The Nation Newspaper

Tag: Terrorism

  • Terrorism: A historical perspective – 4

    In order to put these movements in perspective, it will be clearer if one looks at religious movements in the Sudan broadly defined as a whole. In the modern history of the Western and Eastern Sudan stretching from the Senegal valley across to the upper valleys of the Nile, Islamic fundamentalism has played a very important role. The most well known of Islamic revolutions in the Western Sudan is that of  Usman Dan Fodio, whose son Muhammad Bello and brother Abdullahi founded the Sokoto caliphate. Usman Dan Fodio was an itinerant preacher against syncretism, corruption and misrule among apparently Muslim rulers in Hausaland.

    Islam had been well planted in Hausaland since about the 8th century A.D particularly in Kano and Katsina with many clerics from North Africa visiting Kano and Katsina to lecture at mosques there. But over time, the Muslim rulers of these areas became more materialistic, corrupt and dictatorial in the conduct of state affairs. Taxes were arbitrarily levied on and collected from the peasants and the Nomads. It was these grievances that Usman Dan Fodio exploited to lead a rebellion against the Habe rulers between 1804 and 1808.

    This movement succeeded beyond his wildest dreams and drove away from their thrones Hausa, Nupe rulers and the Yoruba ruler of Ilorin. There is no doubt that Usman Dan Fodio was a pious man but one needs more than piety to found an empire. The political and military prowess of his son Muhammad Bello and Abdullahi his brother facilitated the emergence of the Sokoto caliphate. By the time the British overthrew the caliphate; almost all the evils of the Habe rulers had resurfaced in the caliphate and had undermined the moral fabric of the state. This point was proved by the Satiru revolt of 1905/1906 led by the blind cleric Saybu Dan Makafo who was able to mobilise people against the corrupt practices of the caliphate leadership and its English and French successors both in Sokoto and Dosso.

    The example of the Fulani-led revolt and the creation of the Sokoto caliphate were followed by fellow Fulanis in Massina now part of Mali and led by Sheikh Amadu Bakr Lobbo El-amin in 1810 and between that time and 1845, an ascetic type of Islam was imposed on the community and the Sharia and Islamic jurisprudence were strictly followed. A much wider movement in the Western Sudan was led by Al-hajj Umar Tall. He was a Tukolor, a group closely linked with the Fulani who also established along the upper Nile valleys, a so-called Segu-Tukolor empire in which he imposed himself on the largely Malinke ethnic groups in those areas.

    Al-hajj Umar is well known in West African history as the man who was responsible for spreading the Tijanniya brotherhood, a revolutionary form of Islamic tariqa that preached equality of all peoples. These three Islamic revolutions by and large purified the society and brought new regimes based on the Sharia that were more favourable to the ordinary people. Although over time their decline and eventual fall became inevitable. These movements had positive impact on the Western and Central Sudan. Even though they involved some element of violence, it was violence with a positive purpose.

    A much bigger and militant movement employing modern methods of warfare as well as sophisticated arms took place in what was then known as the Egyptian Sudan in 1881. This has gone down into history as the Mahdia or the Mahdist state which lasted between 1881 and 1898.

    The Sudan was for several decades under Turko-Egyptian control and oppression in the form of arbitrary taxation, corruption and inept rule was characteristic of the regime. It was not too difficult for a millenarian movement led by Mohammed Ahmad who proclaimed himself Al mahdi in the tradition of Islamic thought prevailing in that area. This was based on a doctrine that in difficult times, an “Imam of the age” would come and take over rulership of the state, purify the society and bring the society nearer to God.

    Sheikh Mohammed Ahmad declared himself this “Imam of the age” and the Messiah ‘Mahdi’ the people were waiting for. He was able to found a state between 1881 and 1898 before the combined forces of the Egyptians and the British defeated him under a Bible-waving General Charles Gordon, whose death aroused national sentiment in England. The man who later became British Prime Minister and Second World War hero, Winston Churchill took part in the fighting against the Mahdist leadership. The Mahdia has left an indelible imprint on Sudan even up till today and the Umma, a political party led by the grandson of the Mahdi, the Oxford educated Sadek el-Mhadi has been in and out of power several times.

    It is quite clear that any movement claiming to be an Islamic movement should aim at purifying society and since Islam generally does not separate politics from religion, such a movement must have a plan of creating a state in which the Sharia would be the law and some kind of theocracy would be the mode of governance.

    The closest thing we have to Boko Haram therefore was the Maitasine uprising in Kano in 1980 and its blind fury and murderous campaign against the society generally did not conform to any reformist paradigm of Jihad. It did not appear to have had a programme of creating a state or replacing the then political status quo. It was also secretive and syncretist in nature. It mixed Islam and traditional African religion. The Maitasine revolt however was on such a scale that a division of the Nigerian army had to be deployed against it. Muhammad Marwa its leader was apparently killed in the campaign against them.

    This Maitasine revolt later reared up its ugly head in 1982 in Yola, Adamawa state and Bulunkutu, Borno State at the outskirts of Maiduguri. It was also on the same level of violence as the one in Kano and thousands of people perished in Yola and Maiduguri. This latter offshoot of the Maitasine was apparently led by Musa Makaniki who after the violence in Yola escaped to Gombe and from there to the Cameroons before he was caught in 2004.

  • Children paint against terrorism

    Children paint against terrorism

    Artworks on effects of terrorism by the duo of Jehoshphat Bala of New Vine Academy, Bwari, Abuja and Tire Onabanjo of Loyola Jesuit, Abuja emerged over all best in the junior and senior secondary school categories of the National Gallery of Art (NGA) organised Children Day talent hunt/exhibition. The works emerged from 40 selected works exhibited at  the Cyprian Ekwensi Centre for Arts and Culture, Area 10, Garki, Abuja with the theme, Let’s Fight Terrorism, it Destroys Our Nation.

    The competition is aimed at directing every attention to the negative consequences of terrorism. Hence, the works produced by the children in various media depict the adverse effects of terrorism and advocate that a conscious effort be made to reverse the ugly trend. The theme was chosen to underscore the menacing effect of terrorism in Nigeria and its effect on the Nigerian child.

    A total of 164 entries were received but only 40 were selected for exhibition. Twenty schools in the FCT and Abuja participated in the programme that also witnessed dance-dramas and news casting. The event was anchored by Mr. Edet Dominic Head of Station/Curator, NGA Abuja.

    The first prize painting in the junior secondary category is done in oil on canvas and it shows a child crying ostensibly over the killings going on around him. Fear is palpable in the piece.

    But in Onabanjo’s painting, which won the first prize in the senior secondary school category, a conscious effort is made to reverse the ugly trend as a lady is seen holding a spear to attack a man she had disarmed. The man is obviously a terrorist and the lady, defending herself.

    Director-General National Gallery of Art (NGA), Abdullahi Muku said that NGA has for a decade provided a viable platform for children to express themselves annually on Children on Day May 27. He explained that NGA as an agency responsible for the collection and promotion of the best of visual art in Nigeria has continued to actualise its core mandate by utilising every opportunity to showcase its creative spirit through the visual art.

