By Femi Macaulay

When will Mubarak Bala be freed from unlawful detention?  He is accused of blasphemy and has been detained for more than a year, since April 2020, without any formal charge.   Bala, president of the Humanist Association of Nigeria, who will be 37 in July, was arrested at his residence in Kaduna State and taken to Kano State after allegedly posting comments critical of Islam and religion on Facebook. His comments had attracted accusations of blasphemy and threats.

In a petition to the police, a group of lawyers accused him of posting things on Facebook that are “provocative and annoying to Muslims.” A lawyer fighting for his release was quoted as saying the police had detained him on “a holding charge” usually employed to cage detainees without presenting formal charges against them.

After he had spent about eight months in detention, in December 2020 the High Court in Abuja ruled that his detention violated his rights to personal freedom, fair hearing, freedom of thought and expression. The judge declared his detention illegal and ordered his immediate release following a “fundamental rights” petition describing how he had been detained without charge for more than seven months, and denied access to lawyers for five months. The court awarded him N250, 000 in damages. President of Humanists International Andrew Copson described the court ruling as “a victory for the human rights of all citizens in Nigeria.”  Six months after, Bala is still in detention.

It is unjustifiable that the authorities disregarded the court ruling. By disobeying the court, the authorities ironically demonstrated contempt for the rule of law. The campaign for Bala’s release from unlawful detention has been ignored by the authorities, which suggests undemocratic governance.

This is a case of abuse of power that has attracted the attention of international observers.  Notably, a group of seven UN human rights experts issued a statement in April, after Bala had been detained for a year, condemning the “flagrant violation” of his “fundamental human rights.”  They also drew attention to their efforts to get him released.

Read Also: Sugar daddies, side chicks trend amid Super TV boss murder controversy

They said: “Today marks one year since Mr Bala was arrested and detained in Kano state, without any formal charges, on allegations of blasphemy. His arbitrary detention has continued despite our appeals to the government in May and July last year…The government must take action to ensure that the responsible authorities respect the due process and enforce the judicial ruling.” Two months after, Bala remains in detention. His wife, Amina, has described her “psychological and emotional trauma” as “unbearable.”  They have a toddler.

Right-thinking Nigerians don’t expect him to still be in detention more than a year after his arrest without any formal charge. It is noteworthy that Nobelist Wole Soyinka, a globally respected defender of fundamental freedoms, lent his voice to the campaign for Bala’s release. In a letter of solidarity marking his 100th day in detention, published by Humanists International, Soyinka said: “You are not alone; there is a whole community across the globe that stands beside you and will fight for you. We will not rest until you are free and safe.”

The literature laureate added:  “You have lived. You have stood against the tide of religious imperialism. You have fought for all Humanity, to ensure a better, fairer, world for all. You have not sought to appease those that treasure scrolls. You have not bowed to pressure to revere their unseen deities.”

The crux of the matter is Bala’s self-declared atheism. According to the International Humanist and Ethical Union (IHEU), which is also campaigning for his release, “The real reason for this outrageous and inhumane action is because Mubarak has renounced Islam and has openly declared himself to be an atheist.” A Kano State indigene from a Muslim family, his family members believed he was mentally ill and put him in a psychiatric hospital in 2014 after he renounced Islam and embraced atheism.

He is a vocal atheist, and his rejection of religion is offensive to many people in the country’s Muslim-dominated northern region. The Facebook post that led to his arrest and detention reportedly read, “Fact is, you have no life after this one. You have been dead before, long before you were born, billions of years of death.”  This view contradicts religious belief in an afterlife.

Campaigners for Bala’s freedom regard him as a Freedom of Religion or Belief (FoRB) Victim. According to the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF), “Advocates believe he may be charged with blasphemy under Section 210 of the Penal Code of Kano State, and/or with violating Section 26(1) (c) of the Cyber-crimes Act, which criminalizes insult of any persons due to their belonging to a group distinguished by their religion, among other characteristics. A blasphemy conviction under Kano’s Shari’a court could lead to a death sentence, and if found guilty of violating the Cybercrimes Act he could face a fine and up to five years in prison.”

The allegation of blasphemy against the humanist illustrates the clash between Islamic law, also known as Sharia, and secular law; and shows why the supremacy of the country’s secular constitution should be emphasised. There are fundamental issues about the operation of Sharia in a multi-religious but secular country such as Nigeria where the Islamic system of justice operates in 12 Muslim-majority states in the northern part of the country alongside a secular justice system. Sharia has been controversial since its introduction in 1999.

There is no question that Bala’s arrest and detention violate some of his fundamental rights under the country’s constitution.  The fundamental human rights listed in the Nigerian constitution are: the Right to Life, the Right to Dignity of Human Person, the Right to Personal Liberty, the Right to Fair Hearing, the Right to Private and Family Life, the Right to Freedom of Thought, Conscience and Religion, the Right to Freedom of Expression and the Press, the Rights to Peaceful Assembly and Association, the Right to Freedom of Movement, the Right to Freedom from Discrimination, and the Right to Acquire and Own Immovable Property anywhere in Nigeria.

Importantly, the constitution allows the restriction, suspension or limitation of the fundamental human rights of persons in Nigeria only where there is an order of court or a state of emergency or a democratic law that allows such suspension or restriction of fundamental human rights.

Bala’s unlawful detention is condemnable. Being an unbeliever shouldn’t make him open to abuse of power based on the religious beliefs of those in power. He should be uncaged immediately and unconditionally.

By Femi Macaulay

There is no question that Delta State lost development opportunities as a result of looting by former governor James Ibori.  Accused of stealing a staggering US$250 million from the public purse, Ibori, who was governor from 1999 to 2007, pleaded guilty to money laundering and conspiracy to defraud at Southwark Crown Court, London, in February 2012.

He was sentenced to 13 years in prison in April 2012. His possessions that were confiscated included a £2.2m house in Hampstead, north London; a property in Shaftesbury, Dorset, which cost £311,000; a £3.2m mansion in Sandton, near Johannesburg, South Africa; an armoured Range Rovers valued at £600,000; a £120,000 Bentley Continental GT and a Mercedes-Benz Maybach 62 bought for €407,000.

