Gen. Buratai and his Chinua Achebe’s card By Emmanuel Onwubiko

The black South Africans restarted their deadly xenophobic violence few days back against other black Africans living in their country and thereby completely distracted Nigerians from the all-important story of the height of professional misconduct involving a serving Army captain who allegedly masterminded the killing of three police operatives to save a kidnapper in Taraba state.

However, sandwiched between the ugly scenarios of black on black violence in south Africa is this uncommon public statement by the chief of Army staff lieutenant General Tukur Yusuf Buratai on the show of shame by the said killer Army captain Balarabe Tijani who purportedly ordered the killing of three detectives and a civilian in order to free his friend a suspected kidnapper Hamisu Wadume in Taraba state.

Nigerians can recall that when this sad incident occurred about two weeks back, there was this widespread insinuations that the Army’s authority and the Defence headquarters have plotted to scuttle the charging of the members of the suspected military 'death squad' headed by the Army captain before the competent court of law to be punished for the grave offence of colluding with a kidnapper and for mass murders.

The perfect dramatic setting for these widespread insinuations was the decision by the Defence headquarters to constitute a panel to unravel an incident that even the police had publicly tabled before the World and had showed verifiable evidence that contrary to the claim by the Army spokesman that the killing of the police operatives was an accident their killings may have been properly coordinated.

That hasty and erroneous attempt by the Army spokesman to put up a Defence for this atrocious act of unwarranted assassination of police detectives by soldiers to frustrate the charging of a kidnapper seriously dented the institutional image of the Nigerian Army.

It was therefore the expectation of some of us who truly desire a military that is thoroughly professional and competent, that the Army as a body would repudiate this hasty fallacy committed by the spokesperson of the Army that sought to undermine a credible investigation of the bloody killing of the three cops and a civilian and the ferrying into safety just before his re-arrest of the baron of much of the armed kidnappings in Taraba and Benue Alhaji Hamisu Wadume.

Our yearning for what I call the Professor Chinua Achebe’s moment within the Nigerian Army was not long in coming except that the media reportage of this internal cleansing of the image of the Army was submerged in the hidden news pages due to the ugly reports coming from the xenophobia of black South Africans.

Be that as it may, it will be well placed to bring this courageous step of the Army hierarchy to the attention of the world so it would be known unambiguously that the Nigerian army does not condone such criminality that has happened in Taraba which as I write is yet to come before the competent courts of law and so there could be a closure.

The Army chief of staff played the Chinua Achebe’s card by calling a spade by its name and stating the obvious that the Army needs to carry out systematic re-orientation of the operatives and officer corps of the Nigerian Army so as to achieve service discipline and rid the institution of professional misconduct.

I call the leadership courage exhibited by the current chief of Army staff the Chinua Achebe’s card because the illustrious professor Achebe had in a very clear format stated the trouble with Nigeria and recommended that for Nigeria to get it right, we need to look at the leadership crisis.

His words: “The trouble with Nigeria is simply and squarely a failure of leadership. There is nothing basically wrong with the Nigerian character. There is nothing wrong with the Nigeria land or climate or water or air or anything else. The Nigerian problem is unwillingness or inability of its leaders to rise to the responsibility to the challenge of personal example which is the hallmarks of true leadership”.

At the risk of sounding like someone paid by General Buratai to blow his trumpets (which is not the case), I will state without equivocation that the Army chief of staff has in the last four years adopted constructive steps to instill service discipline and to infuse a high dosage of professionalism and competences within the Nigerian Army as an institution.

One of those measures is so concrete that even the blind has seen the impacts that a smooth and an efficient running of that platform can bring into being in the area of cementing civil and military relations.

The setting up of the department for civil and military relations and the human rights desks in the Nigerian Army have the potentials of turning our Army into a robust national institution whose leadership and membership are composed of persons who respect the rule of law and constitutionalism.

What the Army needs to do is to further empower the department of civil and military relations to begin to practically interface with the civil populace and the civil society community as often as possible. right now, the meetings are few and far between.

The Army needs to upgrade the services rendered by the Human Rights Desks in the Army to adequately enlighten the operatives on their duties and obligations in the area of promotion and protection of the human rights of citizens and those of the personnel of the Nigerian Army.

If truth be told, Lieutenant General Buratai has however set the ball rolling. He needs to get the players to keep playing the game by the rules so Nigerians can feel the impacts.

