Reactions yesterday trailed yesterday’s decision by the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) to approve the withdrawal of Niger, Mali and Burkina Faso from the regional bloc.
Those who reacted include: global affairs analyst and former ECOWAS communication official, Mr. Paul Ejime, former Nigeria’s Ambassador to Belgium Alaba Ogunsanwo and Director of Studies, Nigerian Institute of International Affairs (NIIA), Prof. Efem Ubi.
Ejime: citizens of Niger, Mali, Burkina Faso will suffer more
Ejime noted that by asking the countries to exit the fold, ECOWAS is only following its protocols as did by Mauritania in 2000 when it decided to leave ECOWAS.
Ejime noted that after declaring they would exit the community, the citizens of the affected countries have been suffering more from terrorism, insisting that they would suffer more.
He noted that the claim by Niger, Mali and Burkina Faso that France has been tele-guiding ECOWAS was a ruse since the affected countries are still part of French monetary union.
According to him, the problem is that the military juntas want to hold on to power and knew ECOWAs’ protocols frown at such power grabs.
“Since they came to power, they have not made any attempt to go back to constitutional order,” Ejime said.
Nothing new about allowing them to exit, says Ogunsanwo
Ogunsanwo said there was nothing new about allowing the three countries to exit the fold, stressing that ECOWAS was following what its protocols say.
“There is nothing new about it. ECOWAS is only following its treaty. Britain left the European Union (EU) after their referendum. The citizens of the affected countries will still enjoy free movements as it was before the formation of ECOWAS,” he said.
Ubi: nothing wrong asking them to go.
Ubi agreed that nothing is wrong in allowing them to leave.
“The concerned countries have followed ECOWAS conventions. I will also commend ECOWAS for the diplomatic means to bring them back into the community,” he said.
He said if Niger, Mali and Burkina Faso refused to return to ECOWAS, they are sovereign states and no one can force them to come back.
The Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) has officially approved the withdrawal of Niger, Mali, and Burkina Faso from the regional bloc.
The decision, taken by the Authority of ECOWAS Heads of State and Government, marks a significant shift in the geopolitical landscape of West Africa.
Disclosing this decision at the end of the 66th Ordinary Summit of the Authority of Heads of State and ECOWAS Commission, Dr Omar Alieu Touray, said the three countries will formally cease to be members of ECOWAS on January 29, 2025, in accordance with Article 91 of the revised ECOWAS treaty.
Following their notifications to withdraw, the regional bloc outlined a transitional period from January 29 to July 29, 2025, keeping its doors open for the countries to reconsider their decision.
Acknowledging the diplomatic efforts led by Senegalese President Bassirou Diomaye Faye, Togolese President Faure Gnassingbé, and ECOWAS Chairman Bola Ahmed Tinubu, the bloc emphasized its commitment to fostering dialogue.
He further said the Authority has extended the mandates of Presidents Gnassingbé and Faye to continue mediation efforts throughout the transition period.
He said ECOWAS, during the transitional phase, will focus on preparing for the separation.
ECOWAS also tasked its Commission President with initiating withdrawal formalities after January 29, 2025, and developing a contingency plan to address political and economic relations with the departing nations.
Additionally, the ECOWAS Council of Ministers will convene an extraordinary session in mid-2025 to finalize separation modalities and the contingency plan.
“The part of the communique I’ll be reading relates to the decision of the Republic of Mali, the Republic of Niger, and Burkina Faso, to withdraw from ECOWAS.
“After deliberations, their excellencies, members of the Authority of ECOWAS Heads of State and Government, commend the exemplary diplomatic engagement of His Excellency, Bassirou Diomaye Faye, President of the Republic of Senegal, and His Excellency Faure Gnassingbé, President of the Togolese Republic, and the diplomatic efforts of the Chairman of Authority, His Excellency, Bola Ahmed Tinubu, and other individual member states towards these three countries.
“The authority takes note of the notification by Burkina Faso, the Republic of Mali and the Republic of Niger of their decision to withdraw from ECOWAS. The Authority acknowledges that by the provisions of Article 91 of the revised ECOWAS treaty, the three countries will officially cease to be members of ECOWAS from 29 January 2025.
“The Authority decides to set the period from 29 January 2025 to 29 July 2025, as a transitional period and to keep ECOWAS doors open to the three countries during the transition period.
“In this regard, the Authority extends the mandate of President Gnassingbé of Togo and President Faye of Senegal to continue their mediation role up to the end of the transition period to bring the three member countries back to ECOWAS.
“Without prejudice for the spirit of the opening, the Authority directs the President of the Commission to launch withdrawal formalities after the deadline of 29th January 2025 and to draw up a contingency plan covering various areas.
“The Authority directs the Council of Ministers to convene an extraordinary session during the second quarter of 2025 to consider and adopt both separation modalities and the contingency plan covering political and economic relations between ECOWAS and the Republic of Niger, the Republic of Mali and Burkina Faso”, Touray said.
In January 2024, the three countries of Mali, Burkina Faso, and Nigeria announced their decision to withdraw from ECOWAS.
They accused the regional bloc of deviating from its foundational ideals and succumbing to external influences, particularly criticising the imposition of sanctions aimed at reversing their respective coups.
This decision followed a series of military takeovers: Mali in 2020 and 2021, Burkina Faso in 2022, and Niger in 2023, each leading to suspensions from ECOWAS and strained relations with the organisation.
Travails of Nigerian women clamped in dingy prison without trial
•Remanded children watch in horror as prison officials brutalise their mothers •Embassy officials accused of extorting millions from inmates
Many Nigerian ladies are languishing in Central Women Prison in Bamako, the capital of Mali. A good number of them have been in the dingy prison where they are daily dehumanised for years without trial. Some of them alleged that the Nigerian Embassy officials in the French speaking country have been fleecing them and their relations in millions with promise to secure their release. To worsen matters, innocent children co-detained with their mothers are daily traumatised watching prison authorities brutalise their mothers, INNOCENT DURU reports.