    The DG who was represented by the Director Educational Services Dr. (Mrs.) Evelyn Otaigbe noted that the most vulnerable group to threat and impact of terrorism remains the women and children. Muku therefore said a moment should be spared to remember the children who by virtue of seeking academic excellence have been killed, kidnapped or displaced. He was full of praises to the children for the skills displayed at the exhibition.

     

    *Obadimeji is of the PR Unit,  NGA, Abuja

  • Buhari mourns victims of insurgency

    Buhari mourns victims of insurgency

    President Muhammadu Buhari has on Thursday expressed his sadness over the lost of innocent souls of Nigerians to insurgency.

    The president made this statement in a brief post which appeared on the Presidency’s official twitter handle: @NGRPresident.

    He said: “I mourn every single death of a Nigerian as a result of terrorism. That is why security is my number one priority.

    “Our efforts to strengthen security cooperation with our neighbours & adjust our own response to Boko Haram will yield results very soon.

    “Our resolve and capacity to end terrorism is much greater than the threat we face. Nigeria will prevail.”

  • Jobs, terrorism top Nigerian delegates’ discussion at ILO talks

    Jobs, terrorism top Nigerian delegates’ discussion at ILO talks

    Worsening terrorism in Northeastern part of  Nigeria,  youth unemployment were among issues that topped the Federal Government’s agenda to the 104th International Labour Organisation (ILO) Conference.

    Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Labour and Productivity, Clement Iloh, who led the delegation, said these emerging challenges and solutions called for more introspection among member states, especially the dynamic roles culture, religion, politics and ethnicity, among others, plays in fostering development.

    Iloh reminded the conference of the adverse effect of terrorism with implications for discrimination, stigmatisation, abduction, kidnapping, and rape at work, among others. He said: “There was need for international collaboration to fashion out a framework that would address these hydra headed problems amongst member states in the world.”

    President of the Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC), Comrade Ayuba Waba, who spoke on the occasion urged world leaders to embrace the spirit of unity in the current struggle by the tripartite body that make up the ILO, the government, employers and workers to fight anti-workers’ activities in developing countries.

    He said: “We call on world leaders to unite in the spirit of unity to confront anti-workers’ activities. We are concerned with the increasing challenges which the emerging forms of employment relationships such as contract staffing, casualisation, part time work and employees without borders pose to developing countries in confronting the basic issues of fundamental principles and rights at work.”

    Comrade Waba added that the issue of dealing with the plight of internally displaced persons (IDPs) in some crises affected countries such as the Northeast of Nigeria is a current challenge that needed to be urgently addressed within the centenary framework.

    Also, President of Trade Union Congress, Comrade Bobboi Bala Kaigama, said the country is in need of international aid to confront insurgency ravaging some parts of the country. He said: “We need international support to confront and to address the hydra headed problems associated with terrorism, insurgency and other forms of political upheavals with implications for discrimination, stigmatisation, abduction, kidnapping and rape at work.”

    On child labour, the National Women Commission Chairperson of TUC, Comrade Oyinkansola Olasanoye said: “Our new investigative report in Nigeria shows the need for a coherent policy approach that tackles child labour and the lack of decent jobs for youths.

    “Keeping children in school and receiving good education until at least the minimum age of employment will determine the whole life of a child. It is the only way for a child to acquire the basic knowledge and skills needed for further learning, and for her or his future working life.”

  • Making terrorism visual

    Making terrorism visual

    The National Gallery of Modern Art (NGA) is the parastatal of the Federal Ministry of Culture and Tourism with the mandate to collect and preserve works of arts and paintings that are of modern quality to the nation.  Ever since the edict that established it, NGA has been in the forefront of ensuring that Nigerian contemporary arts are kept in good order.  This is why also, every year the management of NGA, Lagos office, makes it a point of duty to organize art paintings and sculpting for children.  The idea is to encourage the children to fall in line with their talents on time and to also express their artistic ideas as they deem it fit.

    This was why this year’s children’s day celebration was no different.  To make it worthwhile for the children, NGA organized painting and sculpting competition for many school children in Lagos State and beyond.  Part of what the organizers did was to fulfill the mandate of NGA which says that the parastatal is meant to serve as the repository of Nigeria’s creative spirit and to equally promote the appreciation of Nigerian modern and contemporary art.

    To make this realizable, both the primary and secondary school children in the state were invited to showcase their talents.  In this regard Mrs. Ekene Okoroma, the head of the Lagos office of NGA said “this art talent cum art hunt exhibition is usually done on May 27 every year in commemoration of the children’s day celebration.  For us, amidst every uncertainty our entire nation may have gone through this year, yet we have been able to come this far to ensure that our children participated in this competition.”

    Amid series of plays and dramas enacted by the NGA management, the children were very enthusiastic to be part of the shows.  In her speech, Okoroma insisted that the goal of the NGA even amid hardships and the stark economic problem was still able to give the children the opportunity to excel.  She said, “In the quest to continue to make our country greater, our theme for this year’s celebration hinges extensively on one very dangerous and globally accepted evil, terrorism.

    And because terrorism has dealt devastating blows on many societies and have consequently destroyed most homes, this year’s painting theme for the kids was anchored on, ‘Say no to terrorism; it destroys our nation.’  It was meant to continue to create awareness among the youths of the nation.  It is also to help them understand wholesomely the dangers inherent in the act and how it will affect their future.  Therefore, the children should be taught on time on how to reject in its entirety the lure to be drawn into this heinous behaviour.

    With a lot of passion the children did very classical paintings that zeroed down on the theme.  They were able to produce big works that beat the imagination of many people.  Most of the guests could not indeed believe that children in primary and secondary schools could do those works.

    Besides that, Okoroma noted, however, that the children took their time to do justice to the paintings in order to bring out the beauty of creativity and then show that terrorism is not good for anybody.  “This is why you can see this array of beautiful works today.”  The day was crowned with the award of trophies and certificates to those who won positions.

    Apart from giving the awards in different categories, the winning schools were specially recognized and commended for their love for the visual art.  Teachers who have taken their time to instruct the kids and put them on the right track were told to keep it up.  Art, in all intents and purposes should be exposed to the children at their early age so as to enable them do better when they grow up.

    In graphics, in the primary school category, Adetola Ogungbemi of Confidence Nursery School, Lagos, took the first position, while Moshood Fathia of Ewe-Nla School, Lagos, came first in painting.  The first position in sculpture was clinched by Christianah Samuel.  In the Junior Secondary School category, Altta Samuel emerged first in painting, while Chigbo Ralchukwu came first in graphics.  The overall winner was Mayinoluwa Okulate of Lagoon Secondary School, Lekki, Lagos.

    Some of the schools present were Queensland Academy, Yabatech Secondary School, Effortswill Academy, Iman College and many more.  All the winning works will however be preserved by the NGA for posterity.  This tradition has been maintained over the years just in line with the spirit of the promotion of visual art for which the agency is noted.

