AMNESTY: IN WHOSE INTEREST?

The Third Mainland Bridge is Africa’s and Nigeria’s longest bridge. Its economic importance and significance to Lagos and indeed to Nigeria cannot be wished away. It was shocking and worrisome to learn that terrorist organisation Boko Haram have come south to Lagos and made the bridge its target. 

The sect has been responsible for numerous deaths and destruction of property worth hundreds of millions in Naira. A lot of persons have been displaced as a result of the wicked acts of this sect. The administration of President Goodluck Jonathan has had a torrid time dealing with the menace of the group and has thus far remained unsuccessful.

Boko Haram is an ideological organization with hard line terrorist operations. It wants or at least is said to want a Sharia state all over northern Nigeria. Having links with other terrorist organizations including Al Qaeda is proof of its outsourcing capabilities. In terms of efficient organization and impact, the sect’s attacks have been highly effective while the federal government boasting a paid, trained and equipped security department has had a laughable time dealing with the group.

 

It is this inability of the Nigerian security groups to tackle the threats that compels several northern leaders to demand amnesty for the sect. Naturally there are two positions on the issue: pro amnesty for Boko Haram and anti-amnesty for the sect. The leaders demanding amnesty for the group have put a huge cart before the horse.

Prominent northern leaders have demanded amnesty for the sect and last week, pressure from them seemed to have held the president by the jugular. But it seems these leaders have an ulterior motive in making demands for amnesty for a fundamental and ideological group that remains faceless and irresponsible. These prominent leaders compare the amnesty demand for Boko Haram with the same amnesty granted Niger Delta militants.

One prominent Nigerian argues that there is thin line between freedom fighting and terrorism alluding that one’s freedom fighter is to another a terrorist. It is a disturbing thought. Freedom is one of the noblest of rights. Freedom however does not connote slavery or servitude for another. Liberty as a right does not include the right to withdraw it from another on account of superiority of race, religion or even conviction.

This piece is not about condoning the activities of the Niger Delta militants while condemning the terrorist activities of the Boko Haram, far from it. Truth be told, the militants in the South-South region of Nigeria cannot be compared to the terrorist organization operating out of northern Nigeria that has claimed nearly two thousand lives of Nigerians guilty only of innocence. The militants or MEND if you prefer did not directly disturb the ordinary Nigerians within their region but targeted foreign oil workers, scaring them out of the region. Boko Haram on the other hand has targeted defenseless women and children.

The threat on the Third Mainland Bridge was real as was the pressure by certain leaders of the north on the presidency to grant amnesty to a sect whose demands are in no way acceptable. The demands for such amnesty on a basis of what was good for the gander should be fit for the goose holds no water. Boko Haram fights a cause that seeks to suppress the freedom of one group while increasing the liberty of another.

Obviously, our leaders of northern extraction making these demands know well enough that negotiating with terrorists amounts to creating a terror license. So there must be another objective behind the request and pressure on the presidency and perhaps a chess gambit playing out to the untrained eye.

The demand and pressure seems to be made out of pressure and loss of wit. Yet a cursory look at the Nigerian state reveals that every opportunity is one to be exploited quickly for profit. As at the time of this writing, no leader who has made demand for amnesty for the Boko Haram has yet to acknowledge dialogue with the sect. Nor has any of them come forward to say, I represent the group. Yet the pressure mounts like a team struggling to equalize a deficit late into the game.

Let us rewind a little. We have been told that there are several Boko Harams. Which one are these northern leaders representing? Which Boko Haram will accept the amnesty? Which Boko Haram will stop recruiting suicide bombers and uploading messages of threats to anyone who dares listen? Sadly, no one knows. No one, including the monarch of the north or former chairman of the EFCC and all others clamoring for amnesty to a violent group bent on making slaves of fellow humans because they consider their view as superior.

An amnesty committee has been set up. Eventually, funds will roll out. Plenty who hitherto had never lit a fire cracker would line up and receive sums monthly from our willy-nilly government that has lost all resolve to protect and preserve our collective liberty. Liberty from one is liberty from all, just as Boko Haram commanders are not more equal than their victims before God and under our laws.

The amnesty being demanded and the amnesty sums to be paid is a charade. It is a free fall for a purpose that will do greater disservice than what it is intended for. 2015 is upon us. The amnesty funds to be released are some politician’s campaign fund needed to buy poor voters in Nigeria or perhaps begin another terror movement in the South East/South West after 2015.

Within a few months terrorism has become big business in Nigeria. Get a few explosives and few willing arsonists. Move them randomly to locations of peace to unleash mayhem. Do it a few times more and amnesty dollars will roll in. It is that simple if you have the nerve to take lives and sleep well at night.

 

Our federal government in setting up this amnesty committee to begin amnesty payments to a sect that is unrepentant, ideological in its conviction and destructive in their operations has demonstrated its lack of conviction in our equality as a people and our collective liberty as a state. Worse is its lack of will in fighting a menace that has crippled an entire region. On a number of occasions, it turned down the help from several foreign intelligence that offered their wealth of experience and expertise. Even if national security was a challenge with that option, Nigeria could have privately outsourced the required intelligence needed to track down the leaders, financiers and operatives of these evil mongers but rather it chose the easy way.

Several kinds of Boko Haram will accept amnesty in the coming weeks. One kind of Boko Haram will reject the amnesty describing those collecting it as fakes. More confusion will ensue. In the end, a failed state will be better than Nigeria had Nigerians been careful enough to overcome her most recurring problems: indifference and self interest. 

Amnesty has been suggested. The presidency has in its tradition set up an amnesty committee. The question from the foregoing is - amnesty for a terror organisation: in whose interest, Nigeria's, Boko Haram's or ...?