Precious, a petty trader, left the shores of Nigeria for Mali in 2020 to seek greener pastures after many years of toiling without meaningful result.
She embarked on the journey after a close friend assured her that her life would be transformed in the French speaking country even if she had to do the same petty business she was doing in Nigeria.
“Wow!” Precious exclaimed as the information tickled and enchanted her. That obviously was the good news she had been yearning for.
Without wasting time, she packed her luggage and gave her parents and siblings emotional hugs as she bade them bye with an assurance that she would soon put smiles on their faces.
Precious’s elation however turned into despondency soon after she arrived in Mali as she was picked up by security operatives and thrown into prison.
“I have been here for more than four years without trial. They didn’t even tell me the number of years I will be staying here, not to talk of telling me when to go. I never did anything wrong,” the embattled lady said in a video sent to our correspondent by her younger sister, Sharon.
Reliving her predicament and those of other inmates in the prison, Precious said: “Some of our sisters have become paralysed. Many others have given birth here while some others came in with their children.
“Imagine one of our sisters gave birth at a police station and she was brought in here with the newborn baby and blood on her body.”
The infant might have had irreparable damage done to her psyche as Precious said: “The baby has spent three years here in the prison. Now if she sees a vehicle, she will run, if she sees a male person, she will run. She runs away from everything she sees.
“Unfortunately, there is no school the child can attend here. What will she become when she grows up?”
The children, as seen in the video, look visibly ruffled and pale as they hold on to the iron bars of the prison struggling fruitlessly to see what was happening outside.
From the narration of the inmates, the prison is the only home the children have seen in their life and the horrible experience the only education they have had. Hunger and deprivation are all they have enjoyed, leaving one to wonder what the future holds for the hapless and harmless young inmates.
Pained by their predicament, Precious blamed the officials of the Nigerian Embassy in Mali for their woes. Complaints about how some Nigerian envoys sell out their compatriots in foreign lands have become a recurring decimal. From Germany to China and from Mali to other parts of the world, our correspondent, who has been relating with the migrants, reports that the complaints have always been the same. They latch onto the problems of the citizens they are supposed to protect in order to curry favour from their hosts and consequently feather their nests.
Like other distressed migrants that our correspondent had encountered previously, Precious and her colleagues also shared their horrible experience with the Nigerian officials in Mali.
She said: “Our embassy here is our number one problem. They placed us in these people’s hands and they are still the ones coming round to ask us for money to secure our release.
“When you give them that money, they will use it and would not do anything about the problem.
“I have spent more than four years in this prison. They ate my money.
“When anyone among us goes to court, they will still be the ones that would go and stand against the person. They will tell the court not to release us.
“There are mothers among us who have been sentenced to 10 years imprisonment.
“If I spend 10 years in prison, how many years do I have left to be productive?”
She alleged that some of the officials “collected N9 million from some of our sisters. If I am lying, send this video to them. Let them come and ask me. We have more evidence.
“We have 18 of our brothers and sisters (eight boys and 10 girls) who were selling supplements in Burkina Fasso. They came here to hustle at ages between 19 and 20.
“Their only offence was that they did not have approval to sell the supplements. They were rounded up and brought to the prison.
“Those children don’t know how they can even get food to eat. The embassy that was supposed to stand for them were the ones who went to tell the authorities that those children were into human trafficking whereas they have the ID cards of their companies and the supplements they were selling.
“The authorities arrested them and the supplements and took them to a police station. From the police station, they took them to court and wrote that they were into human trafficking.”
Continuing, she said: “The company went to the embassy in Nigeria to complain and from there, they called the embassy here to release them. But they said the money for bail will not be enough and demanded that the parents of the children should send them N10 million or they will be sent to five years in prison.
“The prison officials beat us every day. We have sent letters to our embassy on many occasions but they have always replied that they should not be involved in our matters. They said we should be left here to rot away. We are calling for help from Nigerians.
Frustrated by her experience in the Malian prison, Precious pleaded to be brought back home to serve her prison terms.
Her words: “If it means going to serve jail term in Nigeria, I am okay with that. We are here at our own risk. It was not a small issue with the prison authorities this morning.”
Seeking the intervention of the Federal Government and kind hearted Nigerians, Precious said: “This video is the only avenue we have to speak out. Please help to make it go viral and reach the top government officials in Abuja.
“We believe that no matter how bad Nigeria is, the President will not just sit and watch us die. I am begging Nigerians in the name of God to help us.”
Contrary to claims in some quarters that the video in which Precious spoke was an old one, our correspondent searched and reached out to Precious’s sister Sharon, who promptly dismissed the claims and went on to share fresh videos and audio messages from her sister with our correspondent.
Precious directly responded to our request in one of the short voice messages.
Seeking help for Precious, Sharon went down memory lane to recall how she embarked on the ill-fated trip.
She said: “My sister travelled to Mali between 2020 and 2021. She was into petty business before someone told her about Mali.
“The person told her that there was money in Mali. They arrested her immediately she got to Mali and seized her phone.
“It was two years after she had been in prison that she told us that she was in detention. She used the mobile number of a prison cleaner.
“The amount of money the people over there are demanding from them is too much. They asked for N1million.
“The Nigerian embassy is not helping matters. My sister and other inmates are asking to be deported but they are not cooperating.
“They are also not taking them to court; they just kept them there.”
As a family, Sharon said, “we don’t know what to do again. Our parents are aware of her condition. We have no money. They are asking for a million naira and we don’t have such.
“My mum is not working. My brother has been sacked in his place of work. We have nowhere to raise such money from.
“It is not easy for us to survive here in our own country. The only thing we can do is to cry out to all Nigerians just as we are doing now.”