  • Legal framework for prevention of terrorism

    Legal framework for prevention of terrorism

    Where an entity is convicted of an offence under the TPA (as amended), such as entity is liable to the forfeiture of any assets, funds, or property used or intended to be used in the commission of the offence and the court may issue an order to wind up the entity or withdraw the licence of the entity and its principal officers or both. (s. 25 (ii). Where the court orders the entity to be wound up, its assets and property shall be transferred to the Federation Account. (s. 25)(3).

     

    Terrorist Funding

    Terrorist funding is defined as “providing or collecting funds, by any means, directly or indirectly, with the intention or knowledge that they will be used to carry out an act of terrorism” (72). A distinction must be made very quickly here between terrorist funding and money laundering. Money laundering presumes that there is a crime which generates proceeds that have to be disguised in order to conceal the illicit source which in the case of terrorist financing, money would be from either legitimate or illegal sources. (73).

    Section 13(1) of TPA 2011 (as amended) prohibits making available funds, property or other services by any means, whether legitimate or otherwise to terrorist organisations or individual terrorists with the knowledge or having reasonable grounds to believe that such funds or property will be used in full or in part in order to connect or facilitate a terrorist act. No person or body corporate shall also solicit, acquire, provide, collect, receive or posses such funds. The Act prescribes life imprisonment for a convict of such an offence (section 13(2)(b).

    Section 14 of the Act imposes an obligation on financial institution or designated non-financial institution to report suspicious transaction relating to terrorism to the Financial Intelligent Unit (FIU). The Nigerian F.I.U. was established in 2005 by the EFCC. It draws its powers from the money Laundering (Prohibition) Act 2004 and the Economic and Financial Crime Commission (Establishment) Act 2004. It is the central agency for the collection, analysis and dissemination of information on ML and TF.

     

    Human Rights Issues and the TPA 2011 (as amended)

    The enactment of the Principal Act in 2011 generated concerns from human rights circles as some aspects of the Act were seen as constituting serious threats to some of the fundamental rights guaranteed in chapter 4 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended). For instance, the Act gave broad and sweeping powers to security and intelligence officers without any judicial oversight. In section 25 (now substituted) the National Security Adviser or Inspector General of Police may enter and search any place, persons, or vehicle “without warrant” if he has reason to suspect that an offence is being committed. He may also search, detain, and arrest any person if he has a reasonable suspicion that the person has committed or is about to commit an offence under the Act. Section 26 (now substituted), authorised the Attorney-General of the Federation, the National Security Adviser or the Inspector General of Police to use communication service providers in intelligence gathering as he may deem fit. Section 28 (now substituted) also allowed the detention of a terrorism suspect for 24 hours by security officers without access to any other person except the suspect’s medical doctor and the detaining agency’s lawyer. The wide powers conferred on the government to proscribe organisations were also of a great concern as such powers were considered as capable of being abused, particularly in declaring opponents as terrorists.

    The 2013 amendment of the Act brought about some changes to address some of the human rights issues. Nevertheless, some of the amendments still leave much to be desired. For instance, section 27(1), which provides that “[t]he court may, pursuant to an ex-parte application, grant an order for the detention of a suspect under this Act for a period not exceeding 90 days subject to renewal for a similar period until the conclusion of the investigation and prosecution of the matter that led to the arrest and detention is dispensed with” is potentially contrary to the right to personal liberty under section 35 of the Nigeria Constitution, especially against the backdrop of a community reading of subsections (1) (c), (4) (a) (b) and (5). While sub-section (1) (c) permits deprivation of a person’s liberty, in accordance with a procedure permitted by law, “for the purpose of bringing him before a court in execution of the order of a court or upon reasonable suspicion of his having committed a criminal offence, or to such extent as may be reasonably necessary to prevent his committing a criminal offence”, sub-section (4) provides that such a person shall be brought before a court of law within a reasonable time, and if he is not tried within a period of:

    (a) Two months from the date of his arrest or detention in the case of a person who is in custody or is not entitled to bail; or

    (b) Three months from the date of his arrest or detention in the case of a person who has been released on bail, he shall (without prejudice to any further proceedings that may be bought against him) be released either unconditionally or upon such conditions as are reasonably necessary to ensure that he appears for trial at a later date. According to sub-section 5, the expression ä reasonable time” means.

    (a) In the case of an arrest or detention in any place where there is a court of competent jurisdiction within a radius of forty kilometres, a period of one day; and (b) In any other case, a period of two days or such longer period as in the circumstances may be considered by the court to be reasonable.

    The new section 28(1), which provides that “[w]here a person is arrested under reasonable suspicion of having committed any offence under this Act, the relevant law enforcement or security officer may direct that the person arrested be detained in custody for a period not exceeding forth-eight hours”, potentially contravenes section 35(4) (5) of the Constitution “in the case of an arrest or detention in any place where there is a court of competent jurisdiction within a radius of forty kilometres”.

    The new section 28(4), which provides that where a person arrested under the Act is granted bail by a court within the 90 days detention period stipulated by the Act, “the person may, on the approval of the Head of the relevant law enforcement agency be placed under a house arrest and shall – (a) be monitored by its officers: (b) have no access to phones or communication gadgets; and (c) speak only to his counsel until the conclusion of the investigation.” House arrest, without a valid court order or, in this case, in defiance of a court order, is illegal and undermines the authority of the courts.

     

    The Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF)

    The sweeping powers conferred on the National Security Adviser, the Inspector General of Police and the State Security service under the Principal Act are now curtailed and reposed in the Attorney General of the Federation who is now designated as the authority for the effective implementation and administration of the Act. He has the responsibility to strengthen and enhance the existing legal framework to ensure conformity of Nigeria’s counter-terrorism laws and policies with international standards and United Nations Conventions on Terrorism. He shall also maintain international cooperation required for preventing and combating international acts of terrorism. It is the further responsibility of the Attorney-General to ensure the effective prosecution of terrorism matters. (s.1A (2) (a) (b) and (c).

    The Attorney General of the Federation reserves the power to delegate his power to any agency charge with responsibility of terrorist investigation to instituted criminal proceedings. (S. 30(1)). A special power is conferred on the AGF to initiate a judicial process for the reduction of sentence imposed on a convict where such a convict has before any proceedings, made possible or facilitated the identification of other accused persons and their sponsors or who, after commencement of the proceedings has made possible or facilitated the arrest of such persons. The court has the discretion to reduce the sentence as it may deem fit. Also the attorney-General may under Section 32 of the TPA – 2011 (as amended) apply to a judge in chambers for an interim Order to attach or seize the assets of any person who has been charged or is about to be charged under the Act.

     

    The Office of National Security Adviser (ONSA)

    The office of the National Security Adviser (ONSA) is now the coordinating body for all security and law enforcement agencies in matters relating to terrorism. The office also has the mandate to ensure the effective formulation and implementation of a comprehensive counter-terrorism strategy for Nigeria, build capacity for the effective discharge of the functions of all relevant security, intelligence, law enforcement and military services under the Act or any other law on terrorism in Nigeria. It is further conferred with the omnibus power “to do such other acts or things that are necessary for the effective performance of the functions of the relevant security and enforcement agencies. (See s.1A (a) (b) (c) & (d). For the avoidance of doubts, law enforcement and security agencies are identified as the Nigeria Police Force, Department of State Security Services, Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, National Agency for the Prohibition of Traffic in Persons, National Drug Law Enforcement Agency, National Intelligence Agency, Nigeria Customs Service, Nigeria Immigration Service, defence Intelligence Agency, Nigeria Security and Civil Defence Corps (NSCDC) Nigerian Armed Forces and Nigeria Prisons Service and any other agency empowered by an Act of the National Assembly (s 40).

