The Attorney General of the Federation
and Minister of Justice, Mr. Abubakar Malami, on Wednesday, justified
the decision of his office to institute a legal action against the
presiding officers of the Senate over the alleged forgery of the Senate
Standing Order 2015.
Malami, who honoured the invitation of
the Senate after three weeks the Upper Chamber passed a resolution to
summon him over the matter, also told the senators that his office was
convinced that the suit should be prosecuted in the interest of public.
The AGF, who reminded the federal
lawmakers that making specific comments on the issue could be subjudice,
however, clarified that his initial involvement as a counsel in one of
the three suits instituted on the forgery saga, did not constitute any
conflict of interest.
He maintained that the action of his
office was informed by the police report attached to the suits which
bordered on criminality, adding that the provisions of Section 60 of the
constitution empowered him to file the criminal charges against the
presiding officers.
Malami refused to answer queries by
members of the Senate Committee on Judiciary, Human Rights and Legal
Matters, on why he was prosecuting the Senate President, Bukola Saraki,
and his deputy, Ike Ekweremadu, despite the fact that their names were
not allegedly mentioned in the police report.
Malami noted that the matter was a case
of conspiracy and forgery but that asking him to justify the reasons for
involving the two presiding officers would be subjudice because the
proof of evidence was already before the court.
Quoting from both the 1999 Constitution
and the Senate rule book, the AGF said, “the proof of evidence is before
the court. I am a party in the suit being the prosecutor. I can’t
comment on the question you asked because doing so would be subjudice.”
He said, “I was invited to appear
before the committee based on a 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.
“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 a
series of suits.
“I was appointed on the 12th of
November, 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 has
been concluded. It was based on this that I took the action.
“The action was not taken to truncate
any democratic process, but was taken to protect democracy. 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.
“The initiation behind 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 is 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.
No comments:
Post a Comment