‘How Nigerian embassy officials collected N3,8 million without securing my release’
Another inmate told of how officials of the Nigerian embassy in Mali deceitfully collected millions of naira to secure her release but later abandoned her.
She said: “We are more than 100 here. The name of the prison is Bolefam, Bamako.
“The Nigerian Embassy here is the one killing us. They collected N3.8 million from me with assurance that I would come out of prison, but all that is to no avail.
“I have spent three years and three months here without going to court. We have fasted for a month for us to get released. We even did dry fasting but nothing came out of it. At a point, we were asking if God really exists.
“But we will not give up. We will keep praying.”
Inmate’s mother dies of shock
Besides the traumatic effects of imprisonment without trial on the inmates, the effects are also hitting very hard on their people back at home.
Narrating her ordeal, one of the inmates said amid sobs: “I have been in this prison for many years without any help. When I called my mother to inform her that I am in prison, my mother died out of shock.”
Since the mother’s demise, she said, “I don’t have anybody to help me. We really need help. I am begging.
“If we don’t get help, we will die at the hands of these people. The prison conditions are not easy at all.”
Also decrying her predicament, another inmate said her parents had gone broke trying to secure her release.
The fair complexioned lady said: “My parents have spent so much money to secure my release to the point that they have given up hope about my freedom.
“If they give me a 10 years jail term, will it not be over for me? To feed in this place is a big problem.”
Many of the inmates have various degrees of injuries inflicted on them by the prison authorities. They risk tetanus infection as they have been without treatment. “I can’t even get treated for the injury that they inflicted on me. Please help us before they kill us here.
“We don’t want to die here. Please help us. Let them take us to our prisons in Nigeria to serve our sentences.
“My brothers and sisters, please help us. Look at me being in prison at this early stage of my life.
“If they give me a jail term of 10 or five years, what will become of me when I come out?”
Distressed by what she had gone through, an inmate said: “Being in prison is not an easy thing. It is only those who have served prison terms that can understand what it takes to be in prison. Please we are begging for your assistance.”
Confident that the Nigerian authorities have all it takes to secure their release, she said: “If the Nigerian embassy asks them to release us today, they will do so.
“When we met the director of the prison, he said the ball is in the court of our embassy. When we met the judge, he said our hope lies in our embassy.
“The Nigerian embassy is the problem we have today. If they order for our release, we would be set free.”
Also speaking, another injured lady said: “This injury you are seeing was sustained yesterday, September 26, 2024. We had earlier posted a video asking for help.”
According to her, the prison authorities resorted to battering them after a video they did surfaced online.
“The guidance in the prison saw the video and asked for the phone that we used to record. We refused to release the phone because that is what we are using to reach out to people back at home to ask for help.
“When we refused to release the video, they started beating us. Look at the injuries.”
She added: “We are more than 14 that had various degrees of injuries inflicted on us. We are suffering here and we don’t know what will happen tomorrow, because they have vowed to kill us.
“They said even if they kill us, our President cannot do anything. That is the worst part of the whole thing.
“They said we should go back to our country. Ironically, when we asked to be deported, they said no and that even our president cannot do anything about it.
“Please, we are asking for help. We cannot do it alone.
Also decrying the roles of the Nigerian officials in Mali, she said: “The people that call themselves workers at the Nigerian Embassy are not doing their job. They are the ones selling us out to these people.
“The director of this prison went to our embassy today to complain about the beating. But do you know their response? They said that they should kill us because they don’t have anything to do with us.
“Please don’t allow anything to happen to us in this country, because we don’t have a father, mother, brother or sister here. We are here alone.
“Upon all the money that we wasted, they have refused to give us food since morning. We are starving here.
“When we went to where we could get bread to buy, they refused to sell to us.
“Please, before things get out of hand, come to our rescue.”
Experts on dangers of incarcerating mothers with children
Experts and various reports sourced by our correspondent frowned at the practice of detaining children with their mothers, albeit, some gave a few reasons why it may be of advantage.
Writing on the topic ‘Mothers and babies in prison’, Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe said: “Prison is not a healthy environment for babies and young children. The mother is inevitably under stress, prisons tend to be noisy and privacy is difficult.
“Stimulation is severely restricted. Many prisons holding babies and young children have few specially trained staff, poor play and exercise facilities, and the development of movement skills is restricted.
“Many mothers in prisons in Europe have little or in some cases no right to go outside the prison walls with their babies, and consequently the babies never see trees, traffic, animals or experience ordinary family life.
“The children have little opportunity to bond or form relationships with other family members, particularly their father and brothers and sisters. Food is often restricted to tins or prepared baby foods.
“A longitudinal psychological study of babies in prisons with their mothers (Catan 1988) found a gradual decline in their development of movement and cognitive skills. It was assumed that this was because the prison environment restricts exercise and exploration.
“Once babies start to sit up, crawl and walk, there are few opportunities for prison babies to explore. Instead, they spend more time confined to baby walkers, bouncers and pushchairs.
“The study found a significant increase in the babies’ general development after the mothers’ release.”
Also examining the effects of keeping children in prison with their mothers, African Human Rights Law Journal said a research conducted on this controversial topic attempts to substantiate the advantages and disadvantages of both sides.
It said: “Despite inaccurate data, it is estimated that as at 2017, approximately 19,000 children were living in prison with their primary caregivers, usually the mother.
“Proponents of co-detention argue that it may afford infants and young children an opportunity to bond and develop a secure attachment with their mother, an ‘inseparable biological and social unit’, with undeniable (short and long-term) consequences for the child’s psychological, social and educational development.
“Being breastfed is beneficial to the child by significantly reducing morbidity and mortality rates in the first two years of life.”
This temporary arrangement, it said, could provide a higher level of mental stability for both mother and child and could prevent child abandonment. However, it noted that the mother’s familiar and nurturing presence may be the only reassuring element in the midst of a hostile environment such as the prison.
