You are here: Home / Opinion / Amnesty International’s lopsided report
Amnesty International’s lopsided report

JUNE 17, 2015 : UCHE IGWE 1 COMMENT
print

Uche Igwe
Uche Igwe
I have just read the latest report by London-based human rights body, Amnesty International, entitled: Nigeria: Stars on their shoulders. Blood on their hands: War crimes committed by the Nigerian military, on alleged human rights abuses and extrajudicial killings committed by the Nigerian Army in the fight against Boko Haram insurgents. The horrifying details of offensive brutality and appalling atrocities committed by the military as contained in that report will unsettle anyone. For instance, the report stated that about 1,200 persons suspected to be insurgents were killed by extrajudicial execution while about 7,000 other suspects died in several detention centres as a result of overcrowding, starvation, poor sanitation and lack of medical assistance. The report mentioned the names of members of the top military brass in Nigeria as those to be held responsible for the atrocities. The report further indicated that the names of Maj. Gen. Obida Ethan, Maj. Gen. Ahmadu Mohammed, Gen Azubuike Ihejirika, Air Marshal Alex Badeh, Gen. Kenneth Minimah and Admiral Ola Ibrahim have been forwarded to the International Criminal Court for investigation on war crimes and crimes against humanity. The appropriateness or not of that recommendation will be discussed later.

In general, however, the report raised very germane issues worthy of increased scrutiny and attention. It has also elicited interesting debates within the country and beyond. The evidence that the Nigerian military and justice system need reforms is quite overwhelming. However, the whole report appears to be an ill-timed wake-up call that is curiously one-sided. I know of the work of Amnesty International and had cause to seek its intervention in the past which it graciously granted.

I will therefore find it difficult to ignore any issue it brings to public knowledge. However, there have been wide concerns about the timing and impact of this particular report rather than the validity of the claims. I share some of those. It may just be a mere coincidence but that the report appeared at a time when President Muhammadu Buhari is working to rejig the military for a fresh onslaught against the insurgents, makes the whole thing look untidy if not suspicious. What could be the motive? Why will Amnesty work to ostensibly deny Nigeria the international support that is badly needed for a successful war against terrorism? Should such a reputable global organisation not be working to increase support for Nigeria rather than weaken it? How many other reports have been produced on human rights in other countries battling with terrorism? I know that there are all sorts of conspiracy theories going on about the issue of Boko Haram but it is not my intention to find a place to fit the report in.

My major issue with the report is that it did not look at the issues holistically. It focused narrowly on the rights of the insurgents/detainees and civilian causalities and did not highlight the rights of those senselessly murdered by the numerous attacks of Boko Haram. It directly indicted the military combatants without any reference to the dangerous and unconventional nature of the warfare the soldiers face every day and the losses they have incurred in terms of personnel and equipment. I agree that there are many things that are wrong with the whole lingering battle against these insurgents by Nigerian soldiers. There have been media reports of corruption, poor intelligence coordination, poor equipment, poor motivation and others. For this writer, however, human rights abuse will be one of the least in the hierarchy.

For an extremely violent and heavily armed group that is embedded in the rural communities, like Boko Haram, it will difficult to flush them out successfully without unintentionally hurting civilians. It is almost impossible to identify them unless through the use of volunteer informants who are from such communities. We must not forget the support of the local vigilante groups that later became the Civilian Joint Task Force which yielded some results. Reliance on such a method will be far from perfect and so some people will be sadly caught in the cross-fire.

I need an example elsewhere in the world where such a similar lethal group was successfully degraded and eventually exterminated without killing innocent bystanders. In fact, some of the insurgents use civilians to insulate themselves from the military so that they can get the sympathy of organisations like Amnesty International whenever they are attacked. It is also possible that the military personnel are responding to frustrations from losing many of their colleagues from successful ambushes or sabotage from within in a very risky terrain like the Sambisa Forest. A robust counter-insurgency plan through coordinated but cover intelligence gather will help in the long term.

