconcilable differences among senators.

The Senate went on the break amid the contentious  emergence of Senate President Bukola Saraki and Senator Ike Ekweremadu, elected on the platform of the Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, as the deputy Senate president in an All Progressives Congress, APC, government June 9, 2015; as well as the issue of alleged forgery of the Senate Standing Order 2015 as amended, among others still hanging.

The bitterness had  remained among the senators who have formed two groups, the Senators Unity Forum, SUF, which rooted for Senator Ahmed Lawan, APC, Yobe North, for the position of Senate President and the other group, Senators of Like Minds, supporting Saraki.

Prior to the break, Senator James Manager, PDP, Delta South,  had submitted the report of his Peace and Reconciliation Committee which asked  aggrieved senators in court  to withdraw their lawsuits for the sake of peace and unity in the Senate and also recommended that all factional groups in the Senate be disbanded.

Unfortunately, the recommendations  did not go down well with some of the senators like Othman Hunkuyi,APC, Kaduna North, and Kabir Marafa, APC, Zamfara Central, and others who had gone to court to challenge the alleged forgery of the Standing Order.

To say the least, the last 72  hours since the Senate resumed on Tuesday has been hectic. It has been  unfolding crisis, from the ‘ fight’ between Senator Dino Melaye, APC, Kogi  and Senator Oluremi Tinubu, APC, Lagos Central, to the invitation of the Attorney  General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami, to appear before the Senate Committee on Judiciary, Human Rights and Legal Matters and the invitation of the Secretary    to the Government of the Federation, Babachir David Lawal.

While Malami was called to explain  why he dragged Saraki, Ekweremadu and two others to court over alleged forgery of the Senate Standing Order, the SGF was asked by the Senate to explain why he made the statement that constituency projects may not be executed following poor revenue earnings by  government.

The frenetic 72 hours started when the Senate went into a closed-door session  which lasted for an hour to discuss, among others, how to move the red chamber  forward. The meeting was designed to get senators with court cases against the Senate leadership to withdraw the suits and return peace to the legislature.

At the meeting, as gathered, the mood of well over 90 percent of the senators was to suspend those ‘ erring’ members in the Senate Unity Forum, SUF, who had dragged the Senate President,  his deputy and others to court over alleged forgery of the 2015 Senate Standing Order.

A senator, who spoke to Sunday Vanguard, said the mood of the Senate was   to suspend the senators  for the upper chamber  to prove the supremacy of the legislature and teach the Presidency and the executive a lesson that the National Assembly and the Senate, in particular, be left to carry out its duties without interference.

According to the senator, the upper chamber resolved that there is no case of forgery of the Standing Order  and asked that those involved should withdraw the case from court. The source said  the move to suspend the senators was arrived at on Monday, preparatory to Tuesday’s   resumption.

The senator, who pleaded anonymity, said that, shortly after the commencement of the executive session, some senators called on their colleagues, led by Hunkuyi  and Marafa,  to sheathe their sword and withdraw the petition that led to the criminal prosecution of Saraki  and Ekweremadu.

The senator said: “Senate resolved    to suspend those who dragged the Senate President and others to court over alleged forgery of the 2015 Standing Order. The Senate moved to suspend the erring senators and resolved that there was nothing like forgery. The mood of the Senate was to suspend them    and 90 percent of the senators, both of PDP and   APC, agreed to suspend them.

The supremacy of the legislature

“ Following their refusal to adhere strictly to the report of the Senate Committee on Peace and Reconciliation, led by Senator James Manager (PDP, Delta South), there was a motion by Senator Dino Melaye that they should be suspended. Senator Manager’s report, which urged senators in court to withdraw their lawsuits for the sake of peace and unity in the Senate, had also   recommended that all factional groups in the Senate be disbanded forthwith.

Those billed for suspension, it was gathered, include Senators Abdullahi Adamu (APC, Nasarawa West); Hunkuyi; Marafa;  Abu Ibrahim (APC, Katsina South), as well as other members of Senate Unity Forum, SUF. According to the source, the executive session, chaired by Saraki, also reminded the Senate that a committee, led by former Senate President  David Mark, had been set up to “reconcile” members. Curiously, Mark stood up and said he was not informed that he chaired such a committee and that he didn’t know any of the members.   He was simply told to do his “work”.

The Tinubu/Melaye standoff

According to the source, the shouting match between Melaye and Tinubu ensued when the former called on senators to fight the Presidency to a standstill and was said to have issued threats. It was at this point that Tinubu asked Melaye why he should call for the suspension of the senators and confront the President. Tinubu was said to have warned the Senate to guard against being reduced to a kindergarten court where senators could  issue ‘ childish threats’, and called on senators to close ranks and seek reconciliation. That was when Melaye flew into a rage. “You can’t talk to me the way you talk to other people; you must respect yourself,” Melaye was said to have roared. The statement caused a commotion on the floor as senators in her support gathered to protect her.

