Saraki’s toxic influence on Nigerian politics

A newspaper asked me in 2016 how I thought the standoff between Senator Bukola Saraki and the All Progressives Congress (APC) would end. I replied that both were playing “cat and mouse” game but that “Saraki will, in the end, return to the People Democratic Party (PDP)”. His defection to the PDP two weeks ago, therefore, came as no surprise. Although he said it was “not a decision that I have made lightly”, in truth, it was three years in the making. In every practical sense, Saraki left the APC three years ago, when, in 2015, he put his personal ambitions above party discipline and set himself up against his supposed party and the government that it leads by forming an independent powerbase in the Senate!
But, even worse, these past three years have been characterised by Saraki’s desecration of the office of Senate President, which he captured through political chicanery, and by his arrogant and self-interested ego fights that have undermined effective governance, the culmination of which is his refusal to resign as Senate President following his defection to the PDP even though he secured the position in the first place in the name of APC. His refusal to resign is a recipe for legislative anarchy and unstable government. Saraki is, indeed, a toxic influence on Nigerian politics!
To be clear, this is not a piece in defence of the APC or the Buhari government. Regular readers of this column know my views about both, and there will be plenty of opportunities ahead of next year’s elections to discuss the APC and the shambolic government it leads. But my interests here are principled and institutional, focusing on party discipline, the sanctity of state institutions and political culture. And on each of these, Saraki, in my view, represents a phenomenon that can’t serve Nigeria well, and thus must be rejected.
Let’s start with party discipline. It is the ability of a party to control its members in the legislature and get them to support the party line. This is important for all systems of government that allow parties to hold political power. When a party forms a government with a majority in the legislature, it is entitled to expect its legislators to support its policies. This does not detract from the separation of power and checks and balances. The separation of power is about legislative scrutiny and executive constraints, that is, holding the executive to account and reining in its excesses. But that does not allow legislators to put their self-interest and personal ambitions above the cohesion of their party and its government and undermine party discipline.
But that was what Saraki did when he defied the APC on its choice for the Senate President, and captured the position for himself in a treacherous, cloak-and-dagger way. Unable to secure the support of his party’s senators, he colluded with the PDP senators and the Clerk of the Senate to hold an election while virtually all APC senators, including his main rivals for the position, had allegedly been tricked away from the chamber. He won “unopposed” with the votes of PDP senators and just 8 out of the 60 APC senators. As part of the shenanigan, the position of the deputy Senate President, which rightly belonged to the APC went to the PDP. The Clerk described Saraki’s “election” as “divine”. Saraki himself attributed it to “fate and destiny”, an attempt to use God to justify an act of political brigandage and impunity.
Truth is, no serious party anywhere in the world would condone such a brazen anti-party activity. In the US, whose system of government Nigeria follows, merely voting for an opposition candidate against party line would attract a serious punishment. For instance, in 2000, one Democratic Congressman voted for a Republican; he was stripped of his seniority and lost all his Committee posts. In the UK, an MP that rebels against his party, other than in matters of conscience on which the party allows a free vote, but in a three-line whip would face serious consequences, which include at the very least not rising to a ministerial level. Breaches of party discipline undermine democracy and good governance, and I can’t think of any serious democracy where Saraki’s behaviour, driven by personal ambitions, would be tolerated. He would have been expelled from any party in Europe or the US.
Of course, Saraki is not the first Nigerian legislator to breach party discipline; Aminu Tambuwal and Yakubu Dogara defied their parties in becoming Speaker of the House of Representatives in 2011 and 2015 respectively. What makes Saraki’s case particularly reprehensible were the mystery, intrigue and seeming espionage that characterised the process of his “election”, which threatened to undermine the integrity of the Senate.
Which brings me to the sanctity of state institutions. Let’s face it, the integrity of the Senate has been repeatedly undermined under Saraki’s presidency. No previous Senate President was so beleaguered, with such serious character issues as Saraki. He, indeed, scored many “firsts”! He was the first Senate President in Nigeria to have an arrest warrant issued against him, and actually put in a dock, on an 18-count charge of false declaration of assets and corruption; the first Senate President to be named in relation to undisclosed assets in safe havens; and the first Senate President to be linked to an armed robbery case.
Of course, to be clear, Saraki has not been found guilty of any criminality. In fact, the Supreme Court recently found no evidence against him on the assets declaration case, and hardly any Nigerian truly believes that he sent people to rob a bank, although any relationship with the suspects, even as his political thugs, would be damaging. Now, my point is that all these allegations, proven or not, politically-motivated or not, have done enormous damage to the Office of the Senate President, and that, to preserve the integrity of that institution, Saraki should long have resigned.
That precisely is what would have happened in more civilised societies. For instance, a deputy Speaker of the House of Commons was accused of a sexual offence. He resigned while an investigation was launched even though he was later cleared of the allegation. In 2016, the then Speaker of the US House of Representatives, Joe Boehner, resigned his position not because of any allegation but because he felt his leadership had become divisive. This is what he said: “When you are the Speaker of the House, your Number 1 responsibility is to the institution”, adding that he acted to “protect the institution of Congress”. Sadly, Saraki has done nothing to protect the institution of the Senate or that of the office of Senate President that he occupies.
But why? The truth is that Saraki is a politician driven by a megalomaniacal ambition, borne out of a gilded background, unbridled self-confidence and a ferocious sense of entitlement. His political life has been defined by privilege, riding on the coattail of a famous father. He joined daddy’s business immediately after leaving university. Ten years later, President Obasanjo made him an adviser on daddy’s recognition. Three years later, he became governor in daddy’s fiefdom, Kwara state, on daddy’s say-so. After 8 years in office, he became a senator just for the asking. His ambition was to become Senate President and use it as a launch pad to run for President of the country.
But getting to the Senate in 2011, Saraki discovered that Nigeria is not Kwara state, where everything was at his beck and call. His first term in the Senate was largely lacklustre. President Jonathan had no truck with him, and, indeed, marginalised him. Saraki would never have become Senate President under the PDP. He joined APC with that singular ambition. But the APC leadership would not have him as Senate President. In desperation to achieve that personal ambition, he secured the position through treacherous means, throwing his supposed party into crisis and undermining its government, with the ensuing executive-legislature gridlock.
If all this has been blunt, unusually blunt for this column, it’s because it needs to be. Like the Americans and the British, Nigerians must develop a subversive strain against leadership by the entitled. Nigeria needs a critical mass of well-informed citizens, media, civil society etc to speak truth to power and challenge politicians on core values and norms. And, for me, Saraki’s toxification of politics must be challenged.

Olu Fasan