There are arguments and counter arguments regarding the on-going trial of the senate president, Bukola Saraki and his deputy Ike Ekweremadu. To some people, it is the senate that is on trial, while to others, it is the two presiding officers of the Senate. ANDREW OOTA writes on the unfolding debate.

The seeming rift between the National Assembly, particularly the senate and the President Muhammadu Buhari led government was clearly renewed a few weeks ago, when the Attorney General for the Federation filed criminal charges against the two presiding officers of the senate over alleged forgery of the standing rules of the senate used for the inauguration of the 8th senate. On the charge sheet are the president of the Senate, Bukola Saraki, his deputy Ike Ekweremadu , the Clerk to the National Assembly, Abubakar Salisu Maikasuwa as well as his deputy, Ben Efeturi.

It is important to note that aside the criminal charges involving the two presiding officers of the senate and staff of the National Assembly, before a Federal High Court in Abuja, Senator Saraki is also facing trial over alleged false declaration of his assets before the Code of Conduct Tribunal, CCT. This two developments have thrown up a lot of arguments, for some people, the criminal charges against the two presiding officers of the senate, particularly the senate president as chairman of the National Assembly goes without saying, that indeed, the National Assembly as an institution is on trial.

For the senate, particularly members of the Like Minds, a platform on which the senator Bukola Saraki rode to the senate presidency, the charges against the two presiding officers is an attempt to muzzle the National Assembly, insisting it is a threat to democracy at large. The senate spokesman, Aliyu Sabi also accused the Attorney General of meddling into the internal affairs of the senate.

In his response, the Attorney General insisted that Saraki and Ekweremadu, have a case to answer over alleged forgery of the Senate Standing Orders, 2015. According to AGF Abubakar Malami, the argument that the charges against the two presiding officers cannot be said to be the internal business of the senate and accused the senate of weeping unnecessary sentiments .

He argued that his office is empowered under Section 174 (1) of the 1999 Constitution and vested with the power to undertake and initiate criminal proceedings in any court of law in Nigeria warning that forgery of the Senate Standing Rules cannot be described as the internal business of the National Assembly that is exclusively only in its purview, therefore he cannot, be faulted for his decision to initiate legal actions against the accused for alleged forgery after a thorough police investigation of the issue, whether there was an amendment of the Senate Standing Rules in 2015 or not.

The presidency also argued that the senate cannot claim it is on trial, rather senators Saraki and EKweremadu, who happens to be presiding officers are the ones on trial. While the arguments over whether the senate was on trial or not continued, there are some lawmakers as well as public analysts who believe that the two court cases involving the number one lawmaker for the country has constituted a huge distraction for the parliament.

There is also a school of thought that believes that glossing over alleged infractions by the two presiding officers of the senate would amount casting doubts on the sincerity of the fight against corruption promised Nigeria by the All Progressives Congress, APC this school of thought believes rather, that two presiding officers should clear their names on all charges rather the sentiment of being persecuted. It is worthy of mentioning that the on-going trial of Saraki and his deputy , may not be the real reason for the inability of the present administration to fulfil campaign promises; paucity of funds and the right model of administration seems to be the two major obstacles.

Suffice to say that The Buhari/Osinbanjo campaign had promised to create an enabling environment for graduate employment and monthly national sanitation which will protect the country's environment from pollution by restoring Nigeria’s ecosystems and invest in natural disinters solutions. They equally promised to ensure good governance and politics; they talked about a fundamental political reform in place, such that would instil transparency and accountability.

The party promised to fix insecurity and ensure conflict resolution by making territorial integrity of Nigeria through constitutionally approved methods and agencies whose responsibility is to defend the country at all times are strengthened. It was under this subhead that there was a promise to recruit at least 10,000 Police officers and also establishment of Federal Anti-Terrorism agency. According to the party, only a good economy can guarantee job creation , therefore it promised to fix the economy as quickly as possible build future and enduring education sector, strengthen the healthcare , Youths, Sports and culture sectors as well as empowerment of women to participate in politics and every sector; these were encapsulated in society and human capital developments.

The President and his team were emphatic that the education sector would take 20 per cent of the nation's annual budget to able to address the challenges it faces that leads to low output. The Buhari team equally promised to stabilize the country's currency by ensuring that the Naira equals a Dollar in value.

