Assistant Editor LEKE SALAUDEEN examines the recommendations of the Presidential Committee on Dialogue and Peaceful Resolution of Security Challenges in the North and its implications for the on-going anti-terrorism campaigns.
The Presidential Committee on Dialogue and Peaceful Resolution of Security Challenges in the North has submitted its final report to President Goodluck Jonathan. The committee recommended the setting up of an advisory committee on continuous dialogue to advise the President on all matters related to dialogue and resolution of crisis.
The implication of the committee’s recommendation is that the Boko Hararm insurgency cannot be resolved by military alone. Many Nigerians have faulted President Jonathan’s approach to the volatile issue. The government had in April set up the Tanimu Turaki Committee, which was given a three month-deadline. The deadline was later extended by two months. The committee was mandated to come up with recommendations on how to end the insurgency. Less than a month after its inauguration, the Federal Government declared a state of emergency in Borno, Yobe and Adamawa States, where the Boko Haram group has been on rampage. The government outlawed the dreadful Islamist sect and ordered a military action to subdue them.
Critics have said that it is contradictory to declare war on terrorists, while the government claims to be negotiating with them. In reaction, the sect rejected the proposed dialogue. This rejection of dialogue is reflected in the committee’s report. “Some of our difficulties in having a productive dialogue include the refusal of their leaders to submit to dialogue”, the report said.
President Jonathan had opted for dialogue with Boko Haram when he realised that the issue truly required a political solution. It was against the backdrop of the fact that the terrorists enjoy sympathy in the North among the political elite and security officers. Many observers felt that the President should have sustained the courage to sincerely discuss with the group, listen to their demands, present the government’s view, proffer solutions and reach a consensus.
According to critics, this route was ignored because the government was averse to contrary views in a federation with diverse religious, social, political, economic, cultural, educational and professional interests.
Five months after the declaration of state of emergence and the military operation, the terrorists are yet to surrender. The government has extended the state of emergency in the three states by another six months, an indication that the end of the war is out of sight. The President has admitted that the situation is still dicey. He said: “Though, we cannot say we have won the war. But listening to the address by the chairman, we believe that the document you have submitted will help us with the follow up action.”
Is military action the solution?
Former Chief of Defence Staff (CDS) General Martin Luther Agwai has said that the Boko Haram insurgency cannot be resolved by the military. “You can never solve this problem with military solutions. The military can always be an enabling force. They will sensitise; they will stabilise the area. It is a political issue. It is a social issue. It is an economic issue and, until these issues are addressed, the military can never give you a solution. If anybody expects the military to give a solution to this problem, it is not possible because it is not a military problem. It is not a war. You are not fighting another country invading Nigeria. So, you cannot get a military solution to that.”
An expert in conflict resolution, Mr Gab Okweselise, said that combating the insurgency requires military, political and communal solutions. According to him, the military role is simply to restore law and order, protect lives and properties of citizens and create an enabling environment for political solution to take place which, he said, the Joint Task Force (JTF) has creditably achieved.
Okweselise noted that the JTF’s achievement is based on the premise that the government has the capacity to checkmate the activities of the terrorists and crush them. “Once an enabling environment has been created, concurrent actions should take place with the aim of bringing the menace to an end. The time for political solution to the insurgency is now and the security agencies must remain in a staging position to act decisively and appropriately when the need arise.
“On the other hand, the communities have a lot to do in the area of giving timely and credible information and to stop youths from being recruited into the group; otherwise, the Boko Haram terrorism will linger for a long time. All forms of litany will not solve the insurgency, except concerted, coordinated, selfless efforts and resolve of the government, citizens and the security agencies”.
A sociologist, Dr Hassan Abdullahi, advised government embrace dialogue in solving the insurgency. He said: “Obviously, dialogue, like in the case of Niger Delta militants, could lead to amnesty. Government needs to properly organise the solution by engaging in thorough discussion and negotiation with the terrorists so that, at the end, we will have solutions that can give us sustained peace that we need, instead of living with fear, which the military operation represents.
Abdullahi said the solution approach should have short and long term measures. In the short term, the government should quickly constitute a discussion and reconciliation committee made up of respected leaders in the country. He said that they should be given six months to discuss with Boko Haram, tender apology for the past mistakes of the government, seek to know their grievances, persuade them to understand the secularity of the Nigerian state, reach a common understanding of what should be the solution to the their problems, reconcile them with government, and allow the government to implement the agreement.
