Politics
Faroukgate: Another Political Legacy?
Since the beginning of the Fourth Republic in Nigeria in 1999, the country had been exposed to various events at different levels of governance that unarguably qualify to be recorded as part of its legacy. More so when these events have to do with any arm of government, none the least the legislature, which should rightly be at the driver’s seat of governance.
One of such events is the on-going $3 million bribery scandal in the fuel subsidy probe involving Hon. Farouk Lawan, Chairman of the House of Representatives Ad-hoc Committee on the probe of the fuel subsidy regime, and oil magnate, Femi Otedola, which has been christened “Faroukgate”.
As a major allegation on corruption in the National Assembly, Faroukgate has become one too many of such ignoble corruption cases seemingly being perpetrated in the First Estate of the Realm. There appears to be this persistent stench of corruption oozing from the National Assembly, particularly the House of Representatives in every given legislative year.
In fact, it is such that since the return of democratic rule in 1999, no dispensation has successfully ended without an awful event breaking out from the Green Chambers. Worst is the fact that the events are not palatable. If it does not bother on issues of certificate forgery, it is a bribery scandal or outright embezzlement of public funds which never got investigated beyond news breaks.
Beyond the thrills and frills that it affords the media which furnishes the populace of goings-on, these issues have continued to raise questions about the integrity and or maturity of those elected as lawmakers in Nigeria. Surprisingly, it started with the very first leadership of the House in the present political dispensation.
Hardly had the House been formally inaugurated in 1999 than the case of certificate forgery by the then Speaker, Alhaji Salisu Buhari erupted. The issue dragged on for some time before the Speaker was finally shoved aside. From then on, Buhari grew cold and lost his voice. To a considerable extent, it was not only his constituency that was brutally assaulted and embarrassed.
The integrity of the House and the country at large was also affected. Expectedly, there were rhetorical questions on the moral standing of the lawmaker to continue to enact laws in the “hallowed” chambers of the House. From the international perspective, Nigeria’s ability to formulate laws that could stand the test of time was also in question.
Shortly afterwards in 2007, the House boiled again. This time the protagonist was Mrs. Patricia Olubumi Etteh, the first female Nigerian Speaker of the House of Representatives. Despite making history as Nigeria’s first female speaker, Etteh, was hounded out of office over sundry allegations levelled against her and some principal officers of the House.
In September 2007, she faced a Committee of the House over accusations that she had authorised the spending of N628 million on renovations of her official residence and that of her deputy, as well as the purchase of 12 official cars. A vociferous campaign by the Integrity Group in the house eventually pushed her out of office.
Like, Buhari, the two personalities went so cold that throughout the life of that Assembly, much was not heard from them in terms of contributing to debates in the House. It was not until the twilight of that administration that Etteh briefly made headlines. She was purportedly cleared of the albatross on her neck, though this did not stamp any appreciable impact.
Alhajis Oladimeji Bankole and Usman Bayero Nafada took over as Speaker and Deputy Speaker respectively, but another corruption saga soon played out. A member of the House, Dino Melaye accused Bankole of siphoning the funds of the House. To the chagrin of all, the allegation generated so much dust that there were exchanges of physical blows in the House amongst the members.
The end of that tenure saw Bankole and Nafada behind bars as they were arrested by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC, and prosecuted later. Though Bankole and Nafada issue appeared controversial in the face of the ensued discrepancy between the EFCC and the court over their discharge and acquittal, most Nigerians still think that the duo will have to do more to erase the feelings of guilt and shame from the subconscious.
Similarly, Nigerians are yet to forget the circle of bribery scandal that rocked the House of Representatives in 2009 when the House set up a Committee to probe the nation’s Power sector. The Committee, headed by Ndudi Godwin Elumelu returned a damning verdict that about $16 billion spent on the sector by the Federal Government actually went down the drain.
The committee thus called for a cleansing of the sector. The Report was about to be debated when Elumelu was caught in the web of a N6 billion supplementary budget padding scam. Elumelu and Senator Nicholas Ugba, Chairman of the Senate Committee on Power were eventually dragged to court after a brief detention by the EFCC.
Again, the public odium that emanated from the scandal virtually sealed the lips of Elumelu, who currently appears not to be in haste to discuss public issues. Not long ago, another member of the House of Representatives, Herman Hembe, set out in their usual over-sight function to investigate the “death” of stock exchange.