The source further said that Senator Barnabas Gemade (APC, Benue North-East), who sensed that he would be affected if the suspension move sailed through,   stepped in to plead with his colleagues to embrace peace. He stated that senators were, however, not happy with  the Senate President who reportedly begged and called for peace, against the decision of the senators to suspend those with cases in court.

Responding to what happened at the Senate between his wife and Melaye the next day, a  former governor of Lagos State and National Leader of the All Progressives Congress, APC, Bola Tinubu, described Melaye as a disgrace to the Senate.

Tinubu, in a statement by his spokesman, Sunday Dare, warned Melaye that something would happen, if he dared to beat Oluremi.

Also condemning Melaye, senators representing Lagos State warned  Melaye to desist from harassing and intimidating Oluremi or face their wrath.

The senators, who described Melaye as lilly-livered, vowed to testify in court on the side of truth, as part of the resolution of any conflict in the upper chamber.

The Lagos senators, Olugbenga Ashafa (APC, Lagos East), and Solomon Olamilekan Adeola (APC, Lagos West), said in a statement: “We, the two senators representing Lagos East and Lagos West, having reviewed the recent happenings in the hallowed Chamber of the Senate of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, particularly at the executive session of July 12, 2016, which dwelt on the running of the Senate and now in the public domain without any denial from the affected parties, feel compelled to state as follows:  We deplore in very strong terms the use of abusive, threatening, uncouth, vulgar and un-parliamentary language by any senator against any other senator, particularly our female colleagues.”

But giving his own side to the story, on Thursday, Melaye, who noted that he was provoked by Oluremi  into a verbal altercation in the Senate’s closed-door session, said the husband  was neither God nor his political patron.

Melaye explained  that most of the reports on the Senate closed-door session were exaggerated, but  admitted using violent language after Oluremi allegedly called him a dog and a thug.

In the case of the Attorney General and Minister of Justice, he was  to appear before the Senate Committee on Judiciary, Human Rights and Legal Matters to explain  why he dragged the Senate President, his deputy  and two others to court over alleged forgery of the Senate Standing Order.

Malami and proof of evidence

Abubakar Malami (SAN) . 

Malami’s appearance on Wednesday  came barely twenty four hours after Saraki had threatened to invoke the relevant sections of the constitution to compel him to appear before the Senate Committee.

Members of the committee, during interaction, queried the AGF on why the forgery case  was instituted  just as they said that since the legislature was an independent arm of government, the action was taken in error, adding that they were prepared to know if there was no abuse of office in the entire process.

Following the emergence of Saraki as Senate President, members of the SUF had petitioned the police,  alleging  forgery of the Standing Order.  The rules were alleged to have been forged to alter the mode of electing presiding officers from hitherto open ballot system to secret ballot at the inauguration of the eight in Senate on June 9, 2015.

The alleged forgery also included the alteration of the pattern of the nomination of committee chairmanship in such a way that the new rules now permit the opposition to chair Grade A committees in contrast to the trend in the past.

A  letter of invitation, dated June 6, 2016 and signed by an Assistant Inspector-General of Police, James Caulcrick, listed the affected officers to include immediate past Senate President, Senator David Mark, his deputy and also incumbent Deputy Senate President, Dr. Ike Ekweremadu.

Also on the list were former Senate Leader, Victor Ndoma-Egba; former Clerk of the National Assembly, Salisu Maikasuwa, Chairman, Senate Committee on Rules and Business, Ita Enang and the committee clerk, Dr. Nma Ogozy and former Clerk of the Senate (now deceased).

The letter was tagged “first reminder” as it made reference to the earlier letter written by the police to the officers on July 1, 2015 with the caption: “Forgeries/Fraudulent Use of Senate Standing Order/Rules 2015 (as amended) by the Eight Senate.”

Though the police did not include Saraki on the list of invited officers, the list may have been altered to include following the sour relationship between him and the leadership of the party.

The Office of the Attorney General  later issued a statement, stressing that the trial of the principal officers was neither a witch-hunt  nor the entire National Assembly. He also turned down his invitation  by a committee set up by the Senate to grill him on the ‘motive’ of his prosecution of the case against the Senate helmsmen.

The Senate, through its Chairman, Media and Public Affairs, Abdullahi Sabi, dismissed the Federal Government’s forgery case against Saraki and  Ekweremadu, saying the trial was a   mere plot to remove the principal officers of the National Assembly, even as the Senate  warned the executive arm of government not to abuse the cooperation he is enjoying from the Senate.

Speaking to the senators, Malami, who noted that he would continue with the case   as there was no going back on the matter, said that as the law enforcement officer of the country, he had the duty to institute a criminal trial against anybody.

During the interactive session, the Minister  failed to answer questions  on  issues raised on the proof of evidence against Saraki and Ekweremadu as their names were not mentioned by witnesses in the proof of evidence that was brought against them, saying he could not comment on that as it amounts to subjudice   as the matter was in court, adding, “I am in receipt of a letter dated 21st of June, 2016, addressed to the office of the AGF. I was invited to appear before the committee based on that letter which reads ‘imminent threat to Nigeria democracy’. I have a clear obligation to do whatever should be done within the context of the constitution to sustain the democratic process.”

