₦airaland Forum

I'm not sure u can include Gowon. He was reluctant about the whole thing

PrecisionFx:
Being on the run isn't same as being a soldier or a general.

Right. But in this case Charles Taylor personally took part in the atrocities

PrecisionFx:
Sincerely I don't understand ur post.

See my earlier post:

"9jaDoc:


Well, that's your opinion. My opinion is Awo could have led the West out of 9ja but Gowon showed him that all the oil money was located in the East and also promised him 9ja presidency after the war"

Just saying we r on the same side

9jaDoc:
See my earlier post:

"9jaDoc:


Well, that's your opinion. My opinion is Awo could have led the West out of 9ja but Gowon showed him that all the oil money was located in the East and also promised him 9ja presidency after the war"

Just saying we r on the same side

OK bro. Sorry I got u now clearly.

WetinConsignMe:
Right. But in this case Charles Taylor personally took part in the atrocities

And how did u know

PrecisionFx:
And how did u know

This is how I know. Note the bolded.
This is from NEW YORK TIMES:

LEIDSCHENDAM, the Netherlands — Charles G. Taylor, the former president of Liberia and a once-powerful warlord, was sentenced on Wednesday to 50 years in prison for his role in atrocities committed in Sierra Leone during its civil war in the 1990s.

In what was viewed as a watershed case for modern human rights law, Mr. Taylor was the first former head of state convicted by an international tribunal since the Nuremberg trials in Germany after World War II.

Mr. Taylor was found guilty of “aiding and abetting, as well as planning, some of the most heinous and brutal
crimes recorded in human history,” said Richard Lussick, the judge who presided over the sentencing here in an international criminal court near The Hague. He said the lengthy prison term underscored Mr. Taylor’s position as a government’s leader during the time the crimes were committed.

“Leadership must be carried out by example, by the prosecution of crimes, not the commission of crimes,” the judge said in a statement read before the court.

Here is Taylor at time of his trial

THE CHARLES TAYLOR CASE
(Note the bolded)



1.Who is Charles Taylor?

Charles Taylor is the former president of Liberia. From 1989 to 1997, Taylor led a rebel group, the National Patriotic Front of Liberia (NPFL), which sought to unseat Liberia’s then-president, Samuel K. Doe, and to take control of the country. The conflict ended on August 2, 1997, when Taylor was sworn in as president after elections that were part of a peace agreement brokered by the regional body ECOWAS.

Taylor’s presidency, which lasted until 2003, was characterized by intolerance of dissent and harassment of the press, civil society, and the political opposition. Forces under Taylor’s command also were implicated in supporting and participating in armed conflicts, cross-border raids, and human rights abuses in neighboring countries, including Sierra Leone, Guinea, and Côte d’Ivoire. There was near-total impunity for these and other human rights abuses.

Taylor’s repression of the Liberian people fueled a rebellion to unseat him, which began in 1999. Following rebel incursions into Monrovia, the Liberian capital, and the unsealing of Taylor’s indictment by the Special Court for Sierra Leone (SCSL) for crimes committed in Sierra Leone, Taylor stepped down as president in August 2003. He was offered safe haven in Nigeria, where he stayed until his surrender to the Special Court in March 2006.

2.Why are the Taylor trial and the upcoming judgment significant?

The Taylor judgment will be a watershed moment for efforts to hold the highest-level leaders to account through a credible judicial process. The Taylor judgment will be the first since Nuremberg of a former head of state in an international or hybrid international-national court on charges of serious crimes committed in violation of international law. Before Taylor, Slobodan Milosevic, president of the former Yugoslavia, was tried by an international tribunal, but he died before a judgment was issued. Karl Doenitz, who was a German naval commander and president of Germany for approximately one week at the end of World War II, was convicted by the International Military Tribunal of Nuremberg.

The judgment in the Taylor case comes approximately five months after Laurent Gbagbo, the former president of neighboring Côte d’Ivoire, became the first former head of state to appear at the International Criminal Court (ICC) on charges of crimes against humanity.