Surprisingly, a well intended and fact-finding probe ended up boomeranging on the lawmaker who was accused of being part of the rot in the system for allegedly demanding a bribe of N5 million from Otteh who was initially suspended but was last week reinstated as the Director-General of the Security Exchange Commission, SEC, though this did not go down well with majority of staff of SEC.
Hembe’s scandal had hardly died down when in the first week of June, 2012 what seemed to be the mother of all bribery scandals in the National Assembly hit the House. To a large extent, it turned out to buttress former President Olusegun Obasanjo’s accusation a week earlier that the country’s legislative arm is run by rogues who lacked integrity.
“Integrity is necessary for systems and institutions to be strong”, Obasanjo said, noting that “today rogues and armed robbers are in the State House of Assembly and National Assembly. What sort of laws would they make? The Judiciary is also corrupt. During my tenure (as President) many of the corrupt Judges were removed, some are still there”.
The news that the latest bribery scam involves Mr. Farouk Lawan, who is otherwise called “Mr. Integrity”, was one development that was extremely difficult for many people to comprehend.
Lawan , the moving spirit behind the Integrity Group that got Partricia Etteh out of office as Speaker, the smallish but intellectually sturdy man whose tiny voice smacks innocence and honesty, and who displays an admirable grasp of any issue he speaks on, was allegedly discovered to be the supreme “tax collector” in the Foroukgate scandal.
The fact that Lawan had been in the House of Representatives since the beginning of the present democratic dispensation in 1999, representing Bagwai/Shanono Federal Constituency of Kano State and had been a major factor in virtually all clean-up activities in the House intended to make it free of corruption, made it more difficult to believe.
The better part of his legislative duties had seen him heading many committees, including Finance, Education, Appropriation and subsidy probes. Some say these were compensatory measures to the roles he played in the installation of any given Speaker since the time of Bello Masari.
He is widely believed to be tipped as the next governor of Kano State come 2015. Beyond this, Lawan is also seen as the best northern candidate to vie for the Presidency in 2015.
At the heart of the present faroukgate imbroglio is Zenon Petroleum and Gas Limited which was accused of collecting foreign exchange from the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), but not importing any fuel. Nigerians were happy that Lawan was bold to name most dubious characters in the system that was milking the oil sector of the economy dry.
In a matter of hours, Femi Otedola, one of the oil magnates and owner of Zenon decided to let the lid open over what transpired between him and Lawan’s committee. According to him, initially, his company was amongst those black-listed to have illicitly dealt with the NNPC. But within a split of seconds, the company’s name got deleted from “the Black Book” and was cleared of all allegations by the Probes Panel. It was later to be known that a bribe of 3 million USD did the magic. The allegations and counter allegations that followed are now part of history, but like historians say, “not to learn from one’s past is to remain forever a child”.
Speaking recently on the matter, the former National Chairman of the All Nigeria Progressive Grand Alliance (APGA), Chief Chekwas Okorie, “definitely, the integrity of the National Assembly has been very seriously dented, although it is more pronounced in the House of Representatives than the Senate. The Farouk (Lawan) scandal is one scandal too many. I, therefore, suggest that more serious attention be paid on that House and its members in fighting against corruption”.
In the words of Aristotle, the great Greek philosopher, “we are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, therefore, is not an act but a habit”.
The state chairman of the party, Dr Babandi Gumel, disclosed this in a statement signed and made available to journalists on Saturday.
According to the statement, the Jigawa PDP received news of Alhaji Lamido’s suspension with “profound shock and disappointment”.
The statement added that the suspension, which was reportedly based on allegations that Alhaji Lamido attended meetings capable of undermining party unity, amounts to an affront to justice, internal democracy and the reconciliation efforts recently championed by the PDP leadership.
The party stressed that the exercise of legal and constitutional rights within the party should not be interpreted as an act of disunity. It recalled that Alhaji Lamido approached the court after he was allegedly denied the opportunity to purchase a nomination form to contest the position of National Chairman of the PDP.
The statement further noted that the Federal High Court in Abuja, presided over by Justice Peter Lifu, ruled in Alhaji Lamido’s favour by restraining the PDP from proceeding with its national convention until his right to contest was determined.
The Jigawa PDP argued that the suspension appeared to be a punitive action against Alhaji Lamido for seeking judicial redress over an issue on which the court had already found merit.
The party also faulted the decision of the BoT for contradicting recent public statements by its chairman, Senator Adolphus Wabara, who had emphasised reconciliation within the party, admitted past mistakes and appealed to aggrieved members to return fully to the PDP fold.
