Particularly with reference to the ACN's criticism of the "ban" or "proscription" of the group, which I see mentioned on the front page of The Guardian today.

I'll check it out online before making a comment.

Uyi Iredia: I'll check it out online before making a comment.

So you are Gbawe?

At a time when there are increasing concerns about the loss of civic privileges and personal freedoms in a number of countries, the nairaland commentariat needs to decide whether or not the questions raised by the opposition party have some merit.

My personal view is that, we need to achieve a comfortable medium where a more secure environment does not necessarily equate with the loss of hard-earned liberties.

They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety ~ Benjamin Franklin

In a statement issued in Ila-Orangun on Sunday by its National Publicity Secretary, Alhaji Lai Mohammed, the party said the Order also makes it easy for an increasingly intolerant government to clamp down on the opposition, which its sees more as an irritant than an indispensable part of democracy. It therefore called on media professional bodies to challenge the Order in court to save journalists from long jail terms simply for carrying out their constitutional duties.

In the alternative, the ACN called on the federal government to clarify the knotty and vague areas of the open-ended Order, that may end up punishing journalists and infringing on the civil liberties of the citizens more than it will curtail the activities of the sects.

”Against the background of insinuations in government circles, let us be clear that we do not condone the activities of these sects that have killed and maimed innocent Nigerians and turned a section of the country into a battle field. Terrorism in all its ramifications is condemnable, and no responsible government will allow any group, no matter its name, grievances or ideology, to carry out terrorist acts unchecked.

”But we believe that whatever action government takes – even in an emergency – must pass the Constitutional test, especially since the relevant sections of the Constitution have not been suspended,” the party said.

It said the offensive section of the Order is Section 5 (1), which prescribes a term of imprisonment of not less than 20 years ”for any person who knowingly, in any manner, directly or indirectly, solicits or renders support for the commission of an act of terrorism or to a terrorist group”.

ACN said “support”, as defined by the Order, includes ”incitement to commit a terrorist act through the Internet, or any electronic means OR THROUGH THE USE OF PRINTED MATERIALS OR THROUGH THE DISSEMINATION OF TERRORIST INFORMATION (emphasis ours).

”Is this subsection not in conflict with Chapter II Section 22 of the Nigeria constitution which says ‘The press, radio, television and other agencies of the mass media, shall AT ALL TIMES BE FREE (emphasis ours) to uphold the fundamental objectives contained in this chapter and uphold the responsibility and accountability of the government to the people?’

”By stifling the press, is the Order not abridging a part of the fundamental human rights guaranteed every citizen under Chapter Four of the Nigerian Constitution in Section 39 (1), which states thus: ‘Every person shall be entitled to freedom of expression including freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart ideas and information WITHOUT INTERFERENCE?’ (emphasis ours). Can journalists escape being sentenced to 20-year jail terms for publishing statements issued by the sects? Can they freely report on videos periodically posted on YouTube by Boko Haram leader Shekau? Can the media freely report the kind of massacre that took place in Baga in April without being held liable for ‘supporting’ terrorism? Can radio and television stations organize talk shows on terrorism without the discussants being held liable for ‘supporting’ terrorism?

”Can the opposition criticise the government’s strategies against the terrorist sects, through its regular intervention, without being perceived as offering support to the sects? Does this Order cover the satellite broadcast channels that can be accessed in many homes across the country? Who determines when this Order has been breached? These are some of the questions that arise under the proscription Order,” the party said.

It said the Nigerian government must take a cue from what obtains in other countries, especially in the US, which are also battling terrorism, adding that the media in those countries have continued to report freely on the activities of the global terrorist organisation Al-Qaeda, despite the horrendous attacks it has carried out in the US and Europe, among others.

”In a statement we issued on May 5th, we said inter alia: ‘The Jonathan Administration is steadily descending into despotism with a brazen assault on the freedom of expression and the press, the use of national institutions against perceived enemies and a growing inclination to denigrate opposition leaders. The Jonathan Administration is anchored on a Transformation Agenda. But the only transformation that we can see is the one from a democratically-elected President to an Emperor, a despot…If the President is not prevailed upon to change course, Nigeria may be in for another season of anomie, reminiscent of the days of the maximum ruler who took the country to the brink before his sudden demise.’

