By Henry Umoru & Joseph Erunke

ABUJA—ATTORNEY General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami, yesterday, vowed not to withdraw the forgery case against Senate President Bukola Saraki and his deputy, Senator Ike Ekweremadu, from the courts on the claim that it was in the public interest.

*Malami

Malami, who appeared before the Senate Committee on Judiciary, Human Rights, and Legal Matters, said the case was on the basis of a police report which predated his appointment as the chief law officer of the country. He, however, in deference to the Senate Standing Rules forbidding discussion of issues in court, drew back from discussing the merit or otherwise of the case.

The about two-hour session also saw a sharp exchange of words between pro- and anti-Saraki senators.

Malami, who noted that the amendment of the 2015 Standing Order was carried out illegally, appeared after about three weeks after the invitation was sent to him and was barely 24 hours after  Senate President Saraki threatened to invoke the relevant sections of the constitution to compel him to appear before the Senate Committee.

Answering questions from the senators, Malami noted that he had a clear obligation to do whatever should be done within the context of the constitution to sustain the democratic process.

“The issue that constitutes the basis of this invitation is a criminal case instituted against certain members of the Senate. It is an act that predates my appointment. There are series of suits. The date of interest is July 23, 2015.

“I was appointed on  November 12, 2015. That is four months after the investigation was concluded by the NPF. I have an obligation in the sustenance of democracy to institute a legal action from an investigation that had been concluded. It was based on this that I took the action.

“The action was not taken to truncate any democratic process but to protect it. There are now two pending cases in court. One is a civil case instituted by some senators. The other is a criminal case instituted by the office of the AGF. These two matters are sub- judice. When a matter is before a court of law, nobody is entitled to look into it.

“I am guided by the Senate Standing Rules 53. One of the cases was instituted by the office of the AGF. It will be wrong to make any comments on a case still in court. The two matters are pending. Based n that, I will not say more.

“The initiation of the forgery case was taken in the interest of the public and in the interest of democracy. I want to state clearly that my decision was based on public interest and the aim to prevent abuse of public offices.

“The National Assembly has the powers to regulate its own procedure. But the basis for filing my case was that the position taken was not that of the Senate. The Senate Standing Rules allegedly amended in 2015 did not follow the traditional way of amendment. It can therefore not be the position of the Senate. That is where my quarrel comes in.

“If there are certain persons that did not allow the process of amending the Senate Standing Rules go through the constitutional process, we have a responsibility to act by way of initiating a criminal proceeding against those involved. The public interest and the need to ensure that no abuse is allowed, I have to take the step to prevent that.”