LESSONS TO LEARN FROM SARAKI'S CCT CASE AND THE EXECUTIVE'S IMMUNITY STATUS.
I have always been against the IMMUNITY from prosecution granted to the EXECUTIVES while in office.
One good lessons we should learn from Saraki's case is that, it is good and better to investigate and prosecute any political and public office holder while he or she is in office and not after he or she might have left the position.
If a sitting Senate President can be prosecuted, I don't see any reason why the President,Vice-President,Governors and their Deputies can not be prosecuted of any offense committed while in office.
I mean if any of these Executives knows that they would be jumping from one dock to another to defend charges against them while still in office, they would buckle-up and do ONLY the ideal things expected of them as SERVANTS of the PEOPLE. For instance, American President Bill Clinton was being prosecuted while in office and Heaven did not fall.
One absurd reason always given as an excuse for immunity is that governance would be retarded, if an Executive does not have immunity.
I stand to disagree with that absurd notion. No one is an island of knowledge and governance is suppose to be a team work not one centered on ONE PERSON.
If a President or Governor is being prosecuted for an offense while in office, I don't see how it can retard governance when there are government institutions with it specific responsibilities.
The advantage we stand to gain from removing Executive's immunity is far more than the disadvantage. For many of our past Executives have hid under the guise of immunity to perpetuate all kinds of atrocities only for them to use the proceed to cover and frustrate prosecution while out of office.
Lastly and in this light I call for the removal of the IMMUNITY CLAUSE from the constitution if we are to make any meaningful progress in our socio-economic life as a country.
Thank you.
God bless and prosper a united Nigeria.