The Taylor judgment is also a milestone for the Special Court for Sierra Leone. Upon the conclusion of this case, the SCSL is set to become the first international tribunal to complete its work and to close down its operations.

Taylor’s trial has immense significance for people in the West African sub-region who suffered as a consequence of the violence and instability he allegedly fomented in Sierra Leone, Liberia, Guinea, and Côte d’Ivoire. For decades, so-called “big men”—people who either led armed groups or wielded significant political power—have been allowed to carry out abuses, seemingly with no fear of being investigated or held accountable by a credible judicia body.

In this trial, for the first time, such a “big man” was taken into custody and forced to answer for his alleged crimes. Sierra Leonean civil society members consistently told Human Rights Watch that Taylor’s trial was essential to overall efforts to ensure justice for crimes in Sierra Leone. Liberian civil society members expressed disappointment that Taylor has not been held to account for crimes in Liberia.

3.What are the charges against Taylor?

The Special Court indicted Taylor on March 7, 2003 on 17 counts of war crimes, crimes against humanity, and other serious violations of international law for his role in supporting Sierra Leonean rebel groups during that country’s armed conflict. The abuses took place both while Taylor was head of the NPFL and while he was president of Liberia. The indictment was amended and reduced to 11 counts on March 16, 2006. The specific charges against Taylor are:

Five counts of war crimes: terrorizing civilians, murder, outrages on personal dignity, cruel treatment, and looting;
Five counts of crimes against humanity: murder, rape, sexual slavery, mutilating and beating, and enslavement; and
One count of other serious violations of international humanitarian law: recruiting and using child soldiers.

The indictment cites a multitude of locations where crimes were committed in Sierra Leone, covering 6 of Sierra Leone’s 13 districts. The indictment alleges that Taylor can be held individually criminally responsible for the crimes based on three legal principles:

Individual Criminal Responsibility: Taylor planned, instigated, ordered, committed, or aided and abetted planning, preparation, and execution of the alleged crimes.
Joint Criminal Enterprise: Taylor participated in a common plan, design, or purpose that consisted of or involved the commission of the alleged crimes, or those crimes were reasonably foreseeable consequences of the common plan, design, or purpose.
Command Responsibility: Taylor held positions of superior responsibility and exercised command and control over subordinate members of the Revolutionary United Front(RUF), RUF/Armed Forces Revolutionary Council (AFRC) alliance, and Liberian fighters. Taylor knew or had reason to know that subordinates, responsible to him, were about to commit the alleged crimes or had done so and he failed to take necessary and reasonable measures to prevent such acts or punish those responsible.

The prosecution does not allege that Taylor entered Sierra Leone during the time in question, but that “from the outside he was responsible for those crimes through his participation, involvement, concerted action with and command over the criminal conduct of his proxy armies,” the rebel RUF and later the RUF/AFRC alliance.

The prosecution contends that Taylor’s support of the RUF and RUF/AFRC alliance took many forms, including providing strategic instruction, direction, and guidance; providing arms, ammunition, and manpower; training fighters; creating and maintaining a communications network; and providing a safe haven for fighters and financial and medical support.

Taylor pled not guilty to all counts.

4.How did the Special Court for Sierra Leone come about?

Following the end of the conflict in Sierra Leone, the domestic justice system lacked the capacity to hold those responsible for serious crimes committed during the conflict accountable. Prompted by a request from President Ahmad Tejan Kabbah to the United Nations, the Special Court for Sierra Leone was established in 2002 by an agreement between the Sierra Leone government and the United Nations to prosecute serious crimes committed during the second half of the war based on “international standards of justice, fairness, and due process of law.”

The court is the first stand-alone “hybrid” or “mixed” international-national war crimes tribunal that is not a part of a domestic justice system. The hybrid court differs from earlier established international war crimes tribunals in that it is staffed by international staff members and Sierra Leoneans, rather than by an entirely international staff, and its statute includes both domestic and international crimes, instead of only international crimes. Also, its headquarters are in the country where the crimes occurred and all of the trials except Taylor’s have been held in Sierra Leone. The SCSL relies solely on voluntary contributions from the international community.