Another concrete effort the Army made in the last four years is the publication of a green handbook on the chief of Army staff policy directive on Nigerian Army comprehensive programme with domestic and international laws guiding the conduct of operations.

The Army chief by getting this book published and hopefully distributed has adopted a key step towards restoring normalcy and professional conducts of internal security operations by the military.

Key amongst the components of this green book are the following guidelines that: a) All personnel of the NA comply with domestic and international laws to which Nigeria is a state party. Unless otherwise directed by the Appropriate Superior Authority (ASA), NA personnel will comply with the principles and spirit of the International Human Rights Law (IHRL) during all Internal Security (IS) operations and other Military Assistance to Civil Authorities (MACA) operations that the NA may be deployed to in accordance with Sections 217(2) a, b, c, d, and 218(3) of CFRN 1999 (as amended). b)  An effective programme to prevent violations and ensure compliance with domestic and international law is implemented by the NA at all levels of command. c)    All incidents of violations of domestic and international laws committed by or against NA personnel, enemy, or any other individual are reported promptly, investigated thoroughly, and, where appropriate, remedied by corrective action. 

Others are that; the on-scene commander shall ensure that measures are taken to preserve evidence of incidents pending transfer to ASA. e)    At all appropriate levels of command and during all stages of operational planning and execution of operations, NA Legal Advisers provide advice concerning domestic and international law as it relates to operations, and f)      As much as possible, NA commanders are to use their appointment and provisions made by the military justice system and the AFA, to investigate and sanction violation of international laws which in certain cases are also offences against Nigerian Military Law.

Back to what I have elected to call the Chinua Achebe’s card played by the chief of Army staff, the media reported lieutenant General Buratai as clearly stating that the law will take its full course in the matter of the alleged killings of cops by soldiers under the command of the Army captain who is currently in detention.

The Chief of the Army Staff, Lt. Gen. Tukur Buratai, on Tuesday, made his first public comment on the killing of three policemen and a civilian by soldiers attached to Ibi Unit in Taraba State, saying there was a need for the reorientation of the “junior cadre” in the military.

The army chief, who spoke in Abuja at the Second and Third Quarter Conference with General Officers Commanding, top commanders and principal officers, said the army had concluded its investigation into the Taraba incident and decisive actions would be taken.

Buratai ordered the commanders at all levels to educate soldiers on the need to adhere to the rules of engagement at all times, so as to avoid a repeat of the Taraba incident.

He said, “We should all note that the army, as part of the Armed Forces of Nigeria, is mandated to support the civil authorities and the Nigeria Police Force in internal security operations. “However, recent occurrences have shown that there is a need for more reorientation on civil-military relations and inter-service cooperation at the junior cadre levels.

“Unfortunately, incidents such as the recent one at Ibi in Taraba State, which generated intense comments, are not healthy for the smooth cooperation and operation of our security forces. I hereby charge commanders at all levels to continue to educate personnel on the need to adhere to the rules of engagement at all times.

“They should respect all extant laws and the fundamental human rights of citizens as enshrined in the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, as amended. In this regard, efforts will be stepped up to ensure better relations between the Nigerian Army and sister security agencies while improved civil-military relations would be enhanced.”

Buratai also condemned the recent case of the alleged rape of a lady by a soldier and the shooting of a motorcyclist by another soldier in Abia.

“These are examples of events that must be guarded against. The army will not condone any form of indiscipline or actions that will tarnish its good image,” he said.

I recommend the sustenance of this CHINUA ACHEBE'S scenario in the military so Nigeria becomes better and safer. 

*Emmanuel Onwubiko heads HUMAN RIGHTS WRITERS ASSOCIATION OF NIGERIA (HURIWA) and blogs @www.emmanuelonwubiko.com,www.huriwa.blogspot.com,www.thenigerianinsidermews.com. 

HURIWA petitions Rights Commission on new Labour center

The leading pro-democracy and non-governmental organization – HUMAN RIGHTS WRITERS ASSOCIATION OF NIGERIA (HURIWA) has dragged the ministry of Labour and productivity, the Nigerian Labour congress and the Labour minister Dr. Chris Ngige to the National Human Rights commission  over non-licensing of United Labour Congress (ULC) as an independent Labour Union Centre. 