It is noteworthy that Sue Patten, head of the Crown Prosecution Service central fraud group, said Ibori had acquired his riches “at the expense of some of the poorest people in the world.” Ibori was released from jail in December 2016 after serving four years. He came back to Nigeria in February 2017.

When the British Government returned £4.2 million Ibori-linked loot, recovered from his family members and associates, to the Federal Government in May, it generated an intense controversy on the ownership of the money, with Delta State claiming the money belonged to the state and not the Federal Government.

Delta State Governor Ifeanyi Okowa’s Chief Press Secretary, Olisa Ifejika, recently said “it has been established that the money belongs to us,” adding, “our Attorney-General and Commissioner for Justice has written another letter to the Attorney-General of the Federation requesting that the money be spent on projects in Delta State.”

According to him, “If the Federal Government does not want to release the cash, they can deploy it on their own (federal) projects which they have abandoned in our state and on the completion of ongoing state projects.

“We have identified for them the Asaba-Illah-Ibiaja Highway; the deplorable Benin-Warri section of the East-West Road and the Agbor-Abraka-Sapele Highway.

“The ongoing state projects are the dualisation of the Ughelli-Asaba Expressway; the Warri/Effurun Erosion Control and Warri/Uwvie Storm Water Control Erosion Road.”

The Delta State government’s proposal on the six federal and state projects that could be completed with the returned money reflects its value. It’s a lot of money in the local currency. Importantly, it also showed that the people are the losers when governors loot public funds. Imagine the development projects Ibori could have done with the money if he had not stolen it for his own personal purposes. His assets in the UK were valued at about £17 million ($35 million) in 2007.

The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) had initially arrested him in December 2007, and charged him with theft of public funds, abuse of office and money laundering. A Federal High Court in Asaba, Delta State discharged and acquitted him of all corruption-related charges in December 2009.

In April 2010, the anti-corruption agency reopened Ibori’s case, and made a fresh allegation that he had embezzled N40 billion. He fled Nigeria. The EFCC sought the assistance of Interpol to arrest him. In May 2010, he was arrested in Dubai, United Arab Emirates, and eventually tried and convicted in the UK. It was ironic that he got punished in a foreign land for corruption-related crimes he committed in Nigeria.

Significantly, the Benin Division of the Court of Appeal, in May 2014, overturned the verdict of the Federal High Court in Asaba that had acquitted him, and ruled that he had a case to answer.  He was in jail in the UK when this happened. This meant that he could face further trial in Nigeria. But that has not happened since he returned to the country after his release from prison in the UK.

How many ex-governors since democracy was restored in 1999 can pass the unexplained wealth test? EFCC Chairman Abdulrasheed Bawa has said that “all the known politically exposed cases in courts are vigorously and intelligently going to be sustained.” According to him, “The cases of former Governors Ibrahim Shema, Adebayo Alao-Akala, Ikedi Ohakim, Muazu Babangida Aliyu and former Chief of Air Staff Air Marshal Adesola Amosu are going on. Orji Uzor Kalu, we are going to prosecute him again after 12 years.”

Kalu’s case is striking. In December 2019, the former Abia State governor was convicted and sentenced to 12 years in prison for N7.65 billion fraud and money laundering after a 12-year trial. In May 2020, the Supreme Court nullified his trial and conviction, and ordered a retrial. The apex court ruled that Justice Mohammed Idris’ return to the Federal High Court from the Court of Appeal to conclude Kalu’s trial was unconstitutional.

At the time, Kalu had spent only five months in prison. “The past five months have been quite a profound period for me. As challenging as that period has been, it has provided me an opportunity to learn invaluable lessons about our country, our peoples, our justice system…, he said. Kalu, who was governor from 1999 to 2007, has returned to the Senate where he is Chief Whip and senator representing Abia North District.

The EFCC described the Supreme Court ruling as “quite unfortunate” and “a technical ambush against the trial of the former governor.” The agency said its evidence against him was “overwhelming.”

Indeed, the lessons to be learnt from Kalu’s case may well be how the country and its justice system encourage corruption among people in power by a half-hearted fight against corruption.

EFCC boss Bawa explained that the agency “has the power to cause investigation to be conducted into the properties of any person that appears to the commission that the person’s lifestyle and the extent of the properties are not justified by his source of income.

“This means without any complaint, if it comes to our knowledge that you have amassed so many properties that are not justified by your source of income, the EFCC can ask questions.”

How effectively has the EFCC used its power to demand explanation concerning unexplained wealth?  How many ex-governors since democracy was restored in 1999, for instance, have been investigated by the agency for unexplained wealth?

The recovered and returned Ibori loot should energise the country’s fight against corruption. There should be no room for gubernatorial looting because the people are always the losers when governors are looters.

By  Femi Macaulay

 

Herbert Macaulay (popularly known as HM) is unforgettable. He is deservedly remembered in various ways that celebrate his historical significance.  The acclaimed nationalist, widely acknowledged as the ‘Father of Nigerian Nationalism,’ died 75 years ago, on May 7, 1946, at the age of 81.

He has been honoured again and again for his services to Nigeria. After the country’s independence from Britain in 1960, HM’s face appeared on Nigeria’s postage stamp, with the inscription “Championed Independence.”  The Nigerian Shipping Calendar for 1972 showed the picture of a ship called The Herbert Macaulay.

The N1 note issued in July 1979 by the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) to mark its 20th anniversary bore HM’s portrait. The banknote was replaced with a coin that also showed him.  When the N1 note was released, Macaulay was at first wrongly spelt as “Macauley.” The Macaulay family pointed out this embarrassing error.

The then CBN Director Domestic Operations, A.B.A. Obilana, in a letter to the family dated July 11, 1979, said: “We have noted your observations concerning the correct spelling of the surname “Macaulay.” We shall get in touch with our printers to see what can be done to ensure that the correct spelling of the name is used in subsequent issues of the N1 note. It has been a pleasure to us that the Central Bank could accord this honour to your ancestor and the country’s foremost nationalist.” Sadly, the currency is no longer in circulation, which defeats the purpose of its introduction.