5.What is the mandate of the Special Court?

The Special Court has jurisdiction over “serious violations of international humanitarian law and Sierra Leonean law committed in the territory of Sierra Leone since 30 November 1996.” This mandate notably excludes crimes committed during the first five years of Sierra Leone’s 11-year civil war. Its mandate is also limited to prosecuting those who “bear the greatest responsibility” for the crimes.

6.How did the trial of Charles Taylor come about?

On June 4, 2003, the Special Court unsealed its indictment against Taylor, still president of Liberia, while he was attending peace talks in Ghana to end the conflict in Liberia. The unsealing of the indictment during peace talks generated controversy and Ghana provided him with a presidential plane to return to Liberia instead of arresting him.

In August 2003, as rebels opened an offensive against the Liberian capital, Taylor stepped down as president and accepted an offer of safe haven in Nigeria. In May 2005, the then- president of Nigeria, Olusegun Obasanjo, indicated that he would consider supporting Taylor’s extradition to Liberia if a formal request was made by a duly elected Liberian government. In March 2006, President Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf made the request.

On March 25, 2006, President Obasanjo indicated that Liberia was “free to take former President Charles Taylor into its custody,” although Nigeria did not arrest Taylor. Within 48 hours, Taylor disappeared, but on March 29, he was detained by Nigerian police near Nigeria’s border with Cameroon. He was then sent back to Liberia, where he was taken into UN custody and transferred to the Special Court in Freetown, Sierra Leone’s capital.

7.Why was the trial held in The Hague?

The same day Taylor was transferred to the SCSL, its president submitted requests to the Netherlands and the International Criminal Court (ICC) to relocate Taylor’s trial to The Hague, citing concerns about the stability of the West African sub-region if Taylor was tried in Freetown. Sources involved with Taylor’s surrender have indicated that President Johnson-Sirleaf was only willing to request Taylor’s surrender on the condition that he be tried outside of West Africa.

Taylor was transferred to The Hague on June 30, 2006 after UN Security Council Resolution 1688 provided the legal basis to transfer the trial, the ICC consented to the use of its facilities, and the United Kingdom agreed to provide detention facilities for Taylor if he was convicted. On May 17, 2010, Taylor’s trial was relocated from the ICC premises to the Special Tribunal for Lebanon premises in Leidschendam, in the outskirts of The Hague.

TAYLOR AT THE HAGUE JUST BEFORE CLOSING ARGUMENTS

Taylor durring good times, campaigning for president of Liberia

But back to the question at hand: Did Gowon promise Awo rulership of 9ja once the war was won?

Well as some saw it the circumstances were such that Awo did not have the ABILITY to secede or do much so Gowon did not have to offer him anything. See below.

As some saw it:
WHY AWO DID NOT MAKE WEST SECEDE

(Note the bolded)

Why Awo did not make West to Secede
VANGUARD
26 SEP 2017
By Eric Teniola
ON May 1, 1967 at a meeting of Leaders of thought of Western Region, Chief Obafemi Awolowo made the following declarations:
“I consider my duty to Yoruba people in particular and to Nigerians in general to place four imperatives, two of them categorical, and two conditional:

(1) Only a peaceful solution must be found to arrest the present worsening stalemate and restore normalcy.

(2) The Eastern Region must be encouraged to remain part of the Federation

(3). If the Eastern Region is allowed by acts of omission or commission to secede from or opt out of Nigeria, then Western Region and Lagos must also stay out of the Federation.

(4) The people of Western Nigeria or Lagos would participate in the Ad hoc Constitutional Committee or any similar body only on the basis of absolute equality with other Region of the Federations”.

It was the gravest statement made by any leader in Nigeria at a crucial time.
...
The question is why did the Western Region not follow the Eastern Region when it seceded on May 30, 1967?

The Daily Sketch which published in full Chief Awolowo’s speech on May 2, 1967 sold in Enugu at two shillings per copy which is more equivalent of today’s six hundred naira. The speech was a hot cake.