“Carefully considering the myriad of difficulties associated with prison life and in order to preserve the best interests of the child, supporters of co-detention rather recommend the creation of special institutions where the impact of co-detention on the holistic development of the child could be mitigated.
“On the other hand, it has been argued that children should never be punished for their parents’ crimes and that, therefore, they should not be deprived of their right to liberty, especially if the conditions of detention are not in favour of such choice.
“Co-detention leads to multifaceted violations of children’s rights and may expose them to various risks, depending on the level of prison development and the duration of the stay.
“Most contemporary African prisons find themselves ‘at odds with human rights standards’, being under-resourced, understaffed and overcrowded, evidently translating into overall precarious conditions of detention. “Therefore, such institutions are ill-equipped or completely unable to provide for the specific needs of children.
“Truth be told, most African prisons do not even provide special accommodation for children in co-detention, with the exception of pioneering South Africa as well as certain prison facilities in Ethiopia, Ghana, Kenya and Uganda, where since 2014 mother and baby units have been created.
“The majority of African prisons do not provide for the basic necessities of infants and young children such as formula, bottles, clothing and hygiene products.”
NAPTIP, Malian Embassy decline comment
Our correspondents’ efforts to get the reactions of the National Agency for the Prohibition of Trafficking in Persons (NAPTIP) and the Malian Embassy in Nigeria to react to the allegations were unsuccessful.
NAPTIP’s spokesman, Zack, failed to answer calls to his mobile lines and also refused to respond to messages sent to him via regular text and WhatsAPP. The Foreign Affairs spokesman also declined comment.
The Malian Embassy also did not respond to our message sent via email.
Decrying the conditions of the girls and government officials’ attitude to their plight, Osita Osemene, the Executive Director, Patriotic Citizens Initiative and National Secretary and Head of Programmes, Network Against Child Trafficking, Abuse and Labour, NACTAL, said: “I got this report of Nigerian girls in prison through one of the relatives of the girls who are in prison. It was very touching. I started making contacts after watching the videos especially when I realised that the videos are recent. I was pained because one of the fundamental responsibilities of humanity is to protect the rights of citizens.
“I didn’t probe to know what was wrong but after listening to their voice notes, I noticed that most of them are girls that went for greener pastures or those who were trafficked and being used for sexual exploitation.
“I shared the videos to government officials; NAPTIP, NIDCOM, National Commission for Refugees, our regional platform, West Africa Coalition against Trafficking in Persons, and other stakeholders for intervention because this case does require urgent intervention. We started reaching out through our network, NACTAL, to see how interventions can be done. I even went to the international Centre for Migration and Policy Development. The project manager on counter trafficking had to put a call across to Mali with some of their project contacts there to get across to the Malian government.”
After reaching out to government officials in Nigeria, Osita said: “The feedback I got is that I should find out further what the people did that made them to be kept in prison. I found it difficult why I should be finding out what the people actually did. We are supposed to move in and save the situation first. The girl that sent that video to me has been brutalised and taken to another prison. Eyewitnesses said that she was really wounded and they confiscated the phone that she used in doing the recording. They weren’t happy that the video went viral.
“We have an embassy there that should have shown more concern about the plight of the citizens. They are not bothered about the situation of the citizens in Mali and that is very unfair. We in civil society are not happy the way Nigerians are being treated and the way the authorities are handling issues. They are putting the lives of Nigerians in danger.
“ No matter what, they should protect the citizens. It will be unfair if Nigeria does not care about its citizens who are languishing in prison abroad. Incidentally, these are women and children. It will be unfair if we don’t probe into the matter and see how these people can be rescued and brought back.
What did they do that warranted packing such a large number of girls in prison?”
Foreign Affairs Ministry, NIDCOM reacts
Contacted, the spokesperson for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Amb. Abu-Obe Eche, replying via a text message, said: “I will confirm from our mission in Mali; but I suspect it is bogus. Diplomats don’t take advantage of inmates.”
Amb. Eche was yet to get back to the reporter on his findings from Nigeria’s mission in Mali as at the time of filing this report.
When the reporter also approached the Nigerians in Diaspora Commission (NIDCOM) for comment, the Director of Media, Public Relations and Protocols, Abdur-Rahman Balogun, responded by sharing a statement issued by the commission on the ugly development.
The statement titled ‘RE:VIDEOS ON STRANDED NIGERIANS ABROAD ON SOCIAL MEDIA-LET’S BE CAUTIOUS’ reads: “In recent times, there have been series of viral videos both old and new ones circulating on social media on Nigerians stranded in various countries or in detention camps owing to many reasons from irregular migration, violation of consular regulations or outright committing one crime or the other and requesting for urgent help of the Federal government for evacuation and transportation back home.
“Another one is that of mainly girls, in Bamako, Mali prisons, in a very dehumanising conditions and calling for help from the Federal government of Nigeria.Just like the case of Libya and other cases , the Nigerian government has severally evacuated thousands of Nigerians stranded in Mali, with a warning to avoid any temptation to be lured there. But they still return.
“The Office of the National Security Adviser (NSA) is heading the Multi-Agency Task Force, which includes Nigerians in Diaspora Commission, (NIDCOM), National Emergency Management Agency (NEMA), National Commission for Refugees, Migrants, and Internally Displaced Persons (NCRMIDP), Nigeria Immigration Service,(NIS), among others.
“We urge Nigerians to be cautious in circulating such videos (mainly undated ) and note that the multi-agency team headed by the National Security Adviser, has been evacuating stranded Nigerians abroad , including those being sent back for various offences.
“While we note that the Federal Government is working round the clock to see to the welfare of its citizens wherever they may be in line with its citizens’ diplomacy, we reiterate again that irregular migration and criminal activities must be avoided as the penalties are severe and deadly.”