In a three page petition by the HUMAN RIGHTS WRITERS ASSOCIATION OF NIGERIA (HURIWA) sent to the executive secretary of the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) Mr. Tony Ojukwu, the Rights group has asked the Rights commission to impress it upon the Federal Ministry of Labour and productivity to respect the constitutional provision of freedom of association to grant the license to the United Labour Congress (ULC) with immediate effect. The Rights group said it may consider other measures if after a two weeks the Federal Ministry of Labour and Productivity fails to address the matter satisfactorily. The media statement was endorsed by the National Coordinator Comrade Emmanuel Onwubiko and the National Media Affairs Director Miss Zainab Yusuf. 

In the petition dated July 1^st 2019, HURIWA stated thus:

“This is to demand that your institution intervenes to reverse what we consider as serial violation of the constitutionally guaranteed Freedom of Association of thousands of Nigerian workers in both the public and private sectors who decidedly united to set up a trade union known as UNITED LABOUR CONGRESS to champion their fundamental human rights. Sir, regrettably, the ministry of Labour under the federal government of Nigeria, has consistently denied these citizens of their constitutional rights as citizens which directly infringes on all their fundamental human rights as enshrined in chapter four of the constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria of 1999 (as amended).

As you are well aware, the respect for human rights is an essential component of development just as the Vienna declarations of 1993 states as follows: “All human rights are universal, indivisible, inter-dependent and interrelated. Democracy, development and respect for human rights are interdependent and mutually re-inforcing”.

As stake holders in the human rights sector, we have watched with shock and disappointment, the adversarial roles played by the Nigerian Labour congress (NLC) to undermine the licensing of the independent trade union platform known as united Labour congress of Nigeria.

It is beyond the rational, to offer any concrete reason to justify the open abuse of the human right of these Nigerians to belong to the United Trade Union of Nigeria which is in accordance with the express provision of section 40 of the constitution which states that: “Every person shall be entitled to assemble freely and associate with other persons, and in particular he may form or belong to any political party, trade union or any other association for the protection of his interests: Provided that the provisions of this section shall not derogate from the powers conferred by this Constitution on the Independent National Electoral Commission with respect to political parties to which that Commission does not accord recognition.”

The following are the material ingredients of the violations:

1.    That the federal Government of Nigeria through the Federal Ministry of Labour denies workers the right to choose and to organize themselves into Unions; it has refused to register more than 40 trade unions that are seeking registration in the country despite having met all the stringent conditions for registration.

2.    The Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC) has aided and abetted the federal government in this unholy mission of truncating conventions 87 and 98 vis:

NLC working hands in hands with the Government has condemned many Nigerian workers to remain “unionless” exposing them to employer impunity and recklessness.

It has colluded with the federal government to sabotage and destabilize trade union actions and interests in the country.

It has pressured and intimidated the Ministry of Labour into withholding registration certificates of several unions in Nigeria

3.    The purposes of these actions of the NLC are all geared towards not just denying workers their natural right to freely associate but to create a monopoly that would allow unpopular cabals to continue having a stranglehold on the nation’s trade union movement. This enables them make hefty personal demands on politicians and extract patronage at the detriment of Nigerian workers

The leadership of NLC has used the instruments of violence against Nigerian workers democratically engaging employers in Nigeria. They have hired armed thugs to inflict heavy injuries on both fellow trade union leaders, workers, passers-by and Journalists all in a bid to ruthlessly establish hegemony over Nigerian workers

4.    NLC at the behest of the federal government of Nigerian not only went on national media to disparage fellow workers but also held a joint press conference sponsored by the federal government to seek the scuttling of a workers organized industrial action

NLC has resisted the democratization of the trade union movement in Nigeria by conniving with different arms of government to make laws that stultify the right of workers to voluntarism.

It has deployed the instrument of fear and brute force to scatter Legislative processes instituted to review Employment relations laws in Nigeria. It violently opposed the United Labour Congress of Nigeria (ULC) from making its presentations on the floor of the National Assembly as part of the public hearing to make our Labour laws more compliant with international standards. This led to the abortion of the process

It has violently denied other parties in Industrial relations in the country the necessary freedoms of expressions which our engagement in the IR processes demands and which is supported by various conventions of the ILO and to which NLC president; Ayuba Waba ia a Board member”.