    It is pertinent to state here that pursuant to the provisions of section 1A, a Counter Terrorism Centre (CTC), the Joint Terrorism Analysis Branch (JTAB) and the Behavioural Analysis and Strategic Communication Unit were established to enhance the effective performance of the role of ONSA in coordinating the law enforcement agencies, intelligence sharing and cooperation amongst the agencies. The effectiveness of these bodies is not very pronounced. The ability of the terrorists to plan, develop and execute their attacks without detection clearly exposes the weakness or ineffectiveness of these bodies.

     

    Jurisdiction

    Section 32 of the TPA 2011 (as amended) vests the jurisdiction to try and punish terrorist offences on the Federal High Court “located in any part of Nigeria, regardless of the location where the offence is committed”. And as a corollary of the jurisdiction to try offenders under the Act, the FHC is empowered to impose sentences of varying degrees and fines to individuals found culpable (S. 32(2). In addition, a convict under the Act may be required to forfeit any asset used to commit the offence or connected with it. In order to forestall delay in hearing terrorism cases, the Act empowers the FHC to “adopt all legal measures necessary to avoid unnecessary delays and abuse in the conduct of matters. (s. 32(5). And, one measure prescribed by the Act itself is for the court to refuse to entertain applications for stay of proceedings until judgment is delivered (s. 32(6). My observation here is that, by the time judgment is delivered, it is doubtful if there would be any proceeding to be stayed. And, in any event, the court would have become functus officio. The point was well made by Kabiri –Whyte, JSC (as he then was) in Sanusi v. Ayoola [74] that a court, on disposing of a cause before it renders itself functus officio as it ceases to have jurisdiction over such case. My apprehension about the jurisdiction of the FHC, nevertheless, is that the court is already overloaded, especially, having regard to the long list of items contained in section 251 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) and other statutes over which it has power to exercise jurisdiction.

    One of the amendments effected in respect of the jurisdiction of the FHC is the power of the court to try terrorist offences “whether or not the offence was committed in Nigeria and completed outside Nigeria”(75). This provision must have been influenced by the decision of the South African High Court in The State v. Okah SS94/2011 in which the accused, who was resident in South Africa, was tried and convicted for his involvement in the planning and organising of two car bomb attacks in Nigeria wherein several people were killed and many injured. The South African Court predicated its authority to hear and determine the case upon the fact that “South Africa is a member of the United Nations and therefore committed to executing its obligations in terms of international instruments dealing with terrorism and related activities.” (p3). Nigeria is signatory to all the relevant Conventions and Protocols.

     

    Conclusion

    Terrorism remains a major threat to Nigeria’s peace and security. Terrorism is not peculiar to Nigeria but a feature of modern society. The absence of, or insufficient legal framework and the inertia of Nigerian authorities in the early days of Boko Haram contributed immensely to the escalation of the insurgency. The efforts of the military at recovering Boko Haram’s ‘conquered territories’ in the last few weeks are commendable; although, it is disheartening to read in the pages of newspapers, statements credited to the President-elect, Mohammed Buhari, that the much that has been achieved by the military has been through the instrumentality of South African mercenaries! [76]. There is no doubt that, effective police action or military action, within the precincts of law, can certainly reduce terrorist threats, as it is evident from the on-going military action. We should, however, not operate under the illusion that military action alone can eradicate terrorism completely. Unless terrorist groups themselves decide to abandon armed struggle, it may be difficult to overcome them by force, having regard to the asymmetric nature of their approach.

    The enactment of TPA 2011 (as amended) can be regarded as a right step, albeit, it came a little bit late. Again, it must be stated here, that law can only be  a means to an end. Legislation alone cannot end terrorism. Boko Haram might end up being defeated but that may not put an end to terrorism. Until the root causes that make Nigeria a fertile ground for terrorism, such as poverty, joblessness, unresolved conflicts, social injustice and corruption are addressed, we may have to contend with the monster for a very long time to come.

  • Legal framework for prevention of terrorism

    Legal framework for prevention of terrorism

    He remained the spiritual leader of Boko Haram until 2009 when he was killed in extra-judicial circumstances. Boko Haram came into limelight in 2009 when it sparked off an uprising by the refusal of its members in Maiduguri to wear helmets, while riding motor cycles, as required by a motorbike helmet law of Borno State. This generated a conflict between members of the sect and policemen that attempted to enforce the law. The violence that erupted as a result of this conflict left over 1000 people dead. The violence soon spread to other major cities of Bauchi, Potiskum, Kano and Wudi. In Maiduguri alone, where several churches, a police station and a prison were set ablaze, over 700 people were killed. The uprising was eventually crushed by the police and military, leaving the sect’s headquarters and mosque in ruins.

    In the aftermath of the July 2009 unrest, Mohammed Yusuf, the leader of Boko Haram was killed. He was captured by the army and passed to the police for interrogation. He died in police custody. It is alleged that he was killed extra-judicially. Upon the demise of Yusuf, the sect members went underground and resurfaced with brutal dispositions and determination.

    Thereafter, Abubakar Shekau emerged the leader of the sect. Boko Haram gathered more momentum under him and became very ruthless, as it was determined to avenge the brutal killing of its leader, Yusuf. Since then, the sect has embarked on the mission of committing heinous offences such as gruesome mass killings of defenceless innocent people, including women, children and bystanders by bombing. The sect soon transformed into a terrorist organisation.  The remark of President Jonathan on the activities of Boko Haram since 2009 is worthy of recapitulation here. In a speech delivered at the regional summit on security held in France in 2014, he stated thus:

    Since 2009, we have had to contend with many attacks and killings, which have now developed into a full-scale war targeting the stability and integrity of our nation. Boko Haram has launched a vicious guerrilla-style campaign against the government and the people of Nigeria. It has attacked schools, slaughtered students in their dormitories, destroyed villages, communities and government infrastructure and has wreaked havoc on the economic and social life of our people. This unconventional war has so far claimed over 12,000 lives, with more than 8, 000 persons injured or maimed, not to mention the displacement of thousands of innocent Nigerians’’ (n.p.)

    But then, it is on record that Boko Haram was allowed to operate as a legitimate organization over the years. It was only in June 2013 that Jonathan administration, belatedly, in my view, declared Boko Haram and Jama’atu Ansarul Muslimina Fi  Biladis Sudan also known as Ansaru proscribed organizations.