As noted earlier, the report failed to capture or at least make reference to thousands of innocent citizens including women and children who have been murdered by the insurgents, some of them were even brutally beheaded. It did not take note of the abduction of people’s mothers, wives and sisters into sex slavery and the horrific experiences of those women who escaped and the hundreds who died in captivity. It did not even mention the Chibok girls whose whereabouts are still unknown. What about the fate of the rescued women many of who were said to be pregnant? I agree that there is a need to improve the sanitary condition of detention centres as suggested by the report but I will rather give priority attention to the condition in camps where internal displaced persons are being housed. Like the detainees and insurgents, these other people have rights too. The rights of the innocent should be considered before those of an insurgent. We cannot protect the rights of one set and ignore those of others.

The report called for a prompt independent and effective – let me add thorough and comprehensive – investigation into the Boko Haram insurgency, the level of destruction it has caused the region, the estimated number of human losses and displacements, the military response to it as well as its impact on the citizens. I disagree with the section that suggests that the ICC should step in. The Nigerian government should be allowed to investigate the issues raised and determine appropriate punitive or remedial actions. The Nigerian Army must have internal mechanisms of dealing with anyone found culpable in the battle fronts. On a positive note, the talk about decongesting the prisons in Nigeria will succeed if it is accompanied with comprehensive reforms of our justice system.

This is another area that the report threw up that no one can ignore. The war on terror cannot be won by force alone but I insist that we must get our priorities right as a country. We have to wage a decisive battle against these mindless terrorists and decimate them now or keep playing to Western prescriptions of human rights niceties and live with the deadly scourge for some time to come. The choice is ours to make. After all, the late legendary Afro beat musician, Fela Anikulapo-Kuti, sang that “human rights na my property.” We must not therefore allow Amnesty International to teach us human rights. We must not allow Boko Haram and their cohorts win this war.

Copyright PUNCH.
All rights reserved. This material, and other digital content on this website, may not be reproduced, published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed in whole or in part without prior express written permission from PUNCH.

Contact: editor@punchng.com

For an extremely violent and heavily armed group that is embedded in the rural communities, like Boko Haram, it will difficult to flush them out successfully without unintentionally hurting civilians.

Point

For the author to shamelessly state that his issue is not with the validity of the allegations, but with 'concerns' such as timing, and then go on making baseless inferences, conjectures and conclusions shows that he lacks objectivity and is only pursuing a selfish agenda.

His nake.d disregard for human rights tells of a mind that has been desensitized by living in a society where the sanctity of human life has been thrown to the dogs and jungle justice is the order of the day. He seems more pre-occupied with shielding the indicted soldiers than with pursuing justice, otherwise he would have mentioned the over 500 soldiers facing trial for various offences which can be traced to their superior officers.

engrfcuksmtin:
Point

That is a conclusion only a competent court can make. There are rules of engagement, whether they were followed or not will determine if the officers will rot in jail or not.

Confused AI trying to cause problem in Nigeria. God please intervent.

QuotaSystem:


That is a conclusion only a competent court can make. There are rules of engagement, whether they were followed or not will determine if the officers will rot in jail or not.

OK........rules of engagement for poorly equipped and motivated soldiers? An average soldier in the war front against bokoharam is fighting for his life first, a man fighting to keep himself alive can bend the rules.

engrfcuksmtin:
OK........rules of engagement for poorly equipped and motivated soldiers? An average soldier in the war front against bokoharam is fighting for his life first, a man fighting to keep himself alive can bend the rules.

What does obeying the rules of engagement have to do with equipment , do you understand what we are talking about here?

By the way, only the rules of the corrupt can be bent.

In the sane world and under this sane administration, rules can only be broken not bent, and punishment is not an option. They will be tried in a competent court in the sane world where rules are broken and not bent.

QuotaSystem:


Only the rules of the corrupt can be bent.

In the sane world and under this sane administration, rules can only be broken not bent, and punishment is not an option. They will be tried in a competent court in the sane world where rules are broken and not bent.

Yes sane world, which Nigeria does not belong to but we are hoping for under the new administration.

engrfcuksmtin:
Yes sane world, which Nigeria does not belong to but we are hoping for under the new administration.

Thankfully they will be tried at the International Criminal Court and not in Nigeria, while our judicial system is being reformed by the learned Prof. Osibanjo.

too much jooor