End of visit statement of the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions on her visit to Nigeria, Agnes Callamard, United Nations Special Rapporteur for Extrajudicial, Summary or Arbitrary Executions, 2 September 2019

REPORT from UN Human Rights Council Published on 02 Sep 2019

Introduction

I conducted an official country visit to Nigeria from 19 August to 3 September 2019. I warmly thank the Federal Government of Nigeria for their invitation to visit the country, and the officials I met for their availability and support.

I also thank the United Nations (UN) Office in Nigeria and the UN country team. Their logistical and substantive support during my visit was invaluable.

The principal goals of my visit were to examine situations of violations of the right to life by State and non-State actors; the Federal State security strategy and the responses at Federal and State level to allegations of arbitrary deprivation of life. I considered violations allegedly committed by State security agencies and by non-State actors, particularly in the North East, Middle Belt and South of the country, as well as actions taken by the State to hold perpetrators accountable for their crimes. I also examined specifically the killings of women and members of the LGBTQI community, and, as part of my gender-sensitive approach to my mandate, I included a focus on Nigeria’s criminalization of abortion.

During the twelve days of my mission, I held meetings with the Permanent Representatives of the Federal Republic of Nigeria to the United Nations Office in Geneva and in New York, the Deputy Permanent Representative of Nigeria to the African Union, representatives of the Ministry of Justice, the Ministry of Interior, the Ministry of Defence, the Ministry of Women Affairs and Social Development, the Department of Security Services, the National Commission for Refugees and IDPs., the National Security Advisor, the Director of Legal Services of the Federal Ministry of Defence, and the Commander of Operation Safe Haven, the National Human Rights Commission, and representatives of the State Emergency Management Agency (SEMA). I also held meetings with authorities at the State level, including the Security Adviser for the Governor of Benue State, the Commissioner for Defence, the Commissioner for Police and the Director of State Security Services of Benue State; the Attorney General of Plateau; and the Governor of Rivers State.

I met with members of the diplomatic community, international, regional and national human rights organizations; with women and men working for human rights at the grassroots level; with community and religious; media workers, including journalists; activists; LGBTQI individuals; internally displaced women and men; and with victims of human rights violations and abuse, including survivors, eye witnesses and family members whose relatives have been brutally killed.

These preliminary findings have been presented today to the authorities as part of the end of mission debriefing. The official final report will be presented to the Human Rights Council in June 2020. I am looking forward to engage and work with the Government and all relevant stakeholders to receive more information and clarification on these preliminary observations.

Overview

The overall situation that I encountered in Nigeria gives rise to extreme concern. By many measures, the Federal authorities and the international partners are presiding over an injusticepressure cooker. Some of the specific contexts I examined are simmering.

The warning signs are flashing bright red: increased numbers of attacks and killings over the last five years with a few notable exceptions; increased criminality and spreading insecurity; widespread failure by the federal authorities to investigate and hold perpetrators to account, even for mass killings; a lack of public trust and confidence in the judicial institutions and State institutions more generally; high levels of resentment and grievances within and between communities; toxic ethno-religious narratives and “extremist” ideologies - characterised by dehumanization of the “others” and denial of the legitimacy of the others’ claims; a generalised break down of the rule of law, with particularly acute consequences for the most vulnerable and impoverished populations of Nigeria.

Over the course of its tumultuous history, Nigeria has confronted many challenges and much conflict, including military rule and mass killings. It has also experienced economic boom and considerable economic growth, particularly in the 1990s thanks to its oil resources. Perhaps it is this history that leads (some) commentators, analysts and even officials themselves to downplay or ignore the warning signs or to assume that no matter their gravity that these will be overcome.

However, the absence today of accountability functionality is on such a scale that pretending this is anything short of a crisis is a major mistake. It is a tragedy for the people of Nigeria. Unchecked, its ripple effects will spread throughout the sub-region if not the continent, given the country’s central economic, political and cultural leadership role.

XENOPHOBIC VIOLENCE: HURIWA CANVASSES MASS ACTION AGAINST SOUTH AFRICA; CUTTING OF DIPLOMATIC RELATIONS BY NIGERIA IMMEDIATELY:..... *Says President Buhari has failed to safeguard Nigerian lives in SA:

The Human Rights Writers Association of Nigeria strongly condemns the prolonged but currently ongoing violent xenophobic attacks specifically targeting Nigerians and Africans of other countries living and doing their businesses in South Africa. 