    The brutal manner by which Mohammed Yusuf was killed has been advanced as one of the factors that stemmed up Boko Haram insurgency. According to Sandra Ivanov (2014), the clashes that resulted in the killing of Mohammed Yusuf in 2009 marked a significant turning point which cemented Boko Haram choice of use of violence.  Yusuf was said to have been assaulted, brutalized and dehumanised before he was killed, extra judicially. Consequently, many members of the sect were determined to avenge the unfair circumstances surrounding the death. In a way, Boko Haram insurgency exemplifies the tragedy one singular act of impunity can cause a nation. The lesson to be learnt is clear: impunity should never be encouraged. Security agencies should endeavour to observe the basic tenets of the rule of law and respect for fundamental human rights in the treatment of suspects in their custody. The observation of Professor Akin Oyebode on this point is apt and instructive:

    “…where and when every member of society is assured of his day in court, there would be no room or justification for terrorist acts. However, denial of justice and resort to terrorist acts by the government itself could well provide much-needed ammunition to forces that do not wish it well and who may now insist on a policy of “fighting fire with fire.”

    To be sure, violence is not particularly strange to Nigeria. The history of Nigeria is replete with record of violence. There have been instances of skirmishes recorded in one part of the country or another over the years, consisting of ethno-religious clashes, inter-ethnic violence, intra-ethnic conflicts and religious crises. Interestingly, however, before the advent of Boko Haram insurgency, none of the acts of violence or anarchism perpetrated in Nigeria which caused the deaths of thousands of innocent victims was characterised as terrorism. For instance, there were the Movement for the Emancipation of Niger Delta (MEND) and the Niger Delta Peoples Volunteer Force which held Nigeria spellbound for a period over three years by their violent acts. The militant groups killed, maimed and kidnapped innocent citizens. They attacked petroleum operations in Nigeria and engaged in other criminal activities such as guerrilla warfare, sabotage, theft and destruction of property.  There were also the Maitatsine riot of 1980,Odi massacre of  November 20, 1999 in which a whole village was razed to the ground and over 2,500 people died Yelwa massacre of 2014, a religiously motivated killing that claimed the lives of 700 people.Each of these violent acts was treated and described as either “militancy”, or “extremism” or uprising”, or “riots”.

    Unarguably, the horrendous dimension of violence being ventilated and perpetrated by Boko Haram is novel and alarming. This has created a climate of fear and insecurity in the entire land. 2014 marked the height of Boko Haram brutalities. The frequency and fury of atrocities of the insurgents in that year have been shocking. The fundamentalists were more ruthless in their onslaughts not only on the civilian population but also on military installations and personnel. They became increasingly dangerous and daring. They also heightened the scope and sophistication of their operations. It was in that year that members of the sect kidnapped over 270 school girls at a village called Chibok on April 14, 2014. Of all the crimes the insurgents have committed, none has traumatised the country quite like the abduction of those girls. The girls, aged between 16 and 18 were preparing to write exams when they were taken from school hostels late at night. About 50 of them escaped. Others have remained in Boko Haram captivity for a period of over twelve months now. It is thought that the militants initially took the girls to Sambisa forest. Subsequent reports, however, suggest that some may have been trafficked into neighbouring countries of Chad, Niger and Cameroon, and forced to marry. A new dimension is also added to Boko Haram insurgency as it is confirmed that insurgents in that same year embarked on a mission of conquering part of Nigeria’s territory. At a point, it is reported that about 20,000 square miles of Nigerian territory was under the firm control of Boko Haram with the main object of declaring such conquered territory a ‘Caliphate’ .

     

    Statutory definition of terrorism in Nigeria

    Terrorism is one word that does not render itself to easy definition. Indeed, there is a consensus of opinions of writers, scholars, researchers, policy makers and even the media that terrorism is difficult to define H. H. A. Cooper (2013)  notes that there has never been since the topic began to command serious attention, some golden age in which terrorism was easy to define.  So, the debate of what terrorism is has become perennia The unalterable truth remains that there are hundreds of definitions of terrorism in existence. Giventhis scenario, it is acceptable to simply say that there can be as many definitions as there are people defining terrorism. By and large, the meaning ascribed to the word is a reflection of a person’s perspectives, background and philosophy. The definitional ambiguities embedded in the word ‘terrorism’ are encapsulated in the popular cliché; one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter, which immediately suggests the lack of consensus in determining who should be designated a terrorist or what act should be considered terrorist act. The lack of some kind of generic definition of terrorism that can serve as a common reference point for countries has created a situation in which each country has its own definition of terrorism and proceeds to determine those it wishes to call terrorists or freedom fighters.

    The scope of this paper does not permit an excursion into the numerous definitions of terrorism by scholars, writers, jurists, and the media e.t.c., as I am limited by time and space. I shall, therefore, restrict myself to the statutory definition of the concept in Nigeria. The TPA (as amended) carefully avoids the definition of terrorism, as a concept. Rather, it defines ‘acts of terrorism’. I should think that the definition of terrorism is contextually important, because only an offence that meets such a definition falls under the strictures of the law. In a sense, the definition establishes the threshold of terrorism. This is particularly so, as the word terrorism appears sixty-eight times in the TPA 2011 (as amended). While it is agreed that there is no globally accepted definition of terrorism, it is on record that many countries proceed to provide definitions in their statutes.

    The statutory definition of terrorism in Nigeria remains Section 46 of the EFCC (Establishment) Act 2004. It provides: (a) any act which is a violation of the Criminal Code or the Penal and which may endanger the life, physical integrity or freedom of, or cause serious injury or death to, any person, any number or group of persons or causes or may cause damage to public property, natural resources, environmental or cultural heritage and is calculated or intended to (i) intimidate, put in fear, force, coerce, or induce any government, body, institution, the general public or any segment thereof, to do or abstain from doing any act or to adopt or abandon a particular standpoint, or to act according to certain principles, or (ii)        disrupt any public service, the delivery of any essential service to the public or to create a public emergency, or (iii)          create general insurrection in a state.

    Any promotion, sponsorship of, contribution to, command, aid incitement, encouragement, attempt, threat, conspiracy, organisation or procurement of any person, with the intent to commit any act referred to in paragraph (a) (i), (ii), and (iii).

    To me, this definition is vague and excessively broad. It is unclear, particularly, in the articulation of the elements of the crime of terrorism. For instance, what is an act “that is a violation of the Criminal Code or the Penal Code which may endanger the life of any person? In clauses (i) (ii) and (iii), any act that is calculated or intended to intimidate, put fear or force or coerce any government a body or institution e.t.c. to do any act or to adopt or abandon a particular standpoint or to act certain principles or disrupt any public service, the delivery of any essential service will amount to terrorism. By the definition of terrorism under Section 46 of the EFCC Act, it means doctors and nurses who provide essential services cannot embark on strike actions. One danger of a broad definition as contained under EFCC ACT is that it opens doors of abuse and can be utilised by oppressive regimes for political games.