The Federal Government has condemned the recent terror attack in Bamako, Mali.
It said the attack represents a threat to peace and security for the entire region.
The government in a statement by the Amb. Eche Abu-Obe, spokesperson
Ministry of Foreign Affairs said it stand with Mali and its people.
The statement reads: “The Federal Republic of Nigeria strongly condemns the abominable terrorist attack that took place on Tuesday, 17th September, 2024, targeting a military airport, training Centre and other sensitive locations in Bamako, Mali.
“This heinous act, which has claimed lives and caused destruction of several military aircraft, is yet another stark reminder of the persistent threat posed by extremist groups in the region.
“It must be emphasised that acts of terrorism, regardless of where they occur, represent a threat to peace and security for the entire region.
“Nigeria extends its deepest condolences to the Government and people of Mali, particularly to the families of those who lost their lives. Our thoughts and prayers are with the victims of this tragic incident.”
Mali’s transitional government has broken off diplomatic relations with Ukraine.
The move follows a rebel attack in the country that left dozens of Malian soldiers and Russian mercenaries dead.
A representative of the Ukrainian military intelligence service had previously said that Kiev had helped the rebel Tuareg in an ambush on a convoy of the Malian army.
The Wagner mercenaries supported them over a week ago.
As a consequence, Mali will in future regard support for Ukraine as support for international terrorism, the statement continued.
An unconfirmed photo showing Tuareg fighters with a Ukrainian flag was also circulating on the internet.
“They have received the necessary information to enable them to carry out a successful military operation against the Russian war criminals,” said Andriy Yusov on Ukrainian television last week.
At the same time, he announced further operations of this kind in Africa.
“The monopoly of the Russian private armies in Africa is coming to an end and opposing forces are emerging that can put these criminals in their place,’’ said the intelligence officer.
According to the separatist Tuareg, 84 Russian mercenaries and 47 Malian soldiers were killed in several days of fighting at the end of July around the village of Tinzaouatène on the border with Algeria.
There was also talk of more than 80 casualties on Wagner-affiliated channels, representing the heaviest Russian losses to date in West Africa.
The Islamist terrorist group GSIM, which is allied with al-Qaeda, also attacked the convoy.
Whether the Tuareg cooperated with the Islamists remained unconfirmed.
A university teacher, Prof. Amadu Sesay, has called on Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) leaders to employ tact to convince Mali, Burkina Faso, and Niger to return to the sub-regional organisation.
Sesay, former Head of the Department of International Relations, Obafemi Awolowo University, OAU, Ile-Ife, said those countries can be approached by seasoned diplomats and experts to retrace their steps.
The university teacher, who is the author of the book: “The Politics of Regional Integration in West Africa,” said by lifting the sanctions, which it earlier imposed on the three countries over military takeovers, ECOWAS would have effectively put paid to the threat of the use of force that was being used to compel them to return to civilian rule.
Sesay, who spoke with reporters in Jos, Plateau state, said the emphasis has now shifted to the search for acceptable diplomatic solutions that would hopefully lead to a mutually acceptable resolution of the impasse.
He, therefore, urged ECOWAS leaders to look for capable, credible, and competent emissaries, who would drive the expected series of diplomatic engagements that would be acceptable to all parties, including the three countries.
Sesay said: “I hope that ECOWAS will look within the membership of its Committee of the Wise and Elders to choose those who would drive the series of diplomatic engagements that will provide realistic and practical pathways for the return of the three countries to its fold.
“This is a very delicate and time-consuming endeavour.
“The outcomes are also unpredictable, and no one should expect quick fixes because ECOWAS is made up of equal sovereign states. It has no supranational powers like the European Union.
“Tact and patience are, therefore, of utmost importance, especially at this initial stage of engagements.
“We should remember that the three countries made it clear that they had taken sovereign decisions, which implies that national egos, pride, and prestige are already at stake.”
He said that the ECOWAS leaders’ decision to lift the sanctions, even when the three countries had yet to make any concessions, especially on their threat to quit ECOWAS, was “right and realistic in the prevailing circumstances.”
Sesay, however, said that the decision also implied a sign of weakness on the part of ECOWAS and a tacit admission that it had not achieved the desired results, as well as their negative fallout on all sides.
“ECOWAS is not a supranational body, it cannot compel compliance with its decisions as the actions of Niger Republic, Mali, and Burkina Faso have demonstrated.
“What lifting the sanctions also implies, is that the Protocol on Democracy and Good Governance, once the backbone of ECOWAS’ strategy to promote democracy and good governance in the region, is no longer realistic.
“Neither is it enforceable in the prevailing political and socio-economic conditions in the member states and the region in general.
“It remains to be seen how ECOWAS will fill the gap in promoting democracy and good governance in the region after that.
“I hope the action will not lead to dramatic democratic and governance reversals in the region,” he said.
Sesay noted that the rationale of trying to bring the three countries back to ECOWAS’ fold was to curb the rampant terrorism and insurgencies, which have become major challenges to peace, security, and development in the region, especially in the Sahel.
According to the don, the West African subregion needs national, as well as regionwide efforts, to tackle the devastating national and regional effects of the activities of jihadists, terrorists, and insurgents.
While agreeing with the military leaders on one of their grievances, which is the undue influence of France in the subregion, Sesay said that France has for long been a “negative and obnoxious player in Africa, particularly in its former colonies.”
“Doing away with France as the three countries are trying to do is commendable. I, however, hope that they are not just trading partners by moving uncritically close to Russia and China.
“I hope the three countries will sustain their patriotic and commendable stand against France in the long run. I also hope that they will get the support of ECOWAS and its members to achieve this laudable goal.
“The most challenging situation of African countries in the last six decades of independence is their inability to pursue homegrown and self-sustainable growth and development due to factors that we cannot go into here,” he said.