”We hate to say this has turned out to be prescient, in view of the dangerous provisions of the Boko Haram and Ansaru’s proscription Order. The Order’s assault on the press freedom and the Constitutionally-guaranteed rights of ordinary Nigerians is unprecedented in the country’s history. We therefore call on the federal government to take a second look at this Order, with a view to resolving any conflict it may have with the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria,” the ACN said.

Source

^^^ Are you familiar with the concept of emergency and war situations, and that which is required to effectively deal with them?

Why are Presidents granted emergency powers during wartime in most countries?

Deep Sight:
^^^ Are you familiar with the concept of emergency and war situations, and that which is required to effectively deal with them?

Why are Presidents granted emergency powers during wartime in most countries?

Please do not insult my intelligence by asking platitudinous questions.

Presidents have a right to exercise emergency powers when the occasion demands - sure.
But then, so does citizen Joe who seeks clarification on grey areas, within the ambit of federal law.

eGuerrilla:

Please do not insult my intelligence by asking platitudinous questions.

Abeg calm down o!

Presidents have a right to exercise emergency powers when the occasion demands - sure.
But then, so does citizen Joe who seeks clarification on grey areas, within the ambit of federal law.

Well, in blunt terms, the question behind this thread is the legal and moral right or authority of a person or group who condemns the proscription of a terrorist organization responsible for, and committed to, thousands of murders.

Deep Sight:
^^^ Are you familiar with the concept of emergency and war situations, and that which is required to effectively deal with them?

Why are Presidents granted emergency powers during wartime in most countries?

^
Last time I checked, we are NOT at war. Why this reference?

Deep Sight:

Abeg calm down o!



Well, in blunt terms, the question behind this this is the legal and moral right or authority of a person or group who condemns the proscription of a terrorist organization responsible for, and committed to, thousands of murders.

^
You have failed.

Gbawe is not even here for you.

Beaf!:


^
Last time I checked, we are NOT at war. Why this reference?

If you do not recognize the Boko Haram situation as warfare against the state, then there is really a problem in this country.

I think I agree with the ACN on this.

An unbiased mind will observe that the ACN's focus is on ensuring that the PDP-led FG doesn't use this as an opportunity clamp down on the opposition as well as those who may be critical of the methods employed by the Govt in combating terrorism.

Salient issues were raised by the ACN spokesperson, and these are the issues that one expects the Federal Govt(through the office of the A.G.) to address. ACN's concern is valid given PDP's penchant for engaging in cheap blackmail and witch-hunting of those who are critical of their dealings.

Let the FG clarify the grey-areas of the proscription law and I'm sure everyone will be fine.

The only relevant question here would have to be whether or not the ACN's criticisms are borne out of genuine humanist concerns or the rather more likely case of the wretched form of politics they are playing. Unfortunately, their antecedents points towards the latter. There's absolutely no record of any genuine moral crusade by the ACN throughout their history so this no doubt is borne out f pure hypocrisy and I challenge anyone that thinks contrary to make a case.

Garri the 1st: I think I agree with the ACN on this.

An unbiased mind will observe that the ACN's focus is on ensuring that the PDP-led FG doesn't use this as an opportunity clamp down on the opposition as well as those who may be critical of the methods employed by the Govt in combating terrorism.

Salient issues were raised by the ACN spokesperson, and these are the issues that one expects the Federal Govt(through the office of the A.G.) to address. ACN's concern is valid given PDP's penchant for engaging in cheap blackmail and witch-hunting of those who are critical of their dealings.

Let the FG clarify the grey-areas of the proscription law and I'm sure everyone will be fine.

We're talking terrorism here, my friend, reckless and consistent murder of thousands of people. . . . . . .?

Now the key question: does such an organization (as Boko Haram) have a legal right to exist and be recognized as a legitimate association?

A terrorist association?

Now if the answer is in the negative, as I expect it must be, for all sane people, then what's wrong with the proscription?

The proscription, in fact, only symbolically amounts to stating that which is already the case: namely that it is an illegal association, no?

Interestingly, this question came up a few months ago on nairaland (I'll search for the thread).

Basically, Boko Haram communicates with the media via certain channels (for example, they usually communicate with a certain journalist). Now the question is this; are those journalists merely performing their lawful duties or are they engaged in a crime?