Then there was the argument that the fate of the Yorubas in Ilorin and Kabba provinces at that time was not properly addressed in that speech considering the political influence of Chief Josiah Sunday Olawoyin (1935-2000) and later leaders like Chief Cornelius Olatunji Adebayo (76), my friend Chief Ayo Opadokun and Dr. Abubakar Olusola Saraki (1933-2012).

It is a pity that Chief Awolowo did not publish his memoirs before he died in a domestic accident in his hometown of Ikenne in Ogun state in the early hours of May 9, 1987. Maybe he would have shed more light on why he made those declarations.

I personally believe till today that it was that speech that took the Federal Capital from Lagos, although events have proved later that taking the Federal Capital out of Lagos does not equate with taking commerce out of Lagos- thanks to Chief Bola Tinubu and his successors.

Chief Awolowo’s speech stunned the nation. It was a wakeup call on General Yakubu Dan-Yuuma Gowon (83), the Head of State at that time to prepare for war and save Nigeria. If Chief Awolowo had taken Western Region and Lagos out of Nigeria, it would have been suicidal...

If Chief Awolowo had taken Western Region and Lagos out of the Federation at that time definitely Western Region and Lagos would have been the battle ground. And where were the troops and how prepared was he for a major war. At the time he made those declarations, officers of the Western Region in the Nigerian Army were less than 7%. At that time Lagos, Ibadan and Abeokuta garrisons were occupied by ‘northern troops’. Even the then Governor of Western Region, Major General Adeyinka Adebayo was not prepared for war. Chief Awolowo admitted on May 1, 1967 speech, that ‘We have neither the military might, nor the overwhelming advantage of numbers here in Western Nigeria and Lagos...'

WetinConsignMe:
As some saw it:
WHY AWO DID NOT MAKE WEST SECEDE

(Note the bolded)

Why Awo did not make West to Secede
VANGUARD
26 SEP 2017
By Eric Teniola
ON May 1, 1967 at a meeting of Leaders of thought of Western Region, Chief Obafemi Awolowo made the following declarations:
“I consider my duty to Yoruba people in particular and to Nigerians in general to place four imperatives, two of them categorical, and two conditional:

(1) Only a peaceful solution must be found to arrest the present worsening stalemate and restore normalcy.

(2) The Eastern Region must be encouraged to remain part of the Federation

(3). If the Eastern Region is allowed by acts of omission or commission to secede from or opt out of Nigeria, then Western Region and Lagos must also stay out of the Federation.

(4) The people of Western Nigeria or Lagos would participate in the Ad hoc Constitutional Committee or any similar body only on the basis of absolute equality with other Region of the Federations”.

It was the gravest statement made by any leader in Nigeria at a crucial time.
...
The question is why did the Western Region not follow the Eastern Region when it seceded on May 30, 1967?

The Daily Sketch which published in full Chief Awolowo’s speech on May 2, 1967 sold in Enugu at two shillings per copy which is more equivalent of today’s six hundred naira. The speech was a hot cake.

Then there was the argument that the fate of the Yorubas in Ilorin and Kabba provinces at that time was not properly addressed in that speech considering the political influence of Chief Josiah Sunday Olawoyin (1935-2000) and later leaders like Chief Cornelius Olatunji Adebayo (76), my friend Chief Ayo Opadokun and Dr. Abubakar Olusola Saraki (1933-2012).

It is a pity that Chief Awolowo did not publish his memoirs before he died in a domestic accident in his hometown of Ikenne in Ogun state in the early hours of May 9, 1987. Maybe he would have shed more light on why he made those declarations.

I personally believe till today that it was that speech that took the Federal Capital from Lagos, although events have proved later that taking the Federal Capital out of Lagos does not equate with taking commerce out of Lagos- thanks to Chief Bola Tinubu and his successors.

Chief Awolowo’s speech stunned the nation. It was a wakeup call on General Yakubu Dan-Yuuma Gowon (83), the Head of State at that time to prepare for war and save Nigeria. If Chief Awolowo had taken Western Region and Lagos out of Nigeria, it would have been suicidal...

