The   Supreme Court judgment that gave the green light for the trial of the President of Senate, Dr. Bukola Saraki, has brought back the political tensions that trailed the inauguration of the 8th National Assembly. Saraki’s appeal was a big test for the apex court; as such it was not an easy ruling to make. Because on the face value, the appeal suggested that the appellant, Saraki, was in a hurry to avoid trial. But the critical issues he raised regarding the constitutional postulation of two members and a chairman constituting the Tribunal, is fundamental.

What the justices of the apex court did therefore was to preserve the legal process so as not to be seen to be protecting the influential members of society. Somehow, the court knows that in the fullness of time, the trial would eventually come back to it. It is this possibility that the matter could eventually return as a ripe appeal against the judgments of the courts of subordinate jurisdiction, that the Supreme Court decided to avoid making a pronouncement and rather released Saraki for the courts below to exhaust their mandate. On the flip side, the apex court knows, as every sane Nigerian does, that the matter would no doubt have implications for the fight against corruption and stability of the polity.

Saraki had in his appeal sought to quash the 13-count charge filed against him by the Code of Conduct Bureau at the Code of Conduct Tribunal. In the charge, it was alleged that Saraki tampered with the assets declaration form he filed prior to his emergence as the Senate President. The part of the alteration on which the CCB wants the senate president tried pertains to where he was said to have deliberately manipulated the assets declaration form by making anticipatory declarations. The ancillary charges border on the operation of a foreign bank account while in office as a public servant and acquiring wealth beyond his legitimate earnings. The charged received mixed responses owing to the fact that the said offences were said to have been committed more than twelve years ago when accused served as the governor of Kwara State.

That consideration was part of the reasons; the senate president directed his legal team headed by Chief J. B. Daudu (SAN), to challenge the competence of the charges. Saraki feels strongly that his prosecution did not conform to the requisition of Paragraph 15(1) to the Fifth Schedule of the 1999 Constitution, as amended. He alleged that CCT presided over by Justice Danladi Umar, was not adequately composed to try him, stressing that a two-member panel of the CCT presiding over the case against him fell short of the constitutional requirement of three. Perhaps, Saraki was being mindful of what could happen in the event of a split decision. And given the timing of his trial when he emerged as the president of Senate, Saraki seemed inclined to believe that the trial process was merely to arrive at a preconceived verdict. He therefore contended in his appeal to the Supreme Court that not being a court, the CCT was not constitutionally empanelled to handle criminal trials or equipped with the powers to dock him, based on the 13-count charge. Further, Saraki contended that the absence a substantive Attorney General of the Federation (AGF), made the filing of the charge defective and therefore incompetent.

Arguing the case in support of the Federal Government, Rotimi Jacobs (SAN), averred that the reservations expressed by Saraki in his objection are lacking in merit, insisting that a prima facie case had been actually established against the president of senate. Jacobs led the apex court justices to section 4(2)(b)of the interpretation Act, explaining that the first step to be taken by Saraki was to first of all answer to the charges and clear his name (before complaining against the processes and legitimacy of the trial). The senior advocate declared that Saraki was appropriately charged before the CCT.

All seems to be set for the much talked about trial in the Code of Conduct Tribunal because the apex court has cleared all the roadblocks. Delivering the lead judgment, Justice Walter Samuel Onoghen held that the tribunal was properly made up and has the jurisdiction to handle the trial of Saraki.

On his part, the senate president through his Special Adviser on media and publicity, Yusuph Olaniyonu; Saraki assured of his preparedness to face trail even as he expressed disappointment at the verdict. He explained that he was merely challenging the process of arraigning him before the Code of Conduct Tribunal. He said he would “like to put it on record that the facts of the substantive matter are not before the Supreme Court, since the apex court was only invited to rule on some preliminary issues in the process of commencing the trial.” While expressing appreciation to Nigerians who showed understanding and support to his quest for due process, the senate president maintained that he “will have his day in the court to prove his innocence of the charges preferred against him.”

It is during the trial that Nigerians would learn the details and material facts that propelled the CCT trial. But the possible implications appear too frightening, especially given the fact that National Assembly, which Saraki presides as chairman, had seen some sort of normalcy and stability. It may not be as much as the person of Saraki as the issue of national interest, political stability and the cause of the economic development of the country.

It is good a thing that Saraki had expressed reservations about the tricky composition of the tribunal. For instance, an earlier panel of the same Supreme Court, presided over by Justice John Fabiyi ordered the CCT to stop further trial for a moment. In the ruling of November 12, 2015, Justice Fabiyi, now retired; reasoned that the interlude was necessary to allow the apex court dispense with the matter on appeal. It would also be recalled that the senate president formulated six issues for the apex court to consider and set aside the majority verdict of the Court of Appeal as delivered by Justices Moore Adumein and Mohammed Mustapha.

In that ruling there was a dissenting decision by Justice Joseph Ekanem, who was the third member of the panel. He threw away the 13-count criminal charge before the CCT and discharged Saraki. Now the import of the split judgments at the Court of Appeal is that the framers of the 1999 constitution in their wisdom provided for an uneven number of justices on a panel to look at the three sides of every matter so as to maintain the balance of law and procedures.

Already the trial at CCT had been tainted by political motivation. Although Saraki has the opportunity to prove his innocence of the allegations that form the charges against him, no member of the class of 2003 governors had been subjected to scrutiny based on the averments on the asset declaration forms at the Code of Conduct Bureau. Mischief or malicious intent may be secondary to an issue of criminality but the question of morality and fairness must always be raised when national interest is at issue.

Most people who recall the events of June 9, 2015 in the National Assembly, especially the emergence of Saraki as the President of Senate, recall that that outcome did not please a segment of entrenched political forces in the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC). So national unity and political stability could suffer on account of political disagreements.

A section of the ruling APC have already started hinting at the possibility of Saraki’s removal, saying, “it is a done deal.” In a small message service, shortly after the apex court judgment, a chieftain of the APC confided in The Guardian, “heavy conviction that would make it impossible for him to feature in active politics awaits him.” The source noted that though Saraki had done enough to pacify his enemies, “the time is now too short for him”.

The efforts by President Muhammadu Buhari to fulfill his avowal that he belongs to all but none, has left the foci of power in the APC open to manipulation by entrenched forces. Coming at a time the president is proceeding on a five day short vacation, the apex court has decided to wash its hands off the matter, more so, when it’s ruling on some governorship election appeals have been receiving mixed, but scathing remarks from Nigerians.

Granted that the apex court would still have the opportunity to reexamine the processes, the trial of Saraki at the CCT, would set the polity on edge once more. And while some would applaud the proceedings as the sure sign of impartiality in the fight against corruption, the economy would smart for it. Investor confidence could not be bolstered by a national apprehension over political stability.

What is more, the fault lines in the National Assembly would be expanded, because just as the pro-Saraki NASS members would provide him with moral support, those against him would tend to point at the CCT trial to heat up the federal legislature. And to recall that the chairman of CCT has some issues to settle at the NASS, the coming days would prove interesting. What happens to 2016 budget? Was the budget forged or amended surreptitiously? Who is after what for the 2019 election? Saraki’s trial could open the dark secrets of the APC government or cement Nigeria’s determination to march to a new nation!