HM’s statue stands at Herbert Macaulay Street, Yaba, Lagos. The Herbert Macaulay Senior Girls High School, named after him, is located a short distance from the statue. Another statue of HM stands in front of the Bookshop House, Broad Street, Lagos. The site of his residence, which was known as Kirsten Hall, is nearby.

”It was an impressive and elegant one-storey detached building which has, regrettably, since been demolished, giving way to what now looks like a grotesque Post Office junk yard,” said Ambassador Dapo  Fafowora, who delivered  the maiden Herbert Macaulay Gold Lecture in 2017. I organised the lecture, with support from the Lagos State government, as part of the events to mark the state’s 50th anniversary.

Fafowora added: “The site is now at the back of the General Post Office House on the Marina. Long after Herbert Macaulay’s death, the house remained a tourist attraction and a sort of political Mecca for his admirers and political associates. Given his prominence as an outstanding historic and public figure in Lagos, I think the house should have been preserved for posterity, not demolished. The irony is that it was not the colonial authorities, but an indigenous government, that demolished the house to make way for the General Post Office, a singular display of the lack of a sense of history.”

HM’s rich library, which he called “The Temple of Peace,” was part of the house located in then Balbina Street. It was open to the public, especially to youths who were interested in reading. Macaulay’s desire was “to see the masses in this country educated, their intelligence stimulated and the minds well informed.”

In December 2002, the Association of Lagos State Indigenes (ALSI) put a plaque at the site of Kirsten Hall in an effort to signpost the place for posterity. Then President Olusegun Obasanjo, in a message to ALSI dated November 18, 2002, commended the group’s “decision to further embellish an already immortalised national hero.” ALSI used to organise a yearly Herbert Macaulay Memorial Lecture, and had introduced a Herbert Macaulay Merit Award.

In Abuja, the federal capital and seat of the federal government, Herbert Macaulay Way is the location of the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC) Towers, the headquarters of “the oil corporation through which the federal government of Nigeria regulates and participates in the country’s petroleum industry.”

A political celebrity, HM, in 1923, founded the Nigerian National Democratic Party (NNDP), which is noted as “the first well- organised political party in Commonwealth West Africa.”

At the age of 80, in 1944, he was the “Grand Old Man of Nigerian Politics,” and he emerged as the first President of the National Council of Nigeria and the Cameroons (NCNC).  The late Dr Nnamdi Azikwe, popularly known as “Zik of Africa,” was the party’s Secretary.  Zik acknowledged Macaulay as his “political father.”

He fought several battles against the British colonial government. He was an anti-colonial combatant by conviction and choice, for he could have followed the comfortable path of collaboration with the white colonialists if he wished. His background and education placed him among the elite of the society, and he had solid connections among the native intelligentsia. The British administration regarded him as too principled, too critical, too independent, too outspoken, too bold and too assertive.

He published the Lagos Daily News, which carried the inscription, “The First Daily Paper Published in Nigeria.”  With his handle –bar moustache, white suits and black bow-ties, and his charming command of English, HM earned the epithet Oyinbo Alawodudu  ( white man in black  skin). He was also fondly known as “Champion and Defender of Native Rights and Liberties’’; “The Ghandi of West Africa’’; and “The Musical Wizard of Kirsten Hall.”

HM was outstanding beyond politics. He became a civil engineer in 1893 after completing his studies in England, and the Nigerian Society of Engineers (NSE) recognises him as “Engineer Number One.” Macaulay’s bust can be seen in front of the National Engineering Centre at Engineering Close on Victoria Island, Lagos. The Faculty of Engineering, University of Nigeria, Nsukka, established a Lecture Series in his honour. He was also an architect and surveyor.

His anti-colonial zeal cut short his life. At the height of the NCNC’s opposition to the Richards Constitution in 1945, on the grounds that it fell short of the party’s demand for self-government, he volunteered to go round the country with his associates to win the people’s support, disregarding his advanced age and failing health.  He took ill in Kano during the tour, and the sudden illness forced him to return to Lagos, where he eventually died.

HM was born on November 14, 1864, in Lagos. His father was Reverend Thomas Babington Macaulay, founder and first principal of the CMS Grammar School, Lagos, which is the oldest secondary school in Nigeria, founded in June 1859.  His mother, Abigail, was the second daughter of the Rt. Revd. Samuel Ajayi Crowther, the first African Bishop of the Anglican Communion, the Church of England, who first translated the English Bible into Yoruba.

The 75th anniversary of Herbert Macaulay’s death is a time to reflect on the state of Nigeria today, 60 years after the country’s independence, which the great man championed.

By Femi Macaulay

It’s unbelievable that the Senate is considering making a law to jail ransom payers in kidnap cases.  The idea reflects the gravity of the country’s security crisis, and the desperate search for a solution.  But the move is not a solution. It is a complication.

The Terrorism Prevention (Amendment) Bill, 2021, is sponsored by Senator Ezenwa Francis Onyewuchi of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), representing Imo East senatorial district. According to the proposed law, “Anyone who transfers funds, makes payment or colludes with an abductor, kidnapper or terrorist to receive any ransom for the release of any person who has been wrongfully confined, imprisoned or kidnapped is guilty of a felony and is liable on conviction to a term of imprisonment of not less than 15 years.”

So what should the families of kidnap victims do when kidnappers demand ransom? The Senate needs to answer this question. It isn’t enough to prohibit payment of ransom. The proposed law denies the right of families to try to save the lives of their members when they are unfortunately kidnapped for ransom by paying the kidnappers. It is unjustifiable.

If kidnapping for ransom is thriving because the authorities responsible for security and development are underperforming, who is to blame?  Ransom payers are not to blame for the evil business, but the structures of power that seem powerless against kidnappers and unable to bring about development.

When bandits-cum-kidnappers struck at Greenfield University, Kaduna State, on April 20, it was yet another terrible evidence of the rising cases of kidnapping for ransom across the country. Significantly, it also showed how much money kidnappers dream of making from their evil activity. In this particular case, they initially demanded N800 million. The invaders kidnapped more than 20 students. Tragically, on April 23, the bodies of three of the abductees, a male and two females were found at a location close to the university. On April 26, two more abductees were found dead.