We have watched just like millions of other Nigerians have also watched videos and photographic evidence detailing graphic and gory Treatments and violence meted out and are being unleashed on Nigerians and other Africans that are resident  in South Africa who are not from South Africa. We are amazed, shocked, disappointed that the president of Nigeria and the government of Nigeria has watched helplessly as our citizens are being butchered in their hundreds in South Africa by black South Africans and government has so far refused to adopt and implement a stringent diplomatic blockade and measures against the South Africa business concerns in Nigeria, It is unfortunate. It is not enough to say Nigeria will take decisive action. We want those actions announced and implemented immediately.

Nigerians should take their future in their hands. We are calling on Nigerians to make up their minds and prepare within the next 78hrs to boycott DSTV multi choice, Nigerians should even boycott the Big Brother naija that is going on in South Africa. We are of the opinion that even the participants in Bbnaija should walk out of the Bbnaija Immediately. 

Nigerians should stop paying South Africa businesses. Those who have MTN lines should cut it off and go for other lines, Nigerians should protest in South Africa embassy and South Africa business premises all over the country. 

We must take these measures and we must start doing that without any further waste of time because the governments have not done anything to stop the South Africans from Killing Nigerians and these killings are still going on and everybody is just cool about it.  Apart from the National Association of Nigerians Students NANs that have taken action, unusually you don't expect that from a group of such to be the one that will champion this advocacy. But NANS has demonstrated patriotism by protesting in front of South African business premises within Nigeria. 

We have to go a step further by boycotting any business that have to do with South Africa. 

Nigerian government should be put under intense pressure to cut off diplomatic relationships with South Africa, Nigeria government, Nigeria Airport authority should impose sanction to ban Nigerians from traveling to South Africa. We should cut off any diplomatic relationship with South Africa.

The South African XENOPHOBIC violence has demonstrated that even the South African government is guilty by association. For the fact that the south African government has been unable to arrest these unfortunate scenarios of killings of Nigerians and other Africans shows that the south Africa government is actively in support of the killings because a government that is not in support of mass killings of other people's/country's citizens Should by now have taken measures to stop the widening spectre of blood cuddling violence targeted against Nigerians majorly and other black Africans who are residing in south Africa. 

There is no justification for the xenophobic attacks against other African nationals who live in South Africa. South Africans do not have any right to use the excuse that certain Nigerians or some other Africans like Zimbabweans or other Africans who are in SA perpetrating crimes. 100% of Nigerians living in South Africa are not criminals; the criminals amongst the Nigerians populace in SA are less than 5% of the entire population of Nigerians living in SA.  There are so many Nigerians that are academic professors, teachers, genuine investors who have deployed their human and material resources to carry out legitimate and profit oriented businesses to the South Africans economy. Most Nigerian own businesses have employed South Africans. Why are the South African citizens being allowed to kill Nigerians? And we are all watching as this Act Of genocide goes on and the government of Nigeria is not concerned about the welfare and security of her citizens.

The Human Rights Writers Association of Nigeria is appealing to Nigerians to do something. We must do something, we must not say because our biological brothers and sisters are not in SA. There is hardly any local government in Nigeria that does not have somebody in SA, so we are all involved in this unfortunate scenario that is happening to our people in SA. We must all speak with one voice; we must play the role of a giant of Africa. Unless we are now a giant we claim to be less. Are we really the giant of Africa?  If yes we must take action, the government must show the way. We must not behave like the proverbial giant with clay legs. 

The chairman of diaspora commission, Abike Dabiri-Erewa has failed. The ministry of foreign affairs has failed, since they have been unable to check the menace of targeted assassination and mass slaughter of our citizens in different parts of SA. This is very unfortunate.

And the constitution says that our foreign policy of Nigeria must be formulated and implemented to protect the interest of Nigeria and Nigerians. Any other interest that does not protect the core national interest of Nigerians is no longer part of our foreign policy objectives. So it is the objective of our foreign policy objectives of this country that the killings in SA must be confronted.

Comrade Emmanuel Onwubiko;

NATIONAL COORDINATOR OF HUMAN RIGHTS WRITERS ASSOCIATION OF NIGERIA (HURIWA).