So, boko haram is now an opposition party? Hmmmm! Na wa o. Opposition party that bombs church. Opposition party that murder innocent citizens. What is worste than infringing on a fellow human rights than taking his/her life?

Garri the 1st: I think I agree with the ACN on this.

An unbiased mind will observe that the ACN's focus is on ensuring that the PDP-led FG doesn't use this as an opportunity clamp down on the opposition as well as those who may be critical of the methods employed by the Govt in combating terrorism.

Salient issues were raised by the ACN spokesperson, and these are the issues that one expects the Federal Govt(through the office of the A.G.) to address. ACN's concern is valid given PDP's penchant for engaging in cheap blackmail and witch-hunting of those who are critical of their dealings.

Let the FG clarify the grey-areas of the proscription law and I'm sure everyone will be fine.

Garri the 1st:

An unbiased mind will observe that the ACN's focus is on ensuring that the PDP-led FG doesn't use this as an opportunity clamp down on the opposition

Again.

From the need to fight a terrorist organization (now rated as second only to the Taliban in the world, in terms of mass murder) to clamping down on political parties, is quite a stretch of the imagination, don't you think?

donchris999: So, boko haram is now an opposition party? Hmmmm! Na wa o. Opposition party that bombs church. Opposition party that murder innocent citizens. What is worste than infringing on a fellow human rights than taking his/her life?

Thank you o!

@DS:

I believe the complaint is about the process of determining what "aids" terrorism and who decides what that is!

Todays news has it (for example) that Borno youths in "Gwange 1" are aiding the JTF identify boko haram members! Consider a scenario where someone decides the reporter of such news has, by stating what ward and locality, passed on information to the murderer Shekau (thus helping him identify his enemies and deal with them) and thus has fallen foul of this "open ended" edict! What if they now arrest and sentence (?) such reporters in lieu of clearly stated indices?

The ONLY problem I see ACN complaining of is the leeway this allows for interpretation!

I assume you are considering decency but in Nigeria, that is an unaffordable luxury

nuclearboy: @DS:

I believe the complaint is about the process of determining what "aids" terrorism and who decides what that is!

Todays news has it (for example) that Borno youths in "Gwange 1" are aiding the JTF identify boko haram members! Consider a scenario where someone decides the reporter of such news has, by stating what ward and locality, passed on information to the murderer Shekau (thus helping him identify his enemies and deal with them) and thus has fallen foul of this "open ended" edict! What if they now arrest and sentence (?) such reporters in lieu of clearly stated indices?

The ONLY problem I see ACN complaining of is the leeway this allows for interpretation!

I assume you are considering decency but in Nigeria, that is an unaffordable luxury

Egbon mi, e ku jo meta. Been a while.

Now listen: they complained about the proscription of a terrorist organization.

? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?

officially brings the activities of both groups within the purview of the Terrorism Prevention Act and any persons associated with the two groups can now be legally prosecuted and sentenced to penalties specified in the Act.

“The proscription order warns the general public that any person participating in any form of activities involving or concerning the collective intentions of the said groups will be violating the provisions of the Terrorism Prevention Act.

“Section 5 (1) of the act prescribes a term of imprisonment of not less than 20 years for any person who knowingly, in any manner, directly or indirectly, solicits or renders support for the commission of an act of terrorism or to a terrorist group.

“For the purposes of subsection (1) of the section, “support” include:

(a) incitement to commit a terrorist act through the internet, or any electronic means or through the use of printed materials or through the dissemination of terrorist information;

(b) receipt or provision of material assistance, weapons including biological, chemical or nuclear weapons, explosives, training, transportation, false documentation or identification to terrorists or terrorist groups;

(c) receipt or provision of information or moral assistance, including invitation to adhere to a terrorist or terrorist group;

(d) entering or remaining in a country for the benefit of, or at the direction of or in association with a terrorist group; or

(e) the provision of, or making available, such financial or other related services prohibited under this Act or as may be prescribed by regulations made pursuant to this Act.”

So the question is, can a guardian reporter who secretly meets a boko haram member and interviews him be sentenced to twenty years in jail for associating with terrorists? What implications does this have for freedom of speech/the press? These were the questions that were asked on that thread.

Deep Sight:

We're talking terrorism here, my friend, reckless and consistent murder of thousands of people. . . . . . .?

Now the key question: does such an organization (as Boko Haram) have a legal right to exist and be recognized as a legitimate association?