”We are still in shock,” a parent of one of the abducted students was quoted as saying after three bodies were found. “We did not expect the bandits would resort to killing our children because they had contacted us and demanded ransom.” The concerned parents were negotiating with the kidnappers when the students were killed.

One of the kidnapped students has been released.  The student was said to have been freed after his mother, who is the wife of a retired Army officer from Plateau State, paid ransom to the kidnappers. The mother of the student, Lauritta Attahiru, confirmed the release of her son but refused to give details of how he was released and whether a ransom was paid or not.

The release of the student followed a threat by the kidnappers to kill the remaining kidnapees if the concerned parents failed to meet their fresh demands by May 4.  The kidnappers had asked the parents to pay N100 million ransom, in addition to more than N50 million they had already paid. They also asked for 10 new motorcycles.

The deadline has passed. The concerned parents say they are unable to meet the fresh demands, and have appealed to the state government to come to their aid in order to save the lives of the abductees. Kaduna State Governor Nasir El-Rufai says his administration will not negotiate with kidnappers. “Even if my son is kidnapped, I will rather pray for him to make heaven instead, because I won’t pay any ransom,” he was quoted as saying. What will happen to the 16 caged students?

This case shows why the idea of jailing ransom payers is unacceptable. If the concerned parents had met the demands of the abductors, it is likely the remaining abductees would have been set free. The case of the released student, whose parents are said to have paid a ransom, suggests such a probability.

True, not all kidnap cases end in the release of the victims after payment of ransom. Some kidnap victims lose their lives in captivity, despite the payment of ransom. But cases in which the victims are freed after payment of ransom show that it can achieve the desired result.

”Hasn’t the Federal Government paid millions of dollars to rescue some of those abducted in Borno State? The government paid heavy ransom to rescue some of the Dapchi girls that were kidnapped,” activist lawyer Femi Falana (SAN) observed in his criticism of the proposed law. He added:  ”Members of the National Assembly have paid ransom when their loved ones were kidnapped and even today, if any of the relations or a member of the National Assembly is kidnapped, members will contribute to rescue him or her.”

A study indicated that more than $18 million was paid as ransom to kidnappers in the country from 2011 to 2020, and the greater part of the payment was from 2016 to 2020 when about $11 million was paid. In the local currency, these are huge figures indeed. It shows that kidnapping for ransom is a thriving business, albeit an evil one. Sadly, it is even regarded as a “growth industry.”

Some analysts forecast that kidnap-for-ransom cases will increase in the country as a result of increased unemployment.  This is a disturbing scenario, considering that Nigeria already has one of the world’s highest rates of kidnap-for-ransom cases.

The Chairman of the Nigeria Governors’ Forum (NGF), Kayode Fayemi, recently attributed the country’s security challenges partly to its 33 percent unemployment rate. The country’s difficult socio-economic conditions do not justify kidnapping operations, but show why the authorities should urgently pursue improved socio-economic conditions to discourage kidnapping for ransom.

It is noteworthy that Senator Onyewuchi accepts that “government should provide adequate security and strengthen the economy as a matter of urgency, accelerate its poverty alleviation programmes, provide employment opportunities targeting youths who are mostly involved in abductions and kidnappings, strengthen our law enforcement agencies, and provide the necessary support to end the menace of kidnapping.”

The Senate should focus on these rather than pursuing the passing of a senseless bill against ransom payers. A final question: What if a senator is kidnapped?

By Femi Macaulay

 

When the message reflects reality, it is unrealistic to discredit the messenger. Presidential spokesman Garba Shehu, well known for his combativeness, missed the point by throwing wild punches at the messenger and failing to pay attention to the message.

There is no doubt that Nigeria is facing a security crisis that has exposed state incapacity. The House of Representatives recently set up an ad-hoc committee to organise a securityconference and passed a resolution asking President Buhari to declare a state of emergency in response to the country’s security crisis. In addition, difficult socio-economic conditions in the country demand urgent solutions from the authorities. This context prompted critical remarks by a controversial Catholic priest who called for effective action from President Buhari.

“By now, with what is happening, President Buhari should honourably resign… If you can’t do it, either you resign or you be changed…  Either Buhari resigns by himself or he will be impeached,” said Rev. Fr. Ejike Mbaka, the Spiritual Director of the Adoration Ministry, Enugu.

The message was meant to wake a sleeping president. Buhari’s presidency has been characterised by inaction in the face of challenges that demand decisive action. He earned the nickname ‘Baba Go-Slow’ right from his first term from 2015 to 2019, and has continued to demonstrate the aptness of the characterisation. He remains slow to act, and slow to speak, when his office demands undelayed action and reaction.

Shehu’s reaction to Mbaka’s message was characteristically combative. His job to speak for the presidency, in his understanding, is a job to fight on behalf of the president.  Shehu said, in a statement, “after supporting the President two times to win the Presidency, Father Mbaka has made a complete U-turn, preposterously asking President Buhari to resign or be impeached.” Is it true Mbaka had supported Buhari in both 2015 and 2019?

Indeed Mbaka, who was ordained a priest of the Roman Catholic Church in 1995, had controversially prophesied victory for Buhari over then incumbent President Goodluck Jonathan in 2015. When the prophecy happened, the prophet became the one to watch.

But in 2018 he told President Buhari to forget about reelection. Mbaka had said: “As I was waiting on the Lord, I’m asked to advise you, don’t come out for a second tenure; after this, retire peacefully. Come back to yourself or you will cry by the time you will be sent out of office. Those who are encouraging you to come out and run again want to disgrace you shamefully and publicly.” Buhari was reelected. It is unclear if there were happenings behind the scenes that amounted to Mbaka supporting Buhari’s reelection effort.

Shehu’s thinking that Mbaka’s support for Buhari’s presidential ambition, whether once or twice, should make him an uncritical supporter of the administration, is an unthinking line of thought. When Mbaka demanded active governance from the administration, Shehu didn’t understand.