“Government may have to rehabilitate the group and this is where the idea of amnesty comes in. For an ideological group like Boko Haram, Nigeria needs amnesty to support the political solution. The use of force cannot provide the needed support and it must be dropped forthwith. Amnesty will assist in moving them out of their thinking, engage them economically and assuage them.
“The next stage is to disarm them and discourage them from bombing, destroying and carrying arms to attack fellow Nigerians. Thereafter, government should discretely determine and prosecute any person, who had used and dumped them or who had encouraged them in any form in carrying out their dastard acts. Government needs to provide little support to all those identified to have lost properties or lives arising from the insurgency”.
On the long term solution, Abdullahi asked the government to restructure the National Orientation Agency (NOA) to carry out its functions with re-energised focus. “NOA should put in place a national reorientation programme through which they can regularly interact with the idling Nigerian youths. NOA needs to learn how to deepen the use of inspirational leaders from across the world to calm the raging nerves of the youth and gradually identify what else the youths can do to earn a living. It should be able to discover the talents of the youths, retrain them along their talents through robust free education”.
ICC stand on amnesty
In a move to assist the country in the fight against terrorism, the International Criminal Court (ICC) is making concerted efforts to address the challenges posed by the sect. According to a status report by the ICC Prosecutor on its preliminary investigation, Boko Haram “has attacked religious clerics, Christians, political leaders, Muslims opposing the group, the police and security forces, Westerners, journalists and UN personnel”.
Thus, the next phase of the examination by the ICC, according to experts, would be to evaluate the viability of the attempts to prosecute Boko Haram, to which Nigerian authorities would be required to fully cooperate and make all reports and past investigations available to the ICC.
The United States has declined the request to list Boko Haram as a terrorist organisation. The President of the Chrisian Association of Nigeria (CAN), Pastor Ayo Oritsejafor, faulted the United States for not classifying the group as a terrorist. He said that one year after he had testified before the Congress, US has not designated Boko Haram a foreign terrorist organisation, even though it has killed citizens of many countries, including Americans.
Oritsejafor described America’s ambivalence over the terrorist challenge as a stunning betrayal. He recalled that, after the ‘9/11’ disaster, Nigeria was among the nations that cooperated with global efforts on tracing terrorist financing, adding that a designated foreign financial support was uncovered in Northern Nigeria.
As a result of the mounting pressure, the US government was compelled to designate some members of the group as terrorists, but nothing was done about the group as a body. Three leaders of Boko Haram tagged as terrorists are Abubakar Shekau, who leads the militant group, and Abubakar Adam Kambar and Khalid el Barnawi are believed to have ties with a branch of al-Qaeda.
Ironically, the ICC position has not stopped the federal government from going ahead with its intention to grant Boko Haram amnesty.
A former university don, Professor Itse Sagay (SAN), said that the position of the ICC overrides that of Nigeria. He said that, once they (Boko Haram members) have committed crimes against humanity, that decision is overriding. “In other words, whether we like it or not, it is not a domestic matter anymore. So, that is the status now in international law and in the law of any country that is a party to the statute of the ICC of which Nigeria is a party”, he added.
The President of Yoruba Youths Assembly, Mr Thomas Olarinde opposed amnesty for the group. He said that it is wrong to reward crime.
Olaniran said the issue of amnesty is beyond the Nigerian Government. “It is an international issue. If Nigeria grants them amnesty, the international community will see us as an unserious nation. We at the Yoruba Youths Assembly want the Federal Government to forget about the amnesty to protect the integrity of the country. Government should rather invite the international community to assist the country to urgently address the nightmarish of Boko Haram menace. But definitely, amnesty is no longer the option at this point”, he added.
Human rights lawyer Festus Keyamo urged Nigeria to drop the idea of amnesty. This is in view of the fact that the international community has frowned at it.
He said: “The amnesty proposal cannot continue. We are aware that the international community frowns on it and never negotiates with terrorist groups. The policy is never to negotiate with any terrorist group. It is therefore going to be difficult for Nigerian government to continue to negotiate with Boko Haram”.