     

    Terrorist Acts

    Section 1(3) of the TPA (as amended) defines an “act of terrorism” as an act which is deliberately done with malice aforethought and which may seriously harm or damage a country or an international organisation. Any act also amounts to terrorism when it is done deliberately with malice aforethought and is intended to unduly compel a government or international organisation to perform or abstain from performing any act. A terrorist act is committed when done with the requisite intent, it seriously destabilises or destroy the fundamental political, constitutional economic or social structures of a country or international organisation by intimidation or co-ercion. It also amounts to a terrorist act where it involves or causes an attack upon a person’s life that possibly results in serious bodily harm or death. Intimidating or coercing a government or international organisation is a terrorist act where it involves or causes: the kidnapping of a person, or destruction of a government a public facility, or private property, amongst others. This is, particularly, so where the act is likely to endanger human life or result in major economic loss.

    There is an omnibus provision which criminalises and treats as terrorist act “any act or omission in or outside Nigeria which constitutes an offence within the scope of a counter- terrorism protocols and conventions duly ratified by Nigeria. An act which disrupts a service but is committed in pursuance of a protest is also a terrorist act. However, strikes and demonstration are excluded from the definition of terrorist acts, provided they are not intended to result in any harm referred to in subsection (2) (b) (i), (ii) or (iv). The harm referred to in the section include seriously intimidating a population influencing a government or international organisation by coercion intimidation.

    It is curious to see that the TPA 2011 (as amended) still adopts the common law concept of “malice aforethought” which has long been jettisoned by the Supreme Court of Nigeria.

     

    Terrorism offences

    Basically, the consequences of terrorism affect people and property. It has been argued in some quarters that the TPA 2011 (as amended) encompasses crimes that are prosecutable under Nigerian criminal law, and which, if applied, could curb the crime of terrorism to a large extent.  Indeed, it is said that the TPA Act 2011 (as amended)  …has only captioned, in one coded form, several offences in the Criminal Code of both the Federation and the States although there is no direct heading titled terrorism in the Code”. It is further stated that there are provisions in both the Criminal Code and Penal Code which criminalise acts that injure people and property which may simply be updated to deal with terrorism. For instance, it is said, that the Criminal Code Act contains provisions, inter alia, on murder. manslaughter, kidnapping as well as unlawful deprivation of liberty, offences against the safety of maritime navigation, unlawful attempts to injure by use of explosive substances, and unlawful societies. Similarly, the Penal Code provides for the following offences: culpable homicide punishable with death, culpable homicide not punishable with death, voluntarily causing hurt, wrongful confinement, kidnapping mischief to vessel, injuring and unlawful society, which are sufficient to deal with the spate of terrorism in Nigeria. As plausible as the arguments may appear, the truth remains that none of the Nigerian penal laws mentions terrorism as an offence at all, in the way murder or culpable homicide is mentioned. Only some aspects of terrorism are covered in the criminal law which, to me, will not give terrorism the emphasis and due attention it deserves. Furthermore, promulgation of anti-terrorism laws is consistent with trends in international law and practices from which Nigeria cannot isolate herself.

    The following new line of offences are created under the TPA 2011 (as amended): (a) murder, kidnaps or other attacks on the person or liberty of an internationally protected person (s. 3) (b); terrorist meetings (s. 4) (c); soliciting and giving support to terrorist groups for the commission of a terrorist act (s.5) (d); harbouring terrorists or hindering the arrest of a terrorist (s. 6) (e); provision of training and instruction to terrorist groups or terrorists (s. 7) (f); concealment of information about acts of terrorism (s. 8) (g); provision of devices to a terrorist (s.9) (h); Recruitment of persons to be members of terrorist groups or to participate in terrorist acts (s.10); (i) incitement, promotion or solicitation of property for the Commission of terrorist acts (s. 11); (j) provision of facilities in support of terrorist acts (s. 12); (k) financing of terrorism (s. 13); (l) dealing in terrorist property (s. 14), (m); hostage taking (s. 15); (n) membership of a terrorist group or proscribed organisation (s. 16); (o) conspiracy to commit terrorist acts (s. 17); (p) aiding and abetting terrorist acts (s. 18); (q) escape or aiding and abetting escape (s. 19); (r) attempt to commit an offence under the Act (s. 20); (s) preparation to commit terrorist acts (s. 21); (t) unlawful assumption of character of officer of any law enforcement or security (s. 22); (u) tampering with evidence and witness (s. 23); (v) obstruction of any officer of a law enforcement or security agency (s. 24) amongst others.

  • Legal framework for the prevention of terrorism in Nigeria

    Legal framework for the prevention of terrorism in Nigeria

    Introduction

    The topic for discussion: Legal Framework for the Prevention of Terrorism in Nigeria is, undoubtedly, one of utmost importance to the peace, security and stability of this country and the global community at large. Terrorism, it is to be admitted, is however, an emerging and recondite aspect of our jurisprudence. There is yet a dearth of judicial authorities on the subject in Nigeria, as our courts have not been sufficiently engaged to proffer views and opinions on it.

    Be that as it may, the legal framework for the prevention of terrorism in Nigeria is essentially embodied in two enactments: the Terrorism Prevention Act (TPA) 2011 and Terrorism (Prevention) (Amendment) Act 2013. The two laws shall hereinafter collectively be referred to as Terrorism (Prevention) Act 2011 (as amended) or simply TPA 2011 (as amended), as the context so admits. The TPA 2011 (as amended) was enacted, essentially, to prevent and deal with the wave of terrorism erupting in Nigeria. Section 4 (2) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) empowers the National Assembly to make laws for the peace, order and good government of Nigeria. Section 11 also provides that the National Assembly may make laws for the Federation or any part thereof with respect to the maintenance and securing of public safety and public order and providing, maintaining and securing of supplies and services as may be designated by the National Assembly as essential supplies and services.

    1 Cap C38 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria (LFN) 2004. 2 Cap 89 Laws of Northern Nigeria 1963

    Before the enactment of the TPA (as amended), the Criminal Code [1] (in the South), and the Penal Code [2] (in the North) and other statutes [3] dominated the criminal justice system in creating, defining and prescribing punishment for criminal acts.  Significantly, while both the Criminal Code and Penal Code do not contain specific provisions for counterterrorism, they criminalise specific acts of violence such as murder, homicide, rape, riot e.t.c.

     

    Background to the enactment of anti-terrorism legislation in Nigeria

    The road leading to the enactment of TPA 2011 (as amended) has been long-winding, dilatory and chequered. It took Nigeria a period of 10 years after the devastating September 2011 terrorist attacks on the World Trade Centre (Popularly known as 9/11 attacks) to come up with a comprehensive anti-terrorism legislation in the form of TPA 2011 (as amended). Some writers have attributed Nigeria’s delay in enacting an anti-terrorism legislation to the relative newness of terrorism to the country . This position certainly overlooks certain national and international events that took place between 2001 and 2011.

    In attempting to trace the historical antecedent of the making of the law, we must necessarily take our bearing from the point of the 9/11 attacks, as the event marked a turning-point in the global perspectives of what terrorism portends and the necessity to wage a concerted war against it globally.[6] One direct consequence of the attacks is that it spurred the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) to pass Resolution 1373 by which all the member-states were required to make terrorism a serious crime in domestic legislation along with terrorist funding and other ancillary offences. UNSC also set up the Counter-Terrorism Committee (CTC)[8] to follow up progress in the implementation of the resolution by member-states. It is on record that many member-states, including African countries complied with the resolution, without delay, by amending their existing counter terrorism laws or enacting new ones[9].