The presidential mouthpiece introduced a thought-provoking narrative, attributing the priest’s position to a grudge.  He said:  ”Here is the point of departure: Father Mbaka asked for a meeting, and to the shock of Presidential Aides, he came accompanied by three contractors. The President graciously allowed them in, and to everyone’s surprise, Father Mbaka asked for contracts as compensation for his support.

“Anyone familiar with President Buhari knows that he doesn’t break the laid down rules in dealing with contracts or any other government business for that matter. He requested the appropriate authorities to deal with the matter in accordance with laid down rules.

“Inside the Villa, discretion prevailed, that if those pictures and requests were made public, the followers would turn against the religious leader. None of it was released. Now, this is what is eating Father.”

Shehu didn’t say when this happened. Since he decided to publicise the story, he should have supplied further clarifying details. Mbaka has not reacted.  Even if he doesn’t respond, the spokesman’s story doesn’t invalidate the priest’s position that Buhari should deal with the country’s overwhelming challenges or admit he can’t and leave; or be removed because he can’t.

National Security Adviser Babagana Monguno, in a statement at the end of a security-related meeting at the Presidential Villa, last week, said President Buhari “is very prepared to take profound measures in the wider interest of the people and the Nigerian nation.”  It remains to be seen what the administration means by “profound measures,” and whether the measures will solve the problems.

According to a Mass Atrocities Casualties Tracking Report by the Global Rights Nigeria Country Office, about 4,556 persons died in 2020 from insecurity-related killings, a rise of about 43 percent from 3,188 persons in 2019. Also, the US-based Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) said Nigeria recorded 2,860 kidnappings in 2020, up from 1,386 in 2019, an increase of over 100 percent.

These tragic figures not only show the gravity of the country’s security crisis, but also why the authorities should acknowledge the scale of insecurity, and tackle the problem, rather than attack courageous voices that call for change. There are justifiable fears that violent crimes will reach new heights this year as cases of terrorism, banditry and kidnapping escalate across the country.  For instance, the Kaduna State government, last week, announced that bandits killed 323 residents and kidnapped 949 others across the state in the last three months.

Shehu notably has a record of downplaying insecurity under the Buhari administration, which may explain his inattention to Mbaka’s message.  In November 2020, for instance, when Boko Haram terrorists killed 66 people, mainly farmers and fishermen at Koshobe village in Borno State, he insensitively said in a media interview that the victims didn’t get military clearance to farm.

A month later, when bandits abducted more than 300 students from Government Science Secondary School, Kankara, Katsina State, Shehu initially contradicted the figure given by the state government and the media, insisting that only 10 students were kidnapped.

As Senior Special Assistant, Media and Publicity to President Buhari, he can be described as a messenger who delivers the administration’s messages to the people. When he delivers a message, he expects the people to focus on the message and not the messenger. This is what he should have done concerning Mbaka’s message.

By Femi Macaulay

At least three former army chiefs have a lot of explaining to do on the federal government’s purchase of weaponry since the country’s security crisis began about a decade ago. That was the takeaway when the Chief of Army Staff, Lt. Gen. Ibrahim Attahiru, on April 12, finally honoured the invitation of the ad hoc committee of the House of Representatives investigating the government’s procurement of arms and ammunition from 2011 to date.

He had failed to honour its invitation on three occasions.  According to a report, the army boss “explained to the lawmakers that his inability to honour several invitations of the committee was due to other engagements on internal security.”  The report said:  ”He, however, refused to apologise to the committee, noting that his explanation was sufficient.”

Lamentably, he exhibited a lack of respect for the committee.  He should have acted with a sense of courtesy. He is expected to concentrate on tackling worsening insecurity in the country, and should have understood that the legislative investigation was also aimed at dealing with mounting insecurity.

Notably, the committee was mandated to review the purchase, use and control of arms, ammunition and related hardware by the military, paramilitary and other law enforcement agencies. Its chairman, Olaide Akinremi, was reported saying Nigeria spent about $47.387 million on arms in 2019.

On the investigation, Lt. Gen. Attahiru told the committee to focus on his predecessors, saying he “took over the mantle of leadership barely two months ago.” According to him, “Issues of procurement that you so demand to know were done by specific individuals. I will rather you call these individuals to come and explain to you very specific issues.”

His predecessors, relevant to the legislative investigation, were lieutenant generals Azubuike Ihejirika, Kenneth Minimah and Tukur Buratai. Ihejirika was army boss from September 2010 to January 2014, three years and four months; Minimah from January 2014 to July 2015, one year and six months; and Buratai from July 2015 to January 2021, five years and six months.

Interestingly, in August 2014, Ihejirika had faced an allegation that he was a major Boko Haram sponsor. It was an incredible allegation, considering that he had been the head of an army fighting against the Islamic terror group. It was baffling that the allegation came from Dr Stephen Davis, the Australian negotiator who had worked with Nigerian security agencies in connection with the rescue of the Chibok schoolgirls abducted by Boko Haram in April 2014.  The State Security Service (SSS) said the ex-army chief was innocent.

Also, in January 2016, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) seized an Abuja estate said to be owned by Ihejirika, who was among ex-military top brass probed concerning a $2.1 billion arms scandal involving a former National Security Adviser, Sambo Dasuki.

Increasing insecurity fuelled by terrorism, banditry and kidnapping, continues to expose the incapacity of Nigeria’s military. National Security Adviser Babagana Monguno was thought to have given clues as to the cause of the military’s ineffectiveness when he was recently reported saying that “huge sums of money” approved for the purchase of weapons were “missing” and the weapons “were not bought.” He later claimed he had been “quoted out of context.”

The import of the remarks he disclaimed is that the military is ill-equipped to tackle the escalating insecurity.  It is understandable that federal lawmakers are investigating the government’s procurement of weaponry in the face of an alarming security crisis.

Claims that the armed forces are poorly equipped to fight insecurity are not new.  For instance, Lance Corporal Martins Idakpini of the 8 Division, Sokoto, of the Nigerian Army, dared to speak truth to power in a 12-minute video that went viral in June 2020. He had criticised the military leadership for failing to provide adequate weapons to fight terrorism.