If Chief Awolowo had taken Western Region and Lagos out of the Federation at that time definitely Western Region and Lagos would have been the battle ground. And where were the troops and how prepared was he for a major war. At the time he made those declarations, officers of the Western Region in the Nigerian Army were less than 7%. At that time Lagos, Ibadan and Abeokuta garrisons were occupied by ‘northern troops’. Even the then Governor of Western Region, Major General Adeyinka Adebayo was not prepared for war. Chief Awolowo admitted on May 1, 1967 speech, that ‘We have neither the military might, nor the overwhelming advantage of numbers here in Western Nigeria and Lagos...'

This is pure nonsense. Contrived excuse after the fact. I mean, a few weeks after this talk, far from talk of possible secession, the man was drumming up the Yorubas for all out war. He was more enthusiastic about the war than Gowon. Why did he not even try to negotiate conditional secession with the North? Later on, why didn't he use the opportunity presented by Banjo's Army as stated below?

As you can see from the below, even the man on the street knew Awo could have seceded.

This is from "America's secret files on Ojukwu"
Note the bolded.

...On the other hand, Strong continued: “AG (Action Group) activists and the man in the street are convinced Awolowo made the statement under duress… They say Awolowo’s true position was indicated in the Leaders of Thought resolution in May, which said if any region seceded or forced out, the West would automatically become independent.
The activists feel that Awolowo missed the opportunity to bring the present conflict to close by coming to Ibadan and make a Western Declaration of Independence speech supported by Victor Banjo and his National Liberation Army.”

Ojukwu and Gowon at Ojukwu's residence in Enugu in 2010. A year later Ojukwu was dead.

PrecisionFx:
OK bro. Sorry I got u now clearly.

Quite ok. Crossed wires, as it were.

WetinConsignMe:
This is how I know. Note the bolded.
This is from NEW YORK TIMES:

LEIDSCHENDAM, the Netherlands — Charles G. Taylor, the former president of Liberia and a once-powerful warlord, was sentenced on Wednesday to 50 years in prison for his role in atrocities committed in Sierra Leone during its civil war in the 1990s.

In what was viewed as a watershed case for modernization human rights law, Mr. Taylor was the first former head of state convicted by an international tribunal since the Nuremberg trials in Germany after World War II.

Mr. Taylor was found guilty of “aiding and abetting, as well as planning, some of the most heinous and brutal
crimes recorded in human history,” said Richard Lussick, the judge who presided over the sentencing here in an international criminal court near The Hague. He said the lengthy prison term underscored Mr. Taylor’s position as a government’s leader during the time the crimes were committed.

“Leadership must be carried out by example, by the prosecution of crimes, not the commission of crimes,” the judge said in a statement read before the court.

He wasn't on the war front sir, the bold part of ur post says it all. He was found guilty for aiding and abetting and planning.

PrecisionFx:
He wasn't on the war front sir, the bold part of ur post says it all. He was found guilty for doing and abetting and planning.

Of course u are right.
His own post proved him wrong.
How ironic.

Back to topic: if Isaac Adaka Boro could do it with practically nothing, why couldn't Awo with all he had.
See bolded.

Wiki on Adams Boro:

He formed the Niger Delta Volunteer Force, an armed militia with members consisting mainly of his fellow Ijaw ethnic group.
They declared the Niger Delta Republic on February 23, 1966 and gallantly battled the Federal forces for twelve days but were finally routed by the far superior Federal firepower.
Boro and his compatriots were jailed for treason. However, the federal regime of General Yakubu Gowon granted him amnesty on the eve of the Nigerian civil war in May 1967. He then enlisted and was commissioned as a major in the Nigerian army. He fought on the side of the Federal Government but was killed under mysterious circumstances in active service in 1968 at Ogu (near Okrika) in Rivers State.

Isaac Adaka Boro arrested 1966

9jaDoc:
Back to topic: if Isaac Adaka Boro could do it with practically nothing, why couldn't Awo with all he had.
See bolded.