Its plans for job creation were founded on massive investment in the agricultural sector, where at least one million jobs will be guarantee through a farming scheme. But the most interesting was the promise the government would put in place deliberate policies that would take care of wastages, particularly cash crops. According to the party, there would be a ready buyer at minimum prices for all cash crops. President Buhari and his team also promised to immediately simplify the process of acquiring International Passports and Visas for Nigerians. What that means is that the Immigration Service would be more innovative and pragmatic to ensure that International Passport is the right of every Nigeria to acquire, therefore the process must be simple and easy, provided the requirements are met. It also means there would be a strong foreign policy and strong ties between the Nigerian Government and other nations to guarantee easy visa procurements.

The Buhari team also promised the protection of the girl child rights, gender equality and interestingly , a concerted effort in tackling child labour and the provision of monthly welfare to least families provided those families enrolled their children into schools and, are immunized. It was equally amazing that there was yet another promise of a stipends of N5, 000 monthly to the 25milliom unemployed graduates/youths.

There was also a promise to ensure freedom of speech as enshrined in the 1999 constitution as amended. More fascinating was the promise of 3 million jobs in a year to be created through same agriculture expansion, industrialisation, construction of a new rail way system, roads and ports constructions. These are some of the issues that require harmonious and collaborative efforts of the National Assembly, the presidency and the leadership of the All Progressives Congress to achieve.

This are clearly some of the challenges facing Nigeria at the moment, but most importantly is the poor condition of living of the ordinary people, who would only reap the dividends of democracy through good governance. The debate over whether or not the senate was take a step further when a constitutional lawyer and elder statesman , Professor Ben Nwabueze took a swipe of the Buhari led executive when has said it is not just the Senate President Bukola Saraki and his deputy, Ike Ekweremadu who are on trial over forgery allegations but the entire Senate.

Although the position of Professor Nwabueze runs contrary to that of the Secretary to the Government of the Federation (SGF), David Babachir Lawal who had said only Saraki and Ekweremadu were on trial. While the SGF said individuals and not the Senate are on trial, Nwabueze disagreed, saying the entire Nigerian Senate is in the dock and that other senators should come out in solidarity with their leaders.

The former minister was quoted to have said he was 'provoked to come out' from his 'retirement' and speak on the matter after reading Babachir's comments. While stressing that the prosecution of the leadership of the Senate in a court of law under the Executive amounts to use of coercive influence to interfere in the internal proceedings of the Senate, he said: "It is a flagrant breach of separation of powers caused by ignorance as can be seen in the incompetent statement by the AGF."

He said the SGF was wrong in saying that the forgery case had nothing to do with separation of powers and that he has powers to initiate proceedings in any court of law. Nwabueze argued that the Executive arm of government has contravened Section 5 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

The constitutional lawyer also cited the U.S.' Supreme Court in Humphrey v. United States (1934) thus: "The fundamental necessity of maintaining each of the three general departments of government entirely free from the control or coercive influence, direct or indirect, of either of the others, has often been stressed and is hardly open to serious question. His words, "So much is implied in the very fact of the separation of the powers of these departments by the constitution, and in the rule, which recognizes their essential co-equality. The sound application of a principle that makes one master in his own house precludes him from imposing his control in the house of another who is master there.

"The independence of each department requires that its proceedings 'shall be free from the remotest influence, direct or indirect, of either of the other two powers." Nwabueze took a swipe at the SGF for asking Saraki and Ekwermadu to resign or face trial and for insisting that the Senate as an arm of government should be separated from its principal officers in the matter.

The senior lawyer said it would be absurd for government to interfere in an internal matter affecting an independent arm of government, especially as the Senate’s Standing Rules is not particularly a public document, only senators should be interested in it.

Describing the Senate as an abstraction, a legal person without a body, the constitutional lawyer said the Senate President and his deputy as the alter ego personify the 'hallowed chamber', just as a managing director is to his or her company. He referred to the celebrated speech of Lord Haldane in Lennard's Carrying Co. v. Asiatic Petroleum Co, Ltd in 1915 in which a company which owed a ship was seeking to take advantage of the limitation of liability under section 502 of the Merchant Shipping Act 1894.

The limitation was available only where the injury is caused without the owner's "actual fault or privy." The loss was as a result of the default of Lennard, its managing director and Viscount Haldane L.C delivered the judgment of the House in which he held the company liable, by saying that "a corporation is an abstraction with no mind of its own any more than it has a body of its own; its active and directing will must consequently be sought in the person of somebody who for some purposes may be called an agent, but who is really the directing mind and will of the corporation."

It is important to note that whether the senate or the two presiding officers are on trial, would depend on ones stand point is, but what is of importance is for Saraki and his deputy to prove their innocence, whether in the process of proving their innocence, their continued stay in office would allow them focus on the tedious lawmaking procedure is what only time would determine as the trials progress.