Also, in two other videos, soldiers involved in the war against terrorism had claimed that the army was ill-equipped to defeat the terrorists. In one video, a former theatre commander, Maj. Gen. Olusegun Adeniyi, was seen and heard telling troops that “it appears the people we are fighting have more firepower than us.” He was court-martialled for embarrassing and ridiculing the armed forces.

It is obvious that an ill-equipped military is a non-starter. But President Muhammadu Buhari, who is also the Commander-in-Chief of the Nigerian Armed Forces, has failed to address the issue decisively.

Lt. Gen. Attahiru has indirectly stated that his predecessors should be held responsible for the ill-equipped armed forces the new service chiefs inherited. It was a subtle attack.  It remains to be seen if those concerned will be questioned in order to get to the bottom of the matter.

Apart from the ex-army chiefs, other ex-service chiefs are relevant to the investigation by federal lawmakers. The chiefs of air staff in the period were air marshals Mohammed Dikko Umar, Alex Badeh, Adesola Amosu and Sadique Abubakar. The chiefs of naval staff were vice admirals O.S. Ibrahim, D.J. Ezeoba, U.O. Jibrin and Ibok-Ete Ekwe Ibas.

Also, the chiefs of defence staff were Air Chief Marshal Oluseyi Peterin, Admiral Ola Ibrahim, Air Chief Marshal Alex Badeh and General Abayomi Olonisakin.

Beyond finding out why the military is ill-equipped, despite billions of naira approved for procurement of weapons over the years, and punishing those who shortchanged the military, there is an urgent need to make the military better equipped.

In particular, the war on terror has gone on for too long. It is more than a decade since the military launched its counter-insurgency operation, and Boko Haram continues to terrorise the country. Tragically, it looks like a war without end.

There are disturbing allegations that the war on terror has become an inspiration for corruption in the military and political leadership; and those benefiting materially from it do not want the war to end. This may explain the situation in which the fighters are poorly equipped.

The failure of the military leadership to adequately equip the military, in the period under investigation, is indefensible. It suggests bad leadership by bad bosses.

By Femi Macaulay

 

About six months after the controversial Lekki tollgate shooting in Lagos, on October 20, 2020, it is still unclear what happened.  Claims that soldiers had massacred peaceful protesters against police brutality remain unproved. But that does not disprove the massacre allegation.

The Lekki incident continues to generate widespread interest because of its human rights and accountability angles.   A 2020 Country Report on Human Rights Practices, released by the US government on March 30, further drew attention to the lack of clarity, and the need for clarity, concerning the shooting.

“Accurate information on fatalities resulting from the shooting was not available at year’s end,” the report said, adding, “Amnesty International reported 10 persons died during the event, but the government disputed Amnesty’s report, and no other organization was able to verify the claim.”

The use of the word “massacre” by anti-government narrators to describe the alleged killings on the evening of that day has been faulted by pro-government defenders who insist that it is a tendentious exaggeration.

According to the report, now in its 45th edition, “The government reported two deaths connected to the event. One body from the toll gate showed signs of blunt force trauma. A second body from another location in Lagos State had bullet wounds. The government acknowledged that soldiers armed with live ammunition were present at the Lekki Toll Gate.”

The Lagos State Judicial Panel on Restitution for Victims of SARS-related Abuses and Other Matters, set up by Governor Babajide Sanwo-Olu, is expected to find out what actually happened.  But it remains to be seen if the panel will be able to clarify what happened.

The panel, inaugurated in October 2020, had a deadline of April 19, 2021, to conclude its investigation. Significantly, the release of the US report coincided with the extension of the Lagos panel’s work for three months, till July 19.

It is suspicious that the Nigerian Army, which is at the centre of the panel’s investigation into the alleged Lekki killings, stopped cooperating with the investigators under the former army boss, Lt. Gen. Tukur Buratai, who was replaced in January.

New Chief of Army Staff Lt. Gen. Ibrahim Attahiru is expected to concentrate on tackling escalating insecurity in the country. But the Lekki incident is a hot issue that also demands his attention.  Yet again, on March 20, the army failed to honour the panel’s invitation. This was a negative beginning for Lt. Gen. Attahiru.

Did soldiers indeed “massacre” civilians engaged in a peaceful protest against abuse of power by the Federal Special Anti-Robbery Squad of the Nigeria Police Force, known as SARS?  The Lekki protesters were the focal point of the nationwide #EndSARS protests.

Under Lt. Gen. Buratai, there were indications that the army was uncooperative; giving the impression that it didn’t consider the investigation important. On more than one occasion, the General Officer Commanding 81 Division, Maj. Gen. Godwin Umelo, and the Commanding Officer, 65 Battalion, Bonny Camp, Victoria Island, Lagos, Lt. Col. S.O. Bello, had shunned the panel’s invitation. In particular, Lt. Col. Bello is a person of interest because he led the battalion involved in the Lekki shooting under investigation.

The Commander of 81 Division, Brig. Gen. Ibrahim Taiwo, had testified before the panel, denying claims that soldiers shot #EndSARS protesters with live bullets during the operation. However, the panel had summoned Maj. Gen. Umelo and Lt. Col. Bello because Brig. Gen. Taiwo’s testimony was inadequate.

It is unclear why the two officers had failed to appear before the panel. But there is no justification for their failure to honour its invitation. They were expected to appear before the panel not only to clarify the issue but also to exculpate the army. Their non-cooperation was bad for the army’s image. The army is supposed to operate under the law in a democracy.

There is a need for clarity. The army initially claimed its personnel were not at the toll gate when the incident happened, then later admitted it had deployed soldiers to the place with live and blank bullets, maintaining that soldiers shot into the air and did not kill any protester.

The panel’s chairman, retired Justice Doris Okuwobi, had ordered that fresh summons be issued to the officers who had shunned its invitation. “Service shall also be made to the Office of the Chief of Army Staff…,” she had said.  Lt. Gen. Buratai was still the boss at the time.