WHY IT IS LEGALLY MANDATORY TO PUNISH ARMED BANDITS AND KIDNAPPERS-by HURIWA

A prominent pro-democracy and civil Rights advocacy group- HUMAN RIGHTS WRITERS ASSOCIATION OF NIGERIA (HURIWA) has condemned the Katsina State governor Alhaji Aminu Bello Masari for negotiating with armed kidnappers and bandits just as the Rights group said the action is an affront to the constitution of Nigeria and all relevant laws which obliges the government to legally punish felons and hoodlums.   

HURIWA in a position paper sent to the media and signed by the National Coordinator Comrade Emmanuel Onwubiko and the National Media Affairs Director Miss Zainab Yusuf, HURIWA  affirmed  that the emerging illegality of some Northern States in entering into dialogues with mass murderers and kidnappers in the guise of seeking for peace can only achieve a peace of the graveyard and would amount to rewarding criminality. The Rights group said the conspiratorial silence of both President Muhammadu Buhari and the Federal Attorney General and minister of justice Alhaji Abubakar Malami whilst these cocktails of illegality and mischief against the constitution go on is the greatest disservice to the constitutional democracy even as the Rights group charges the President, Muhammadu Buhari and all stakeholders including the Nigerian Bar Association to speak out against the coup against the Nigerian Constitution which these nocturnal meetings with killers and kidnappers in Zamfara, Katsina represent. 

HURIWA stated that: "It is said the culture of violence brings with it a class of cruel people who believe they are entitled to determine the value of other humans. This is a reality which dawns on a society with weak criminal justice system where crime is not only prevalent and under-reported and officially rarely documented but also seldom meted with sanctions. This state of affairs breeds a most vile, oppressive and daring criminal sets like kidnappers and arm bandits.

The US Department of State’s Overseas Security Advisory Council (OSAC) report on Nigeria indicates that kidnapping for ransom occurs throughout the country. There is hardly a part of the country which has not experienced kidnapping and armed banditry in recent times and most disturbing is the hard fact that there does not appear to be a conscious and concerted effort to arrest the situation.  This subject therefore deserves attention and the reason for this paper.

Legal Definition of key terms

Kidnapping and abduction are used interchangeably to describe the forceful taking or confinement of another against their will for several illegal purposes. Some criminal legislation in Nigeria defines the terms as different sides of a crime while in some others, the age or state of mind of the victim is the distinguishing factor.

A lot of the States of the South have passed laws criminalizing kidnapping and abduction. According to section 1 of the Kidnapping (Prohibition) Law of Lagos State 2017, the term “kidnap” includes the act of unlawful removal or abduction of person(s) from a place to another against the person(s)’ will, either by force or use of offensive weapons, firearms or deception or the act of holding somebody hostage with or without the person’s consent with the intent to demand ransom, for ritual killing or for any other unlawful purpose.

By section 2 of the Law, the punishment for abduction is life imprisonment but where death results from the kidnapping, the punishment is death sentence. The section provides thus:

(1)  From the commencement of this Law, any person who-

(i)               Forcibly takes holds, abducts, detains or captures;

(ii)             Instills fear in another or the purpose of kidnapping through coercion or by any other means against the person’s will with intent to demand ransom; commits an offence, and is liable on conviction to life imprisonment.

(2) Where death occurs as a result of the commission of the offence of kidnapping, the offender(s) shall be liable on conviction to death sentence.

(3) The death sentence imposed under subsection (2) may be executed by-

(i)               Hanging;

(ii)             Lethal injection; or

(iii)           As the Court may direct.”

Under the Penal Code Law (PCL) which applies in the States of the North including the FCT, the term kidnapping is defined under section 271 in the following words:

Whoever takes or entices any person, under fourteen years of age if a male or under sixteen years of age if a female, or any person of unsound mind out of the keeping of the lawful guardian of such person without the consent of such guardian or consent of someone legally authorized to consent to such removal, is said to kidnap such person.

While Section 270 of the PCL states that whoever by force or by any deceitful means induces any person to go from any place, is said to abduct that person. Punishment for kidnapping range from 10 to 14 years under section273 and 274 of the PC depending on the intention of the actor.