However, it maintained that suspending a founding member who sought justice through legal means runs contrary to the spirit of reconciliation and healing publicly advocated by the party leadership.
The chairman said the suspension was premature and prejudicial, as the matter remains before the courts. He also described Alhaji Lamido as one of the few founding fathers of the PDP who has remained loyal to the party without defecting, warning that punishing such loyalty sends a negative signal to other committed members.
The party further argued that the action undermines party unity at a time when the PDP requires cohesion to effectively challenge the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC). It also insisted that there is no provision in the PDP constitution that allows for the suspension of a “life member”.
The party called on the BoT to immediately and unconditionally withdraw the suspension of Alhaji Lamido.
It also demanded that the BoT publicly affirm the right of all party members to aspire to leadership positions in line with the party’s constitution and the laws of the country, without fear of victimisation.
It further urged the BoT to retrace its steps, align its actions with its reconciliation agenda, and tender an apology to Alhaji Lamido.
The Jigawa PDP reaffirmed its commitment to a united, democratic and law-abiding Party.
In a statement signed by its Executive Director, Comrade Auwal Musa Rafsanjani, CISLAC warned that if proven, such actions would amount to a serious breach of constitutional order, legislative integrity, and public trust.
The organisation noted that Nigeria’s law-making process is clearly defined by the Constitution, stressing that any alteration of a bill after parliamentary passage undermines democratic governance and the principle of separation of powers.
CISLAC further emphasised that taxation has direct implications for citizens, businesses, sub-national governments, and the overall economy. It stated that uncertainty or a lack of transparency in tax legislation could erode investor confidence and raise concerns about accountability and the possible abuse of executive power.
The organisation described the situation as particularly troubling given the rare inclusive, and thorough public consultation that shaped the law’s final provisions prior to its passage.
“This process brought together taxpayers, civil society groups, professional organisations, the private sector, labour unions, local governments, and technical experts, ensuring that diverse viewpoints were considered and carefully balanced.
“Any unilateral changes to these agreed-upon provisions, made outside the established legislative process and without renewed public engagement, not only breach public trust but also violate the fundamental tax principle of representation, which holds that citizens must have a meaningful voice in shaping the laws that govern how they are taxed. Such actions undermine democratic accountability, weaken the legitimacy of the tax system, and risk eroding public confidence”, it noted.
CISLAC expressed particular concern that uncertainty surrounding the authenticity of the tax law, coming at a time when a new tax regime is expected to take effect, could exacerbate the economic hardship already faced by many Nigerians.
It observed that citizens are contending with rising living costs, inflationary pressures, declining purchasing power, and reduced access to basic services, warning that implementing a disputed tax framework under such conditions, risks deepening inequality, discouraging compliance, and fuelling public resentment.
The organisation stressed that tax reforms must be anchored in clarity, legality, fairness, and social sensitivity, cautioning that any tax system introduced without full transparency, adequate public communication, and legislative certainty undermines voluntary compliance and weakens the social contract between the state and its citizens.
As part of its recommendations, CISLAC called on the Presidency to urgently publish the exact version of the tax law assented to, alongside the authenticated copy passed by the National Assembly, to allow for public and institutional verification.
It also urged the leadership of the National Assembly to promptly exercise its oversight powers to determine whether the assented law reflects the will of the legislature, including a review of the enrolled bill process.
The organisation maintained that any discrepancy discovered should be treated as unconstitutional and addressed through lawful means, such as the re-transmission of the correct bill or judicial interpretation where necessary. It further called for an independent review of the process by relevant institutions, including the Office of the Attorney-General of the Federation and, where required, the judiciary, to establish the facts and assign responsibility.
CISLAC noted that the controversy highlights the urgent need to strengthen safeguards at the legislative and executive interface. It recommended measures such as digital tracking of bills, public access to enrolled legislation, and more transparent assent procedures.
CISLAC emphasised that the issue is not about partisan politics but about safeguarding the integrity of Nigeria’s democratic institutions. It warned that allowing any arm of government to unilaterally alter laws passed by another sets a dangerous precedent and weakens constitutional democracy.
The organisation urged all parties involved to act with restraint, openness, and fidelity to the Constitution, noting that Nigerians deserve laws that reflect due process, the public interest, and the collective decisions of their elected representatives.
CISLAC added that it will continue to monitor developments and engage relevant stakeholders to promote accountability, transparency, and the rule of law in Nigeria’s governance processes.