Appraising ECOWAS’ scorecard ahead of its 50th anniversary in May 2025, he said: “One of the biggest achievements of ECOWAS in the last five decades, is the absence of inter-state conflicts in the region, either over territory or natural resources.
“Fifty years after its creation, however, it is arguable that most, if not all of its members and the region, are much worse now politically and economically.
“There have been serious governance and economic reversals, especially in the last two decades.
“I think that ECOWAS will overcome the present challenges to its integrity if it devotes more attention to promoting prosperity in the region by developing and undertaking regionwide projects that will impact positively on the citizens of the region and enhance its stature and relevance to its members.”
Sesay identified the driving force behind the seeming epidemic of military coups that are currently bedevilling West Africa, and indeed Africa, as the yawning governance deficits in many member states.
He challenged ECOWAS and other African leaders to pay more attention to meeting the basic needs of the citizens, or what his colleague famously described as “democracy of the stomach.”
“The forces responsible for these coups are the dictatorial tendencies of democratic governments in member states and the desire to hold on to power at all cost through undue tenure elongation.
“Others are the manipulation of electoral and judicial processes; over-reliance on so-called development partners; weak national economies and excruciating poverty among the majority of the citizens.
“This is why voiceless citizens sometimes openly call for or welcome the military as the only way out in the prevailing circumstances,” Sesay said.
Sesay, anbECOWAS’ official historian, also authored the ECOMOG book: “The Search for Lasting Peace in Liberia, Sierra Leone and Guinea Bissau,” and “Post-war Regimes and State Reconstruction in Liberia and Sierra Leone.
A peacebuilding think tank, Foundation for Peace Professionals (PeacePro) has counseled the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) to handle the withdrawal of Mali, Burkina Faso, and Niger Republic from being members of the body with tact and caution.
PeacePro specifically urged ECOWAS to delay its response to the withdrawal of the member-states.
PeacePro asked the West African body to assess its conduct and approaches over time as well as its mid and long-term plan, as well as its strategic interest, vis-a-vis the implication of withdrawal of the affected countries and their foreign allies before articulating its position.
Executive Director of PeacePro, Abdulrazaq Hamzat explained that the withdrawal of the three member-states had political, economic, and security implications for the region, hinting that “the effect will be positive or negative, depending on how ECOWAS handles the new development.”
Hamzat explained that “this development, as shocking as it may be, could assist the region to transform itself and become the necessary catalyst for West Africa’s rejuvenation.
“This is why we would advise ECOWAS not to respond rashly to the development of momentary spotlight, ” adding that “the body should overview its conduct and approaches over time, its short and long term plan, as well as the strategic implication before taking any position.”
The bloc should stick to own rules but use diplomacy to brush off pullout threats
Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger, a trio ruled by military juntas, just announced their “immediate” withdrawal from the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS). That should not cause any panic, spawn a rash of doomsday analyses, or even spark emotive blusters that ECOWAS has outlived its usefulness. It has not.
If anything, West Africa’s Anglophone-Francophone gulf would appear to have closed somewhat, since ECOWAS’ birthing treaty: the ECOWAS Treaty of Lagos, signed on May 28, 1975, though “complete” integration is still clearly a work-in-progress.
As partnering sovereign states, the core principle of the collective is voluntary entry and exit, on perceived national interests, as judged by those that occupy power in the 16 respective states. It’s a moot point though if soldiers, with no democratic mandate, can lay claim to their people’s authority, as different from junta whims, to exit from such a body – Africa’s biggest regional bloc today: 5.2 million square kilometres; a combined GDP of $734.8 billion; an estimated population of 300 million.
Still, the limitation of soldiers, vis-a-vis elected governments, to make such pivotal decisions, is not quite an open-and-shut case. ECOWAS itself birthed when many of the 15 founding countries were under military rule. Ritualised elections — often skewed in many African states to steal power — don’t, open sesame, equate a democracy. So, rulers can steal power by the ballot, as much as they can by the gun.
Nevertheless, there is a double jeopardy for junta rule. Whereas elections can be rigged, coups are never a choice. Rather, they are savage suppression of the majority, by the infinitesimal few, by official arms. Worse: coups strait-jacket the power-grabbing soldiers and their sorry nationals, with near-no way out, except by counter-robbery by the gun!
That ECOWAS, many of its founding fathers though ruling soldiers, has today turned a radical apostle for democracy, shows an admirable bid to learn from past ruins.
Military rule has been a plague everywhere. Look no farther than Nigeria. Its military Head of State, Gen. Yakubu Gowon, was host-in-chief when the ECOWAS treaty was signed in 1975. But its current President, Bola Ahmed Tinubu, proved the opposer-in-chief to coups in the region, with Nigeria’s fierce opposition to the 2023 coup in Niger Republic, despite the cultural bond and fraternal ties between Nigeria and Niger.
ECOWAS has declared military rule an anathema, a stance this newspaper absolutely shares. So, the body should not flinch from imposing that rule on any errant member, a category into which Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger fall. It has started well by suspending the trio; and trying to engage them to announce a reasonable timetable back to credible elections. It must insist on that, and not succumb to any threat to pull out.
The reason is simple. If 12 out of 15 members embrace a protocol as sacred and inviolable, why should they succumb to a pullout blackmail threat, by misguided few, with the mindset of might-is-right? The three juntas claim ECOWAS has departed its original goal; and is allegedly selling out to foreign interest. But how? Simply because it disallows an anathema in its collective? Rich!
If anything, these military rulers project the ire of a child chasing a vanishing lolly, but throwing tantrums to veil his panic. Or how do you reconcile the trio approaching the ECOWAS Court for some remedy, faced a logical rebuff — suspended members can’t seek relief from the common court — but returned, three weeks later, with the threat of “immediate” pullout? It’s a classic case of short-gun thinking from a short-fused junta!