On the other hand “armed bandit” is  not a legal term for any particular kind of crime but used in association with criminals who carry arms especially firearms which the most deadly of all kinds of offensive weapons. Section 3 of the Robbery and Firearms (Special Provisions) Act criminalizes the illegal possession of “firearms” which is defined under section 11 of the Act to include any canon, gun, rifle, carbine, machine-gun, cap-gun, flint-lock gun, revolver, pistol, explosive or ammunition or other firearm, whether whole or in detached pieces. To underscore the gravity of firearms related offences, robbery with firearms is punishable with death under Section 1(2) of the Act while receiving property subject of the Act carries a sentence of life imprisonment as well. It is also a crime under section 4(3) for any person hospital or clinic to admit, treat or administer drug to a person with bullet wounds without reporting same to the police.

The Rationale

The State has two tasks in which potential victims of wrongdoing are likely to take an interest; first is to criminalize certain behaviors which wrong others, the second is to punish those behaviors. It fulfils only one part of the law when all a society has is provision in a piece of document without complementary enforcement of those provisions in defaulters or deviants.

The first legal basis and rationale for punishment of those crimes is that the law has provided for their punishment. It must be reiterated that the usual procedure for law passage involves the executive and legislative arm of governments, so much so that even in military regimes, quasi legislative assembly or committees are constituted to serve as the parliament to either formulate the set of rules that eventually decreed or in the least the embellish it with the legislative or legal jargons. The point is that at the violation of a law, the organ of government with powers to adjudicate is the judiciary.

Another basis for which the crime of kidnapping and arm banditry must be punished is that they are not compoundable offences. A crime is compoundable when the victim of an offence which is personal to him accepts settlement from the perpetrator in lieu of prosecution. However the offences of kidnapping or abduction and armed banditry are not personal to the any particular victims. The whole society is a victim of kidnapping and armed banditry.   They are offences which deal with the state of safety of the public and for which any member of the society could be a victim either by virtue of social standing in financial terms, or by virtue of mere membership of a particular tribe or group or merely by being a believer or practitioner of a particular faith or religion. Again the manner of carrying out of these offences involve the use of fire arms which only the State has prerogative over.

Moreover it is someway compounding of offence to fail to prosecute and punish kidnappers and arm bandits. In the case of PML (NIG) LTD v. FRN (2017) LPELR – 43480 (SC), 39-44, Paras. B-C the Supreme Court shed light on the concepts of compounding of offence and compounding offence in the following words:

"Compounding a crime" is defined in the same Black's Law Dictionary, 9th Ed., as follows

The offense of either agreeing not to prosecute a crime that one knows has been committed or agreeing to hamper the prosecution.

Compounding a crime is also "a criminal act in which a person agrees not to report the occurrence of a crime or not to prosecute a criminal offender in exchange for money or other consideration"

………………………………………………………………………………….

The offense is complete when there is an agreement to either withhold evidence of the crime, conceal it, or fail to

prosecute it.

"Compounding of offences" on the other hand, is an act on the part of the victim, who decides to pardon the offence committed by the accused person, and requests the Court to exonerate him. This does not mean that the offence has not been committed;”

In Ramesh Chandara v. A.P. Jhaveri [A.I.R.1973 SC 84] the Indian Supreme Court made a profound statement which appears to shade light on the conspiracy of silence in the midst of the gruesome crimes and state of unrest in Nigeria today The Court held that an invisible permission to compound a compoundable and non compoundable offence is totally invalid.

Prevalence of an offence is another reason for the need for stiffer measures and sanctions to ensure deterrence. In the case of Onyilokwu V The State (1981) 2 NCR 49 where the offender was initially detained for causing hurt, and later, he unsuccessfully tried to escape and was additionally charged with escaping from lawful custody. Although he was later discharged and acquitted, the court expressed the view that three years imprisonment earlier imposed on him did not show adequate consideration not only for his first offender status, but also , for an offence which was not prevalent in the community. The rationale for reconsidering the sentence gives a clear indication that a prevalent crime should not be treated with kid gloves if such a society must survive the crime.