    The initial reaction of the Nigerian government to the resolution can simply be described as ambivalent, engendered by political bickering and parochial ethno-religious sentiments. Between 2001 and 2004, no step was taken by Nigeria to give effect to Resolution 1373 in spite of the fact that there was no counterterrorism law in existence then. Rather than enact a new law as demanded by the resolution, the National Assembly, in a half-hearted manner, perfunctorily inserted two sections in the Economic and Financial Crime Commission (EFCC) (Establishment) Bill  that was then undergoing legislative processes.. The two sections now form sections 15 and 46 of the EFCC (Establishment) Act 2004. Section 15 of Act merely creates some offences relating to terrorism while section 46 attempts to define terrorism.

    Suffice it to say that as far back as 2003, there were pockets of violent acts in Nigeria, of the nature that signalled imminent dangers, capable of snowballing into terrorism. In late December 2003 and early January 2004, a group, calling itself “the Taleban” raided police stations in the north-eastern states of Borno and Yobe, and reportedly took officers hostage, stole weapons and killed at least seven people.The United States of America Department of State Country Report on Terrorism 2004, in respect of Nigeria, also noted that, Osama bin Laden went on record as identifying Nigeria as ‘fertile ground for action”.  Around the same time, it was revealed that some individuals and private groups in Nigeria had ties with terrorist sources in Sudan, Iran, Pakistan and Libya; and that, members of terrorist groups, including Al-Qaeda had operated and recruited in Nigeria. Also, by 2006, the Niger Delta militant group were becoming restive and violent. Attacks on oil pipelines by the Movement for the Emancipation of Niger Delta had been recorded . There were also threats of further attacks to destroy all oil facilities until their demand for justice in their struggle against poverty, marginalisation, underemployment and environmental degradation were met.

    Prominent amongst the groups are Movement for the Emancipation of Niger Delta led by Henry Okah and the Niger Delta Volunteer Force led by Alhaji Asari Dokubo

    Oil Pipelines in Isaka and Abonema in Rivers State were attacked early 2006 by the militant groups.

    These were clear indices of the vulnerability and susceptibility of Nigeria to terrorist attacks. Given the prevailing situation and circumstances, it might be expected that an anti-terrorism bill would be introduced, subjected to vigorous legislative and public debates and passed without any procrastination. This was not to be, as all initial steps at legislating against terrorism, most strangely, met with stiff opposition at the National Assembly. In 2005, the cabinet of the Obasanjo administration approved a draft counterterrorism bill and sent it to the National Assembly for consideration. Under the proposed legislation, anyone convicted of a terrorist offence could be sentenced up to 35 years imprisonment.[19] The bill was withdrawn the day of its second reading in the Senate due to opposition from northern senators who argued that the motivation for such a bill was anti-Muslim sentiment . In 2006, Senator Ben Obi, proposed a private member bill, the Prevention of Terrorism Bill as a comprehensive national legislation on terrorism. Again, it aborted, as it did not receive the requisite support to scale through legislative processes. Sampson, I.  T. and Onuoha, F .C. (2011) articulate the opposition against the bill in the following words:

    “…differing perceptions and interpretations of lingering militancy in Niger Delta region (South) and Islamic extremism (North) presented the main challenge to Nigeria’s endeavour to enact comprehensive terrorism legislation. People from the Niger Delta and some member of the Muslim Community had denounced the draft PTA for what they described as an open-ended definition of terrorism with the potential of subsuming the activities of the Niger-Delta and Islamic militants under its definition. On the other hand, the Niger Delta people steadfastly opposed the PTA, which they interpreted as an attempt to criminalise their struggle for equity in the distribution of oil, resources produced from their region… On the other hand, the manifestation of militant Islamism in northern Nigerian presented another challenge to the criminalization of terrorism. For example, some Islamic clerics had criticized the proposed PTA as targeting Muslims.”(Pp 39-40.)

    Therefore, sharp cleavages and jaundiced views of Nigerian lawmakers, in a way, delayed the passage of counterterrorism legislation in Nigeria. Basically, laws are meant to foster order and create conditions for peace, equality and security of lives and property to thrive in. This point underscores the fact that lawmakers are obligated, at all times, to enact laws that will advance and support this noble cause. This is quite apart from their constitutional responsibility “to make laws for the peace, order and good government of the Federation or any part thereof”  [22] Lawmakers should also appreciate that there is accountability in the process of law- making such that demands of them, the need to strike a balance between the protection of the people they represent on the hand and their personal or religious and ethnic inclinations on the other hand.

    By 2010 and the early months of 2011, terrorism had evolved in Nigeria, full blown, in scope and shape. Boko Haram insurgency had emerged and continued to escalate in sophistication. In a research conducted by Ioannis Mantzikos, a research assistant, with Terrorism Research Initiatives, it is revealed that between September 2010 and May 2011, Boko Haram successfully carried out over fifty attacks  [23] It then dawned on the law-makers that terrorism has no borders, religion, gender, race, ethnicity or nationality; but a true manifestation of evil that defies human nature which must be combated. On December 10, 2010, an Executive-Sponsored counter-terrorism bill was read and swiftly passed with an overwhelming majority votes in both chambers of the National Assembly.[24] Both the Senate and the House of Representatives harmonised their differences and passed the Terrorism Prevention Bill in May 2011 while President Goodluck Jonathan signed it into law on June 3, 2011(25). It is of great significance to mention here that the TPA 2011 (as amended) was enacted at the twilight of the legislative term of the 6th National Assembly. Indeed, it is clear that the bill was hurriedly packaged and passed. The manifestation of this assertion reflects in the fact that the Act was amended barely two years after its enactment in such a way that, more than 20 sections were either substituted or deleted.

    An event of international significance deserves to be mentioned here as one of the factors that eventually compelled Nigeria to enact an anti-terrorism legislation. On December 25 2009 (Christmas Day), a young Nigerian, Umar Abdulmutallab,[26]  who was associated with Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, attempted to set off an explosive aboard Delta/ North West Airlines Flight 253, with 274 passengers. The plane was an Airbus 330 which originated in Nigeria and had a stop-over in Amsterdam.  The attempt was unsuccessful as he was overpowered by passengers .  Consequent upon this event, the US Transportation Security Administration (TSA) issued new security measures which included blacklisting Nigeria by classifying it “Country of Interest” on the US Terror Watch list. This blacklist placed Nigeria on the same pedestal as countries like Afghanistan, Algeria, Iraq, Lebanon, Libya, Pakistan, Sandi Arabia, Somalia and Yemen. The implication of blacklisting a country is that citizens of the designated and affected countries will be subjected to enhanced screening techniques such as body scans, pat-downs and a thorough search of carry-on luggage for traces of explosives, no matter where they are travelling from.[28]

    The Nigerian government wasted no time in taking the necessary diplomatic steps to avert a face-off with the U.S. The US gave four conditions to be fulfilled by Nigeria before it could be delisted. These conditions included: public condemnation of any form of terrorism anywhere in the world; improvement of security in the nation’s airports; deployment of air marshals on board aircraft and legislation geared towards combating terrorism in the country.[29] It was in fulfilment of these conditions and further pressures from the U.S. that culminated in the enactment of TPA 2011.

