The Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) and Minister of Justice, Mr. Abubakar Malami (SAN), yesterday told the Senate that he has the constitutional powers to investigate any case and prosecute anybody, accused of breaching the law of the land.

While appearing before the Senate Committee on Judiciary, Human Rights and Legal Matters, Malami asserted that as the nation’s number one law enforcement officer, the criminal proceeding he instituted against the President of the Senate, Bukola Saraki, and his deputy, Ike Ekweremadu, was in public interest. He further told the committee that the suit was based on already investigated case, which was carried out by the Police before his appointment as the AGF.

His words: “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 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. It can, therefore, not be the position of the Senate.

That is where my quarrel comes in. “If there are certain persons that did not allow the process of amending the Senate Standing Rules go through the constitutional process, we have a responsibility to act by way of initiating a criminal proceeding against those involved.

The public interest and the need to ensure that no abuse is allowed, I have to take the step to prevent that.” The Senate had, three weeks ago, passed a resolution, summoning Malami to appear before its committee, to give reasons for the forgery case filed against its two presiding officers, Saraki and Ekweremadu.

The AGF appeared before the committee barely 24 hours after Saraki threatened to invoke sections 88 and 89 of the constitution to compel him to appear. Responding to questions from the senators, Malami said that since the matter was already pending in court, it would amount to sub judice for anybody from any arm of government to make comments on it, stating that he would not go further to speak on the matter.

The AGF also told the lawmakers that by the provisions of Section 60 of the constitution, the bureaucracy of the National Assembly has nothing to do with the regulation of the Senate procedure as senators claimed that the allegedly forged Senate Standing Rule 2015 was produced by the bureaucracy.

Members of the committee had queried the AGF on why the forgery case was instituted against Saraki and Ekweremadu since the legislature is an independent arm of government, arguing that the action was taken in error. In his response, the AGF, who was kept waiting for over an hour by the committee members, said he has a clear obligation to do whatever should be done within the context of the constitution in order to sustain the democratic process.

Malami noted: “I am in receipt of a letter dated 21st of June, 2016, addressed to the office of the AGF. I was invited to appear before the committee based on that 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 series of suits. The date of interest is 23rd of July 2015. “I was appointed on the 12th of November, 2015.

That is four months after the investigation was concluded by the Nigeria Police Force. 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 the democracy. There are now two pending cases in court. One a civil case instituted by some senators. The other is a criminal case instituted by the office of the AGF. These two matters are sub judice.

When a matter is before a court of law, nobody is entitled to look into it. “I am guided by the Senate Standing Rules 53. One of the cases was instituted by the office of the AGF. It will be wrong to make any comments on a case still in court.

The two matters are pending. Based on that, I will not say more. “To my mind, the issue had been overtaken by events. I have a tradition of honouring social invitations, much less of an institution like the Senate. I know what they stand for.

My inability to come was not out of arrogance or anything. I was out of the country when the invitations were sent.” The committee is expected to report back to the Senate today for further deliberation and resolution on the matter.