In the case of Olanipekmi V The State (1979) 3 LRN 204 1979 (alias junta manta), during a robbery, D the leader ordered one of his followers to shoot a victim. He complied but the gun did not go off. In sentencing him to five years imprisonment with hard labour, the court said:

‘’society demands that such a man should be kept out of circulation for some time-the offence is a serious one………’’

Similarly, courts have taken very serious view of the offences which injure or threaten the lives of citizens. In the case of R. v. Ozuloke Suit No.HU/4/47/C/71 (High Court Umuahia, Unreported) where the appellant met a little girl aged about eight years who was related to him on a village road, he covered her eyes with his hand and stuffed bread into her mouth to stop her crying out and took her into a bush, he laid her out on the ground, stood on her hand, poured acid over her body and cut off her left ear, he forced her eyes open and poured acid into them. He later ran away leaving the little girl unconscious. A twenty year jail sentence was considered adequate; the offence was regarded as being most revolting. What could be more revolting than the present state of widespread and indiscriminate possession of firearms and the attendance wanton crimes of kidnapping, molestation, killings, terrorism in all parts of the Country today.

Lastly the present prevalent state of armed criminality is direct affront on the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (CFRN) 1999 (as mended) and undermines her territorial integrity, national unity and nationhood. Section 1 (3) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria provides that

“The Federal Republic of Nigeria shall not be governed nor shall any person or group of persons take control of the government of Nigeria or any part thereof, except in accordance with the provisions of this Constitution.”

The history of rebellion and revolution all over the world began with proliferation of arms and unbridled state of crime associated with such arms as in the present state. Nigeria therefore cannot afford to treat the present state of crime and insecurity lightly under any guise. To do so will be a clear decision to ignore history and tore its path.

The Problems

At the heart of the unabated state of the menace is the lack of political will and seriousness in prosecuting suspected or alleged offenders. A report in the Punch newspaper of March 9, 2013 had notably reported that “political observers” had noted that “no meaningful convictions” for kidnapping had been served even in states with laws prescribing capital punishment for kidnapping and relating offences. Also the All Africa of November 4, 2013 quoted then Edo State Governor as stating that the challenge is the enforcement of laws on kidnapping. It is in this regard that alot of political observers and commentators as well as members of the public do not seem to absolve the role of the present government in the state of insecurity in the country. While most peg their reason for the blame on the utterances of high profile government officers, others cite the docile attitude and near inactions as clear evidences of collusion.

Moreover there is the problem of complicity of government or political office holders and law enforcement agents with the suspects. A case in point is the most recent ugly incident in Taraba State involving the Army and the arrest of Hamisu Bala Wadume by the men of the IG Intelligence Response Team. It is surprising that no one directly took responsibility for the unfortunate incident nor did anyone get fired, notwithstanding the panel set up to invest the matter which again is another illegality.

There is also the problem of poor handling of prosecution by law officer or those from the appropriate authorities. Allied to this is the poor state of the judiciary with incompetent and compromised officers besides the usual issues associated with protracted trials.

The communal culture of shielding offenders or the lack of willingness to volunteer information by members of the public also encourage the offences.

Recommendations

In a presidential system of governance as ours, the executive arm seem to wield the greatest influence and coincidentally the state apparatus for enforcement of law and order at its whims and caprices. The President as  the chief security officer must take responsibility for the security of the country and urgently deploy resources at his disposal to address this national emergency. In this regard, it does appear that there is urgent need to shed the security weight on the president by considering state police. 

Closely related is the fact that the President appoints the chief law officer of the country under whose office the Department of Public Prosecution is. There is need to review the mechanisms of investigation and prosecution including their funding if the heads will not operate as appendages of political parties especially that in government or power which has been a huge set back. Recent events clearly buttress this fact. A law officer cannot be independent if such exists at the pleasure of a political office holder.

There is also the need to review judicial system with a view to creating a special courts with impeccable judges to attend to cases as under consideration to redirect the State. The usual courts are encumbered with so many cases which do not help criminal trials of this nature, as a result so much time is wasted and witnesses are discouraged from attending or prevented by virtue of relocation or even misfortunes affecting their availability or clarity of memory.

Moreover there is need for investigators and prosecutors to be professional and discreet in handling information in order to encourage informants and potential witnesses. Our system does not rely on hear say but no one will be willing to risk their lives where their identities are not protected or they are not offered any form of protection to volunteering necessary information. The public confidence must be secured if investigators and prosecutors are to make head-way. There is no suspected criminal who doesn’t have a confidant but no one would risk their lives only to find out afterwards that they did it for nothing.

Nigeria must also beef up its security equipment to enhance collation, preservation and documentation of evidences.  This will greatly enhances investigation and narrow persons of interest to real suspects to avoid the usual general raid will end in no conviction."