My first job as Speaker is to protect the institution. It had become clear to me that this prolonged leadership turmoil would do irreparable harm to the institution … So, … I will resign from the speakership and resign from Congress at the end of October”.

–Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, John Boehner, at a news conference in the Capitol on September 25, 2015.

If Senate President Bukola Saraki respected his political party and the institution of the Senate, he would have either yielded, like Speaker Yakubu Dogara, to his party’s request on the election of principal officers, following his own controversial election, or resigned, like Speaker Boehner in the opening quote, in the face of the leadership crisis, which has been rocking the Senate since his election.

However, those who know Saraki well will not hesitate to point out that he is a dogged fighter, who reportedly did not hesitate to fight his sibling and even his own father in order to advance his own political ambition. Clearly, propriety is not a virtue he cherishes that much, if at all.

If Saraki’s family troubles arose from his father’s desire to also nurture his daughter for political leadership (which Saraki probably saw as a threat), the story is different with Saraki’s political travails. He could be said to have fomented his own troubles like Brother Jeroboam in Wole Soyinka’s The Trials of Brother Jero, in which Soyinka focuses on the exploits of Brother Jero, a phoney preacher, who proselytises by deceiving his followers until one of them seeks to kill him.

Jero’s exploits are used to mock the effects of the rapid spread of Christianity and the consequences of blind faith and following across Africa. The play also draws attention, through satire, to the social and political ills in Nigeria during the first decade of the country’s independence.

Here we are now, on the eve of the nation’s 55th independence anniversary, grappling with the rapid spread of democracy but still reproducing the ills of the 1960s. Corruption and deception are among the many ills, which have since metamorphosed into a cancer, especially among the political class. These two ills were so rampant during the immediate past administration of former President Goodluck Jonathan that the succeeding administration, led by President Muhammadu Buhari, is determined to fight them.

Yet, there are notable politicians even in his political party, the All Progressives Congress, who climbed to their present positions on the ladder of grand deception. As I indicated in “Will Bukola Saraki ever be Nigeria’s President?” (The PUNCH, September 1, 2015), Saraki is suspected to be such a politician.

Like Brother Jero, Saraki engages in political proselytisation by deceiving his followers about his political sainthood. He not only talks about the need to preserve democratic virtues and the rule of law, he even talks about the evil of corruption and the need to wipe it out.

Yet, he is suspected to have used his political offices to accumulate stupendous wealth, which he then spends to buy supporters. In the process of assuming office as governor in 2003 and 2007 and as senator in 2011, he allegedly lied about his assets and reportedly deceived the Code of Conduct Bureau about his true worth. He is now responding to 13 charges at the Code of Conduct Tribunal, including false and anticipatory declaration of assets; contravention of the law prohibiting public officials from operating foreign bank accounts; and fraudulent conversion of public funds for personal use.

The backgrounds to the charges against Saraki–the controversy surrounding his election as the Senate President; his initial defiant attitude to his party leadership; his initial refusal to appear at the CCT, after being summoned; and his monologue in the dock, while taking his plea–raise several important questions.

First, is Saraki a political ‘’witch”, being ‘’hunted’’ by his party leaders? To me, this is a non-question, because Saraki would not have been hunted, if he did not constitute himself into a witch (especially by his actions since he became the Senate President) and if there were no skeleton in his asset declaration forms. It is also important to realise that there is no statue of limitation on any charge that the CCT could bring against anyone. In any case, time does not run out against the state in criminal matters. Finally, it is difficult to take politics out of any matter between the Senate President and the state of which he is the number 3 citizen. Be that as it may, Saraki made a mistake insinuating witch-hunt, while taking his plea, because “witch-hunting” is no defence in a criminal court, which is why his lawyers never raised such an argument.

Second, is Saraki being selected for corruption charges? Why not? After all, the fight has to start somewhere. True, it would have been neater if there were 10, 20 or more cases thrown up by the CCB along with Saraki’s; nevertheless, the CCT can only try one case at a time. So, why not Saraki’s case first, and then others later? Our problem in this country is two-fold. One, we often fail to express outrage whenever we witness untoward behaviour. Two, we often are too quick to invoke political (often partisan), ethnic, or religious motive to explain such a behaviour. Thus, we rationalise some justification for the behaviour on these grounds, instead of discussing ways of preventing its recurrence.

Saraki’s shenanigans should be condemned, and he should be encouraged to answer the charges to which he had entered “not guilty” pleas. If he is found not guilty, as he claims, end of discussion, although his political troubles will not end there. But if he is found guilty, then he is toast, politically at least. Either way, his case should have a deterrent effect on discerning public servants.

A third important question raised by Saraki’s travails is whether or not he should resign. Two preambles are necessary before I address this question. One, it must be realised that Saraki is not only an unwanted Senate President by his party, he is also a defiant and divisive one. Add his botched attempt to probe the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission Chairman, Ibrahim Lamorde, even against the entreaty of fellow Senators, and you get the picture of a recalcitrant Senate President on the verge of derailing his own party’s anti-corruption fight.

Two, Saraki’s appearance in the dock and his interrupted monologue there made a sorry sight, unbefitting of a Senate President. He would be the first Senate President in Nigerian history to so appear while still in office. If he ever was mindful of Nigerian history in this respect or of the integrity of the institution of which he is the leader, he should have resigned before appearing in the dock on charges of corruption and deception. It is not surprising, therefore, that calls are already coming in for his resignation.

In saner democracies, politicians in Saraki’s position take the appearance of guilt very seriously, even if no charges were brought against them. That’s why, as the leader under whose watch the parliamentary expenses scandal of 2009 broke, Michael Martins, Speaker of the House of Commons in the British Parliament, not only resigned as Speaker, he also resigned as Member of Parliament. As the opening quote indicates, Speaker Boehner of the US Congress has taken a similar path in order to “protect the institution” over which he presides.

No matter how Saraki’s corruption case is decided, the seed of division planted by his controversial election will continue to grow so long as he remains the President of the Senate. He should take the path of honour and resign. It is good for the Senate. And it is good for our democracy.