But  the senators insisted that the invitation of the AGF by the Committee was not about whether he had the constitutional cover to charge anybody, including the presiding officers of the Senate, to court, but they were concerned and worried about what they perceived as conflict of interest and abuse of office.

The matter tool another dimension when an Abuja High Court Judge, Justice Kolawole, described the criminal case instituted against the principal officers of the Senate and two others as “an abuse of legal process”.

According to Kolawole, the AGF was in “desperate haste” and the actions taken raise  doubts as to whether he actually acted in public interest.

Malami was alleged to be the counsel to the litigants in the case against the defendants prior to his becoming a Minister and this explains the fear  of  conflict-of-interest  on the part  of the Senate President and his deputy.

In his remarks on the invitation  of the AGF, Senate spokesperson,  Abdullahi Sabi, said, “When Senate invited the AGF to come and throw light on the forgery case, it was not to challenge his right to file, take over or discontinue any criminal case, but for him to explain the issues of conflict of interest, abuse of office, disrespect of a subsisting order of a court and violation of the principle of separation of powers which are being raised against him”.

Senator takes on SGF

On the invitation of the SGF, by the Senate to appear before its Committee on Ethics, Privileges and Public Petitions and those of Finance and Appropriations over his comments on constituency projects that they may suffer in the face of declining budget income, Lawal was quoted to have said that the N100billion constituency projects in the 2016 budget may suffer setbacks due to dwindling resources.

The resolutions of the Senate to summon the SGF were sequel to a  Point of Order raised by Senator Matthew Urhoghide, Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, Edo South, who expressed the fear  over the statement  by the SGF, even as he stressed that with selective implementation of this year’s budget, it was already doomed to fail and that as  politicians, their promises to the people will not be realized.

Urhoghide, who described  statement by the SGF  as unfortunate, especially with regard to his position in the society, said that non implementation of any part of the approved budget would amount to violation of the law because President Muhammadu Buhari had signed it into law and was an impeachable offense if not implemented.

In supporting the motion, Deputy Leader of the Senate, Senator Bala Ibn Na’ Allah, urged the Senate not to dignify statements coming from what he described as improper authority.

While Na’ Allah was speaking, there was however shouts from the chamber of Point of Order, apparently from PDP  senators, but the Senate President  was able to douse the tension and the Deputy Leader continued.

He said, “I wish to state that this Senate will be doing a lot of good to democratic process. It is precise to recognise some certain issues that are very fundamental. This senate is aware that SGF is not a finance minister, this senate is equally aware that he is not a minister of budget, this senate is equally aware that he is not spokesperson.

“What I am trying to drive home is to clearly say that why he should not have the authority for Mr President, but I think in my position I am in a position to say what was alleged by the SGF cannot be in the position of Mr President. At the same time am urging my colleagues to please not dignify comments that are coming from improper authority. “

Also contributing, Senate Deputy Minority Whip, Senator Biodun Olujimi, PDP, Ekiti South, who noted that the motion was not properly moved, warned that the SGF must be mindful that he is the highest administrative nominee of the present government and whatever comes out of his mouth, must be seen as a policy   statement.

On Thursday, the SGF appeared and senators, one after the other, expressed  reservation on his comment against the backdrop that constituency projects mean much to the people and politicians and that, failure to execute them, would amount to losing elections.

Taking on  Lawal, Chairman, Senate Committee on Appropriations, Senator Danjuma Goje, APC, Gombe Central said, “I want to let the executive know that the budget they are implementing is a law passed by the National Assembly. It is an Act of Parliament which the President willingly accepted and assented to. So, if there is need for any review following challenges in the revenue generation as they are saying, the law in the Constitution provides   for a review through the parliament. They can review upward or downward as the case may be. We are operating a democracy and therefore we must makes sure that we follow the laws in all that we do. So, if the executive feels that the constituency projects should not be there, they should ask us to review the budget and not to hear what they are now saying after the projects were captured and appropriated for in the budget”.

Personal opinion

On his part, Senator Peter Nwaoboshi, PDP, Delta North, noted that besides the President, his vice and the legislators who are elected, the SGF and others were all employees of the government.

When it was his turn to speak, Lawal said  the statement that the executive would not be able to implement constituency projects captured in the 2016 budget was his personal  opinion  and not the position of the Federal Government, just as he  disclosed that Nigeria’s projected earning  in the 2016 budget had dropped by 40 percent.

Now that the SGF has appeared and the talk about a good working relationship be established between the executive and the legislature, it is hoped that the Presidency would implement the constituency projects as contained in the 2016 budget against the backdrop that they are sited in Nigeria and not in Chad or Niger, while the projects will be on the interest of Nigerians.