Lt. Gen. Attahiru should demonstrate that he truly represents a new era. He should ensure that the army cooperates with the panel. Anything less than that is suspicious.

The army’s defenders ask: If there was a “massacre” at Lekki, where are the bodies?  They also counter the claim that the army had got rid of the bodies, arguing that there have been no announcements of missing persons by relations of those allegedly massacred and disposed of.

Notably, in December 2015, the Nigerian Army was accused of carrying out a massacre in a clash with members of the Islamic Movement of Nigeria (IMN) in Zaria, Kaduna State. The army claimed members of the group had tried to assassinate Lt. Gen. Buratai, the army chief at the time.

In response to the incident, known as the Zaria massacre, the Kaduna State government set up a judicial commission of inquiry that found out that the army had gunned down at least 348 civilians, and had secretly buried 347 bodies in a mass grave. The commission called for the prosecution of those involved in the massacre. The incident is regarded as a “notable human rights violation.”

With this kind of damning record, the army needs to prove that nothing like the Zaria massacre happened at Lekki. In January, after the army stopped cooperating with the panel, the panel’s chairman was reported saying the army’s failure to honour lawful summonses meant that it could not justifiably complain of a denial of fair hearing after the panel had presented its findings to the government.

The army’s refusal to further cooperate with the panel is unacceptable.  If the army has nothing to hide, it should cooperate with the investigators.

By Femi Macaulay

Having a good name means a lot to retired ambassador Dapo Fafowora who turns 80 today. Born in Ilesha, in present-day Osun State, on March 29, 1941, he can be described as a man of knowledge and integrity.

“Early in life,” Fafowora says in his autobiography, Lest I Forget, published in 2013,  “ I set myself some objectives, of which the most important were my intellectual and moral development. I believe that I have achieved those two objectives. I have also achieved personal success in my public career with which I remain satisfied.”

An old boy of CMS Grammar School, Lagos (1954 -58), he had joined the Nigerian Diplomatic Service in 1964 after graduating in History from the then University College, Ibadan.  He earned a master’s degree from University of London in 1966, and a doctorate from Trinity College, Oxford University, in 1972.

He served as Second Secretary, Nigeria High Commission, London, from 1966 to 1968.  He was Ambassador and Deputy Permanent Representative of Nigeria to the United Nations from 1981 to 1984.

“I was only 43 years old in March, 1984 when, without any justification whatsoever, I was suddenly and prematurely retired by the Buhari military regime from the Foreign Service, twenty years after I joined it, and some 17 years before I was due to retire statutorily,” Fafowora says in his memoirs.

Understandably, this unexpected development hurt his sense of personal and professional integrity. Apart from writing about the matter in his memoirs, he further publicised it when he boldly criticised the appointment of Prof. Ibrahim Gambari as Chief of Staff to President Muhammadu Buhari in May 2020.

In a widely published article, Fafowora had again accused Gambari of treacherously working with others to end his diplomatic career unjustly and prematurely. Gambari was foreign minister at the time.  According to him, “I had done absolutely nothing wrong in my entire career in the diplomatic service… There were many other Yoruba and Southern officers retired who like me had done nothing wrong.

“Now, the result of these capricious and vengeful retirements that took place under the watch of Gambari is that the fine Foreign Service we had, of which we were all proud, was wantonly destroyed.”

Fafowora’s insistence on his innocence, and his repeated accusations against Gambari, reflect his sense of personal and professional integrity. It is noteworthy that Gambari has not responded to the damaging allegations.

With his diplomatic career cut short in unclear circumstances, the career diplomat was left wondering about ruined possibilities. He had a stint in the private sector as Director General of the Manufacturers Association of Nigeria (MAN), which showed his versatility.

His investiture as a Fellow of the Nigerian Academy of Letters (NAL) in August 2014 highlighted yet another dimension of his multidimensionality. “Nothing gives me greater pleasure than writing,” he says in his memoirs.

For more than 25 years, starting from 1991, he was a respected newspaper columnist who focused on Nigerian Diplomacy, Politics and Economics. He retired from column writing when he left The Nation editorial board in January 2018, after 11 years of dedicated service.

He is the author of  Lord Lugard’s Political Memoranda and the Development of Indirect Rule in Nigeria; A History of the CMS Grammar School, Lagos (1859 – 2009); A Venture of Faith (An Official History of the Cathedral Church of Christ, Lagos (1867 – 2007); and Lest I Forget: Memoirs of a Nigerian Career Diplomat (2013).

As a public speaker, Fafowora has delivered lectures at University of Ibadan, the then University of Ife, University of Lagos, Lagos State University (convocation), University of Ilorin (convocation), University of Benin, Redeemer’s University, and the National Institute of Policy and Strategic Studies, at Kuru, in Jos, Plateau State. In 1989, he was invited by the Confederation of British Industries (CBI) in London to speak on the Nigerian industrial sector. Also, he has presented papers on Nigeria’s foreign policy prompted by invitations from the foreign ministry.

Our paths had first crossed on the editorial board of The Nation.  I got to know Fafowora better when he agreed to deliver the inaugural Herbert Macaulay Gold Lecture in 2017. I coordinated the event. He helped to turn an idea into an event. He chose the topic: “Herbert Macaulay and his relevance to the excellence of Lagos.”  While we prepared for the event, which took place at the Lagos Country Club, Ikeja, Lagos, on May 25, 2017, we shared life beyond the boardroom.  It was an unforgettable time. I benefitted immensely from his immense experience. He deepened my understanding of decency and integrity.

He said in his lecture: “As a professional historian, one of my unfulfilled literary ambitions was to write a full-length biography of Herbert Macaulay. There is, regrettably, none at the moment. This is because I find his public life, career, and politics in Lagos very fascinating. Therefore, I welcome and relish this opportunity and privilege of delivering this inaugural lecture on the life and times of Herbert Macaulay, who is widely regarded and acknowledged as the ‘Father of Nigerian Nationalism.’”

It is ironic that Fafowora headed a team that was set up to prepare a paper for President Buhari on foreign policy after he won the 2015 presidential election.  This was the same seasoned diplomat who had been prematurely retired under the Buhari military regime.