    The TPA contains Provisions covering the following areas: (1) prohibition of acts of terrorism: (2) the procedure for proscribing terrorist organisations; (3) terrorist meetings: (4) support for terrorists: 5) banning the provision of training for terrorists: 6) information about acts of terrorism: 7) obstruction of terrorism investigation: 8) international terrorism: 9) suppression of financing of international terrorism: 10) hostage taking: 11) seizure of terrorist cash: 12) terrorist funding: 13) obligation to report suspicious transaction relating to terrorism: 14) dealing in terrorist property: 15) attachment of property: 16) property tracking: 17 requests for foreign States: 18) request to foreign States 19) evidence pursuant to a request 20) form of requests: 21) extradition: 22) exchange of information relating to terrorist groups and terrorists acts: 23) issuance of warrant and search without warrant 24) intelligence gathering: 25) detention of a conveyance: 26) custody of records and video recording: 27) prosecution of offences: 28) witness protection: 29) jurisdiction: 30) penalties: 31) evidence by certificate: 32) refusal of application for registration and the revocation of charities linked to terrorist groups: 33) provision of information relating to passengers of vessels: 34) aircraft and power to prevent entry and order the removal of persons: 35) power to refuse refugee application: 35) regulations and interpretation and a lot more.

     

    The shape of terrorism in Nigeria between 2009 and to date

    Since 2009, the Boko Haram, a so-called Islamic sect, has engaged in series of brazen attacks and heinous acts that have imprinted the word ‘terrorism’ on the nation’s conscience such that the word has become a household name and entered into the daily lexicon of the average Nigerian. The mention of the word terrorism today readily suggests to one’s mind, the image of the atrocious acts engendered by Boko Harm   The origin of Boko Haram has been traced to 2002 when Ustaz Mohammed Yusuf founded the sect.  The official name of the sect is Jama’atu Ahlis Suna Lidda’awati wal Jihad, an Arabic name which in English means ‘People Committed to the Propagation of Prophet’s Teaching and Jihad. The sect is however popularly known as Boko Haram, a Hausa name which translates into ‘Western education is prohibited’. Mohammed Yusuf was born on 29 January, 1970 in Girgir village, Yobe State.

  • Terminating terrorism

    Terminating terrorism

    •The incoming Buhari administration must deal decisively with terror

    As President-elect Muhammadu Buhari prepares to assume the mantle of office on May 29,  his government must take comprehensive steps to tackle the growing menace of terrorism, inter-communal clashes and other forms of internecine violence that continue to trouble Nigeria.

    The Boko Haram insurgency is obviously the biggest problem in this regard. Although sustained campaigns by the armed forces since the end of March have recorded significant successes, especially in the recovery of territories and the liberation of captives, the insurgents still manage to launch hit-and-run attacks. One of the latest took place on May 8 at the College of Business and Administrative Studies in Potiskum, Yobe State. Five insurgents killed a security guard, shot at students, and triggered an improvised explosive device (IED) which injured about 20 students.

    Then there are the inter-communal clashes that have come to rival Boko Haram attacks in their savagery and violence. There are long-running disturbances in Benue, Kaduna, Plateau and Taraba states, in addition to periodic flare-ups in almost every other state. In Taraba, an estimated 100 people were killed at the beginning of May in a series of attacks launched by ethnic youth militias and by individuals alleged to be soldiers.

    If the Buhari administration is to make good on its promises of positive socio-economic and political change, it will have to put the restoration of peace and stability at the top of its agenda.

    The first thing to do would be to unlearn the failures of preceding administrations. The most tragic of these is President Goodluck Jonathan’s under-estimation of the seriousness of the Boko Haram insurgency. Instead of confronting it decisively from the onset, excuses were made for a succession of military and political missteps which only underscored governmental incompetence, even as the terrorist threat expanded inexorably. While government dithered, a rag-tag militia transformed itself into a formidable terrorist organisation.

    To further worsen matters, serious effort was not made to mobilise local populations against terrorism and communal unrest. Instead, they were often seen as the enemy, and treated as such. The Joint Task Force in Borno State has been repeatedly accused of gross human rights abuses in its efforts to crack down on Boko Haram, and security agencies have been similarly charged with aggravating unrest in Plateau, Adamawa, Kaduna and Taraba states.

    The Buhari administration should build on the current successes of the military by ensuring that they are able to hold recaptured territory, rescue and succour Boko Haram captives, and liaise effectively with the allied nations of Niger, Chad and Cameroon in the push to end the insurgent menace. It must investigate the corruption in the military that damaged its readiness and effectiveness. It should speed up the creation and training of special forces troops who are better able to prosecute unconventional conflicts. It must rescind the dubious contracts given to ethnic militia groups and return the armed forces to its pride of place.

    Sustained attempts must also be made to convene roundtable meetings at which different parties will thoroughly air their grievances, and more must be done to follow up the resolutions of such parleys. In the Fulani-settler disputes, for example, the need for a grazing corridor in Middle Belt states has long been advocated; it should be implemented without delay.

    It is especially important for the Buhari administration to bring an end to the culture of impunity. No longer should the perpetrators of internecine violence be allowed to get away with their crimes. The discredited process of setting up tribunals and panels of inquiry whose reports are subsequently ignored must not continue.

    Peace is essential to any strategy of change. It is to be hoped that the incoming administration will achieve this fundamental objective of purposeful governance.

    ‘It is especially important for the Buhari administration to bring an end to the culture of impunity. No longer should the perpetrators of internecine violence be allowed to get away with their crimes. The discredited process of setting up tribunals and panels of inquiry whose reports are subsequently ignored must not continue’

  • Israel to help Nigeria in fight against terrorism, graft

    THE President-elect, Gen. Muhammadu Buhari, received a boast to his pledge to fight terrorism and corruption yesterday with a promise from Israel to assist the new government in achieving success, when it is sworn in.

    In a congratulatory letter by President Reuven Rivlin, Israel also pledged to assist Nigeria in the development of agriculture sector.

    The congratulatory letter, which was delivered by Israeli Ambassador to Nigeria, Uri Palti, said Nigeria and Israel face “similar dangers and challenges in our daily struggle against those who want to terrorise our citizens.

    “The latest news regarding the Boko Haram-ISIS alliance underscores the need for like-minded countries to unite in the fight against such radical terrorist organisations. I assure you that in this important campaign, Israel stand shoulder-to-shoulder with Nigeria.

    “I wish you every success in the challenging task ahead and trust that under your presidency, the relations of friendship and cooperation between Nigeria and Israel will continue to expand and strengthen. Please accept, Your Excellency, the assurances of my highest consideration.”

    Responding, General Buhari expressed his warm appreciation of the Israeli gesture and pledged to work with all countries for mutual benefits.