Yes again — as sovereign states, they reserve the right to be in or out. But even that right is rules-bound; and “immediate” pullout is strange to that rule. Mauritania, one of the 15 founding states, withdrew from the bloc in December 2000. But that couldn’t start until December 2001, because by ECOWAS statute, it had to give a one-year notice — which it duly did. By August 2017, however, the same Mauritania had signed a new agreement with ECOWAS as associate member.
There is always strength in regional economic blocs that enjoy common trade protocols and sundry benefits, especially for land-locked countries, as Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger — a clear advantage the trio are now throwing away in a fit of anger. But those benefits must have been the pull for Cabo Verde — though a cluster of tiny islands on the Atlantic Ocean off the West African coast. It joined as the 16th member in 1977.
Yet, it must be stressed that Africans are people scattered across borders. Different colonial masters imposed different colonial languages on them — no thanks to the arbitrary carving out of territories by the colonial powers.
Indeed, the close and intricate relationship between the Hausa, Fulani and Kanuri with kith-and-kin in Niger (Nigeria’s immediate northern neighbour), is akin to the bond of ethnic Yoruba across Nigeria, Benin — and to some extent, Togo and Ghana. That cross-border kinship is also replicated between the Igbo and sundry ethnics massed along Nigeria’s south east border — with Cameroon, Gabon and Equatorial Guinea.
That, therefore, makes ECOWAS not just a cut-and-dried case. Whether it holds or splits is not clinically settled by law, conventions and protocols. There are deeper cultural bonds that predate these latter-day laws. That was why the military option against Niger, to restore ousted President Mohamed Bazoum, was hugely unpopular in the North, even while the Nigerian government, whose President chairs ECOWAS, considered it a rather serious option.
So again, ECOWAS should not abandon its rules for a junta triad that just declared itself upset. But it must find ways, beyond these temporary holders of power, to engage the people: using cultural and religious links to dissuade these countries from their arbitrary decisions. For this, there is a thriving network of monarchs, religious leaders, and even distinguished families that straddle these countries. Such consultations could make the juntas and ECOWAS understand one another better.
Then, ECOWAS itself is overdue for very stringent peer review, in terms of elections and good governance. Only that will strengthen its stand that democracy, in West Africa, must be inviolable. It should not only work hard on clean elections, it should also develop community-wide protocols that vet governance across borders, without breaching the sovereignty of member countries.
There is also this question of Guinea. Though one of four countries under military rule, it has been the least arrogant and badly behaved among them. It seems to have taken its sanctions in good faith. For that, ECOWAS should encourage it and nudge it toward re-democratisation.
Still, there is no fetish about democracy. The government voted into power must add value to the people. If it doesn’t, it should be voted out — as performing ones are rewarded with fresh terms — in elections not only transparent but clearly seen to be so.
That is the challenge before ECOWAS and its dream of democracy, development and prosperity — and here failure is no option, just as military rule is never one.
A major crisis hit the 49-year old Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) yesterday.
Three member-countries-Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger-quit the sub-regional group, following protracted disagreement over its rejection of military rule in West Africa.
However, ECOWAS claimed that it was yet to get notification about the withdrawal announced by governments of the three countries.
The three Sahel nations said in a joint statement on state televisions that they had made a “sovereign decision” to leave ECOWAS “without delay”.
The juntas said they have “decided in complete sovereignty on the immediate withdrawal of Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger from the ECOWAS,” alleging that the bloc has “moved away from the ideals of its founding fathers and pan-Africanism” after nearly 50 years of its establishment.
The statement added: “Furthermore, ECOWAS, under the influence of foreign powers, betraying its founding principles, has become a threat to its member states and its populations whose happiness it is supposed to ensure.”
Struggling with jihadist violence and poverty, relations between the regimes and ECOWAS have been ruptured, following the coups took place in Niger last July, Burkina Faso in 2022 and Mali in 2020.
The three countries were suspended from ECOWAS, with Niger and Mali facing heavy sanctions.
They have hardened their positions in recent months and joined forces in an “Alliance of Sahel States”.
The French military withdrawal from the Sahel – the region along the Sahara desert across Africa – has heightened concerns over the conflicts spreading southward to Gulf of Guinea states – Ghana, Togo, Benin and Ivory Coast.
The prime minister appointed by Niger’s military regime, Ali Zeine, Thursday blasted ECOWAS for “bad faith” after the bloc largely shunned a planned meeting in Niamey.
Niger had hoped for an opportunity to talk through differences with fellow states of ECOWAS which has cold-shouldered Niamey, imposing heavy economic and financial sanctions, following the military coup that overthrew elected president Mohamed Bazoum.
The bloc, in a statement yesterday, said it was yet to get any official or direct notification from the three countries.
The statement reads: “The attention of the Commission of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS Commission) has been drawn to a statement broadcast on the National Televisions of Mali and Niger announcing the decision of Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger to withdraw from ECOWAS.
“The ECOWAS Commission is yet to receive any direct formal notification from the three member states about their intention to withdraw from the community.
“The ECOWAS Commission, as directed by the Authority of Heads of State and Government, has been working assiduously with these countries for the restoration of constitutional order. Burkina Faso, Niger, and Mali remain important members of the community and the authority remains committed to finding a negotiated solution to the political impasse.
“The ECOWAS Commission remains seized with the development and shall make further pronouncements as the situation evolves.”
Analysts: use persuasive diplomacy to bring them back
Reactions by international relations expects have trailed the exit of Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger from the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS).
They urged the regional body to employ persuasive diplomacy to bring them back into the fold.
The experts said in ECOWAS, like other international organisations, individual countries can decide to join or leave, depending on the interests they are pursuing.
They said other ECOWAS member-states should find a way of discussing with the countries and bringing them back on board through dialogue.