A terrorist association?

Now if the answer is in the negative, as I expect it must be, for all sane people, then what's wrong with the proscription?

The proscription, in fact, only symbolically amounts to stating that which is already the case: namely that it is an illegal association, no?

You still don't get ACN's point. There's a 20 year jail term for anyone who supports such an organization. The question is: WHAT CONSTITUTES "SUPPORT"??

If for example a journalist publishes a video recording released by BH, is that support??

Deep Sight:

We're talking terrorism here, my friend, reckless and consistent murder of thousands of people. . . . . . .?

Now the key question: does such an organization (as Boko Haram) have a legal right to exist and be recognized as a legitimate association?

A terrorist association?

Now if the answer is in the negative, as I expect it must be, for all sane people, then what's wrong with the proscription?

The proscription, in fact, only symbolically amounts to stating that which is already the case: namely that it is an illegal association, no?

Why don't you try to address the substance of the official press release presented here.

After all, it is rather disingenuous to call for a debate when you are not prepared to evaluate cogent questions.

Here's the proscription order

“The proscription order warns the general public that any person
“participating in any form of activities involving or concerning the
collective intentions of the said groups will be violating the
provisions of the Terrorism Prevention Act”.
” Section 5 (1) of the act prescribes a term of imprisonment of not
less than 20 years for any person who knowingly, in any manner,
directly or indirectly, solicits or renders support for the
commission of an act of terrorism or to a terrorist group.”
” For the purposes of subsection (1) of section, “support” includes:
incitement to commit a terrorist act through the internet, or any
electronic means or through the use of printed materials or through
the dissemination of terrorist information; receipt or provision of
material assistance, weapons including biological, chemical or
nuclear weapons, explosives, training, transportation, false
documentation or identification to terrorists or terrorist groups;
receipt or provision of information or moral assistance, including
invitation to adhere to a terrorist or terrorist group; entering or
remaining in a country for the benefit of, or at the direction of or in
association with a terrorist group; or the provision of, or making
available, such financial or other related services prohibited under
this Act or as may be prescribed by regulations made pursuant to
this Act.”

ACN claims it is vague but it isn't. It explicates on what it meant by support. Hence, any ambiguousity on what 'support' means is removed.

naptu2:

So the question is, can a guardian reporter who secretly meets a boko haram member and interviews him be sentenced to twenty years in jail for associating with terrorists? What implications does this have for freedom of speech/the press? These were the questions that were asked on that thread.

Those provisions specifically mention "support" and "incitement", and as such your reporter is not covered.

However, I would personally go as far as saying that no one should interact with this group or disseminate their information! For heavens sake, the implications are massive. You are inadvertently disseminating their 'cause'!

This is an emergency situation in which the Federation is trying to destroy a terrorist association permanently. All hands must be on deck. Desperately.

Human lives are at stake.

naptu2:

So the question is, can a guardian reporter who secretly meets a boko haram member and interviews him be sentenced to twenty years in jail for associating with terrorists? What implications does this have for freedom of speech/the press? These were the questions that were asked on that thread.

Exactly!

"Through the dissemination of terrorist information". This means that even nairaland can be held liable for disseminating terrorist information.

Paschal007:

So you are Gbawe?

Are you ?

DP

Beaf!:


^
Last time I checked, we are NOT at war. Why this reference?

We are at war with terrorists - not a metaphor.

Deep Sight:

Those provisions specifically mention "support" and "incitement", and as such your reporter is not covered.

However, I would personally go as far as saying that no one should interact with this group or disseminate their information! For heavens sake, the implications are massive. You are inadvertently disseminating their 'cause'!

This is an emergency situation in which the Federation is trying to destroy a terrorist association permanently. All hands must be on deck. Desperately.

Human lives are at stake.

So would you recommend that press freedom be suspended till Boko Haram is destroyed.??

naptu2: "Through the dissemination of terrorist information". This means that even nairaland can be held liable for disseminating terrorist information.

Exactimo! That was the first thing that went through my mind when I read the proscription.

The FGN simply needs to assuage fears on this score, and all should be fine.

Another example (question that was asked). Shekau makes a new video and posts it on youtube. Someone posts that video on nairaland. Are Seun, nairaland and the nairalander guilty of disseminating terrorist information (of course Shekau will be inciting violence in the video)?