Also ironic is the information that Alhaji Ahmed Joda, who headed Buhari’s presidential transition team at the time, involved Gambari in Fafowora’s foreign policy team.  This was the same character accused of playing a leading role in Fafowora’s retirement drama.

It is a testimony to Fafowora’s diplomatic distinction that he was the first national president of the Association of Retired Career Ambassadors of Nigeria (ARCAN) from 2017 to 2019. Under him, the association did a review of the country’s foreign policy to aid the federal government.  He led members of the group when they visited President Buhari in November 2018.

Interestingly, he has stayed out of partisan politics, although he was Special Adviser on Economic and Industrial Affairs in the Osun State government under Chief Bisi Akande from 2000 to 2003. He was Commissioner for Trade in the government for two years, and acting Commissioner for Finance and Secretary to the State Government at various times within the period. He describes his role as “going there to assist the government as a technocrat.”

Fafowora’s story shows that there is a need for men of knowledge and integrity in the country’s corridors of power. He may well represent what is missing, at the leadership level, in the country’s pursuit of development.

By Femi Macaulay

What’s the use of the information recently provided by Oba of Lagos Rilwan Akiolu about how much money people described as hoodlums stole from his palace during the #EndSARS campaign last year? Did he expect public sympathy?

Oba Akiolu’s remarks during the opening of the remodeled Glover Memorial Hall, Lagos Island, on March 3, showed that he didn’t learn any lesson from the invasion of his palace. Has the eminent traditional ruler forgotten that he had to be evacuated from his palace by military protectors who saved him from becoming a casualty as well?

The king’s palace was among “private facilities, as well as other investments that were partly torched and vandalised/looted,” the police had announced at the time. The palace at Isale Eko, Lagos Island, known as Iga Idunganran, is the official residence of Oba Akiolu, the most important traditional ruler in the country’s economic and commercial capital.

“The incident that happened here from October 20th to 23rd is so saddening,” Oba Akiolu said at the event.  “The destruction we suffered in Lagos is so enormous than in any other part of the country.

“Many buildings were burnt, including vehicles used to generate income. I can now say publicly that they stole away from my palace $2 million and N17 million.

“Those who committed the offence would not have done that if they knew the implication. But as a father, I won’t place any curse on them.”

His palace is a place of traditional power and may be likened to a government house, the official residence of a governor.  In a sense, the attack on the palace was like an attack on a government house. It is ironic that the palace was attacked by locals expected to be loyal to the king. The attack suggested that the king was unpopular. A popular king should have more friends than enemies in his kingdom.

The king ought to reflect on the humiliating attack by his subjects, and be sober. Instead, he exhibited indiscretion and insensitivity by publicising the money they allegedly stole, two factors that had provoked the attack in the first place.

Oba Akiolu, 77, didn’t need to publicise his monetary loss. He was indiscreet because the disclosure highlighted his riches and suggested that he was flaunting his affluence.  He was insensitive because he seemed not to consider that his announcement could provoke the many poor people in his domain.

In particular, two million dollars is a lot of money to keep at home. It is unclear why he had kept so much money in his palace? How much did he keep outside his palace at the time?  Many people in his domain, and beyond it, must be wondering about the king’s riches.

People described as hoodlums had taken advantage of the widespread #EndSARS non-violent protests against police brutality and abuse of power to make a statement against widespread poverty and hardship.

It is noteworthy that the palace is located in a poor locality. Isale Eko is an urban eyesore. The picture of a beautiful palace amid visible poverty is unappealing.  It is always a possibility that the poor will protest against poverty and aloof prosperity.

“It was inevitable,” a prominent Lagos royal, Princess Abiola Dosunmu, the Erelu Kuti of Lagos, had observed at the time.  “They didn’t touch any other building in Lagos Island, only the Oba’s palace. That’s a direct message,” she said.

Poverty is no excuse for criminality. But the traditional authorities need self-examination. How has the traditional leadership helped to develop the locality and the locals? Have the traditional leaders done enough to alleviate the obvious poverty in the area?  How many of the people in Isale Eko are among the more than 83 million Nigerians living below the national poverty line, according to figures released by the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) last year? Nigeria’s population is about 206 million.

The NBS 2019 report on Poverty and Inequality in Nigeria deserves the attention of not only the federal, state and local governments but also the traditional authorities across the country.  Every level of leadership has a development role and should be development-conscious.

Before he became king, Oba Akiolu had served in the police force. He spent 32 years in the police force and became assistant inspector-general of police in 1999. He retired in 2002. He is a lawyer. It is unclear if he was rich before he became king, or how rich he was before his coronation.

He was crowned in 2003, but his kingship was challenged by royal rivals, resulting in a long-drawn-out legal battle that ended in his favour in 2019, 16 years after he ascended the throne. “My appointment as the king is the first time in history that kingmakers will be unanimous in selecting an Oba of Lagos,” he had said in court during the battle. The attack on his palace did not reflect his assertion.

The palace of the Oba of Lagos, built in 1670, is a tourist attraction.  The ancient palace has been modernised over the years, including in Oba Akiolu’s era. There are ancient shrines within the palace grounds, and some of the previous kings are buried at Iga Idunganran. These features were insignificant to the mob that desecrated the palace.

Oba Akiolu was forced to live outside his palace for more than two months, and returned to the repaired palace on January 1. In a tweet, the Senior Special Assistant to the Lagos State Governor on Health, Oreoluwa Finnih, described his return as a “triumphant entry to Iga Idunganran Palace.”

The description was an attempt to downplay and trivialise the king’s humiliation in his domain, by his subjects. Dramatically, those who invaded and looted the palace stole Oba Akiolu’s staff of office and displayed it as they marched through the streets. It suggested that the mob had dethroned the king, if only temporarily.  It is significant that his staff of office was said to have been recovered.

Oba Akiolu should be thinking of leaving a legacy of development, and pursuing the development of his domain. May he not be remembered as a king who was forced to flee from his palace, and lost unexplained money in his palace to an angry mob.