According to those who spoke, the affected countries are sending a signal, adding that “they will be the one who will later want to seek readmission”.
An Associate Professor and the Acting Director of Research and Studies Department at the Nigerian Institute of International Affairs (NIIA), Efem Ubi, yesterday recalled that he asserted in a recent paper published by Financial Nigeria that if ECOWAS intervened militarily in any of the three countries, it would be its end.
I think the issue of military coups has not been handled rightly by the bloc,” Ubi said.
“With the announcement of this new alliance, can we say ECOWAS is still in existence? This is just the beginning of what we are expecting to see. Now, they have moved away; they have formed an alliance. I don’t know what you are still going to call the other remaining 12 ECOWAS members.
“I think the issue of military coups has not been handled rightly by the bloc,” Ibim said.
He said the sanctions placed by ECOWAS on the three countries only affect the citizens and not the coup plotters.
“ECOWAS has to look at the root causes of the problem of coups in West Africa. I have said it on many occasions that root causes of military take over have not been addressed.
“What I think ECOWAS should do is to embrace more of diplomacy.”
“It’s the military option that has degenerated to this point. They should find a way of discussing with the countries and bring them back on board. The best way is to manage the problem through dialogue,” he said.
Former Vice Chancellor of Federal University Oye- Ekiti, Ekiti State, Prof. Kayode Soremekun, said the three countries have done what they think is in their interests.
According to him, ECOWAS should use persuasive diplomacy.
“The three countries should also not be carried away by the euphoria of the movement. I hope they are not being edged on by external forces. Russia is showing keen interests in the region.
“I hope this is not funeral song of ECOWAS being sung. Therefore, Nigeria and others should bring them back into the fold.”
But, a one-time Ambassador to Belgium, Prof. Alaba Ogunsanwo, said it was not the first time that a country would withdraw from ECOWAS.
According to him, Mauritania, which was part of the countries that signed the ECOWAS Treaty in Lagos in 1975, gave one year notice in 1999 that it was leaving the organisation.
“It left and it has not come back. These three countries – Mali, Burkina Faso and Niger – are landlocked, which means it will be difficult for them without the ECOWAS neighbours interacting with them. Before ECOWAS was established, the three countries were interacting with themselves.
“Because they are under suspension, other ECOWAS countries can say they are rejecting their withdrawal. They can also say we will only accept your withdrawal when you return to civilian rule and the civilian governments can now say they are leaving ECOWAS.
“The situation is different from Mauritania, which said it would prefer to join the Maghreb Union.
“In ECOWAS, like other international organisations, individual country can decide to join or not to join, depending on the calculations of the interests to belonging to the organisation. The three as sovereign states can say they are withdrawing from ECOWAS.
“And ECOWAS can say you are the one who will suffer. Let’s see how you will survive. And ECOWAS can punish them more. I also know that some people would say let ECOWAS go and use force.
“But because ECOWAS is an international organisation, it should just allow erring members to go because they are sovereign countries. They may suffer from more sanctioning and when they learn their lessons; they can come back.”
A former Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Ambassador Bulus Lolo, described the decision of the three West African countries as a new development, which is not unconnected with the current political situations in the three countries.
Stressing he was not surprised by their actions, he, however, said it is a storm in tea cup that would soon fizzle out.
The former Permanent Secretary said: “They are sending a signal, but the point is that they will be isolated as they are now.
“Down the road, they will be the one who will later want to seek readmission.”
He also asked rhetorically: “Where are they going to? After the present leaderships, what will be the future of the countries? “
Lolo said no democratic government would want to follow their path of action.
Oge Onubogu, director of the Africa Programme at the Washington-based Wilson Centre think tank, said in parts of West Africa, ECOWAS is fast losing its effectiveness and support among citizens, who see it as representing only the interests of the leaders and not that of the masses.
Widely seen as Africa’s top political and regional authority, the 15-nation bloc of ECOWAS — formed in 1975 to “promote economic integration” in member states — has struggled in recent years to reverse rampant coups in the region where citizens have complained of not benefitting from rich natural resources.
First to exit the bloc: Mauritania
Arabic-speaking Mauritania was one of the founding members of ECOWAS in 1975 and decided to withdraw in December 2000. Mauritania signed a new associate-membership agreement in August 2017.
ECOWAS Revised Treaty
Withdrawal under Chapter XXII – General and final provisions Article 91
1. Any Member State wishing to withdraw from the community shall give to the Executive Secretary one year’s notice in writing who shall inform Member States thereof. At the expiration of this period, if such notice is not withdrawn, such a state shall cease to be a member of the community.
2. During the period of one year referred to in the preceding paragraph, such a member state shall continue to comply with the provisions of this treaty and shall remain bound to discharge its obligations under this treaty.
After three coups in recent years, and the expulsion of United Nations and French military contingents, Mali is on the cusp of military and political disaster. The coups were supposedly in reaction to the flagging anti-jihadist war under two elected or interim presidents, and the allegedly complicit or ineffective involvement of the French in counterinsurgency operations in the northern and central parts of the country. After the expulsion of the UN and French forces, and their replacement with about 1,000 Russian Wagner mercenary forces, the war has still continued to go badly for the Malians, with fresh reports indicating massive gains by al-Qaeda-affiliated militants in central Mali, and the besiegement of Timbuktu.
ECOWAS may have had a bad time dealing with rampaging coups in the sub-region, including the latest in Gabon and Niger Republic, but they now need to urgently convene an extraordinary meeting to counter the situation before it gets out of hand. This time, they must exude less emotion, and together with their foreign policy experts, the African Union, and the chafing UN, find a solution to the crisis if they are not to be confronted by a nightmare too difficult to handle. The problem is no longer just that of West Africa; it is an African crisis. Nigeria must speedily conclude its election litigations in order to release President Bola Tinubu to provide the needed leadership to confront what may be an epochal crisis.
