Revisiting Farouk-Otedola bribery scandal

Answering this question is problematic because it takes at least two parties (giver and taker) for a corruption scandal of this nature to happen and so, why zeroing the question on one party – Lawan (the alleged taker) and excluding the second party – Mr Femi Otedola (the alleged giver)? Why should such a principal […]

Answering this question is problematic because it takes at least two parties (giver and taker) for a corruption scandal of this nature to happen and so, why zeroing the question on one party – Lawan (the alleged taker) and excluding the second party – Mr Femi Otedola (the alleged giver)? Why should such a principal character (Otedola) in the scandal be regarded as innocent by those that were quick to condemn Lawan in spite of Otedola’s strategic role in facilitating the “creation” of the scandal? Because he is seen as a “whistle blower” or of his claims of “playing along” reportedly on the advice of the security agencies? If this is the case, then Lawan should also be regarded as innocent since he had made similar claims in which he specifically argued that he collected the said $500,000 as exhibit.

I feel it is pre-mature for those who see themselves as advocates of social justice to be in the forefront of doing what is clearly the direct opposite of what is ideal by pre-empting the legal process. Lawan remains innocent until found guilty by a competent court of law. For, it is quite possible that at the end of all investigations and eventual prosecution, Otedola and not Lawan, may be the guilty one. It is therefore wise to maintain a studied silence and utter only law-compliant comments pending the conclusion of investigations, prosecution and the court’s subsequent verdict.

Also, Lawan’s suspension by the House of Representatives should not be construed as an endorsement of his guiltiness by his colleagues but rather, a mandatory decision taken to prevent Nigerians from assuming that the House is giving undue protection or cover to one of its own. It is an action done in the national interest which has identical principle or significance with the famed “doctrine of necessity” that brought on board the current Goodluck Jonathan’s presidency about 2 and half years ago.

Having distinguished himself as the House’s symbol of integrity based on the manner he had always come out clean in the series of scandals that pierced through the heart of the House beginning with Speaker Salisu Buhari’s “Toronto gate”, to “Ghana must go windfall” of Speaker Ghali Umar Na’abba’s era in the face of the then president Obasanjo’s botched “third term” attempt, to Speaker Patricia Olubunmi Etteh’s “Contract inflation scam”, to immediate past Speaker Dimeji Bankole’s “Capital expenditure logjam”, in addition to similar ones at committees’ level, Lawan’s present travail is surely a set back to his enviable legislative record but not enough though, to tarnish the powerful image he has painstakingly build in the minds of Nigerians in the last 12 years as an intelligent, astute, focus, articulate, consummate, sound, brave and excellent legislator.

Sa’ad Abubakar Zongre, Yerima Bappa Sanda Road, Turaki “A” Ward, Jalingo, [email protected].