Wiki on Adams Boro:

He formed the Niger Delta Volunteer Force, an armed militia with members consisting mainly of his fellow Ijaw ethnic group.
They declared the Niger Delta Republic on February 23, 1966 and gallantly battled the Federal forces for twelve days but were finally routed by the far superior Federal firepower.
Boro and his compatriots were jailed for treason. However, the federal regime of General Yakubu Gowon granted him amnesty on the eve of the Nigerian civil war in May 1967. He then enlisted and was commissioned as a major in the Nigerian army. He fought on the side of the Federal Government but was killed under mysterious circumstances in active service in 1968 at Ogu (near Okrika) in Rivers State.

He was killed in a city the Nigerian army liberated.
I hope the biafra part of SS have learned their lessons, the north n their conspirators will use them n dump them.

WetinConsignMe:
As some saw it:
WHY AWO DID NOT MAKE WEST SECEDE

(Note the bolded)

Why Awo did not make West to Secede
VANGUARD
26 SEP 2017
By Eric Teniola
ON May 1, 1967 at a meeting of Leaders of thought of Western Region, Chief Obafemi Awolowo made the following declarations:
“I consider my duty to Yoruba people in particular and to Nigerians in general to place four imperatives, two of them categorical, and two conditional:

(1) Only a peaceful solution must be found to arrest the present worsening stalemate and restore normalcy.

(2) The Eastern Region must be encouraged to remain part of the Federation

(3). If the Eastern Region is allowed by acts of omission or commission to secede from or opt out of Nigeria, then Western Region and Lagos must also stay out of the Federation.

(4) The people of Western Nigeria or Lagos would participate in the Ad hoc Constitutional Committee or any similar body only on the basis of absolute equality with other Region of the Federations”.

It was the gravest statement made by any leader in Nigeria at a crucial time.
...
The question is why did the Western Region not follow the Eastern Region when it seceded on May 30, 1967?

The Daily Sketch which published in full Chief Awolowo’s speech on May 2, 1967 sold in Enugu at two shillings per copy which is more equivalent of today’s six hundred naira. The speech was a hot cake.

Then there was the argument that the fate of the Yorubas in Ilorin and Kabba provinces at that time was not properly addressed in that speech considering the political influence of Chief Josiah Sunday Olawoyin (1935-2000) and later leaders like Chief Cornelius Olatunji Adebayo (76), my friend Chief Ayo Opadokun and Dr. Abubakar Olusola Saraki (1933-2012).

It is a pity that Chief Awolowo did not publish his memoirs before he died in a domestic accident in his hometown of Ikenne in Ogun state in the early hours of May 9, 1987. Maybe he would have shed more light on why he made those declarations.

I personally believe till today that it was that speech that took the Federal Capital from Lagos, although events have proved later that taking the Federal Capital out of Lagos does not equate with taking commerce out of Lagos- thanks to Chief Bola Tinubu and his successors.

Chief Awolowo’s speech stunned the nation. It was a wakeup call on General Yakubu Dan-Yuuma Gowon (83), the Head of State at that time to prepare for war and save Nigeria. If Chief Awolowo had taken Western Region and Lagos out of Nigeria, it would have been suicidal...

If Chief Awolowo had taken Western Region and Lagos out of the Federation at that time definitely Western Region and Lagos would have been the battle ground. And where were the troops and how prepared was he for a major war. At the time he made those declarations, officers of the Western Region in the Nigerian Army were less than 7%. At that time Lagos, Ibadan and Abeokuta garrisons were occupied by ‘northern troops’. Even the then Governor of Western Region, Major General Adeyinka Adebayo was not prepared for war. Chief Awolowo admitted on May 1, 1967 speech, that ‘We have neither the military might, nor the overwhelming advantage of numbers here in Western Nigeria and Lagos...'

It was obasanjo that closed the seaports in the south that made Lagos what it is today.

PrecisionFx:
He wasn't on the war front sir, the bold part of ur post says it all. He was found guilty for aiding and abetting and planning.

By "war front" I mean he was part of the actual process that culminated in the crimes.

Unlike, say, Gowon's role in the Asaba massacre. He had no role at all.

Leaders are usually far from the actual war front.

But when they are intimately involved in planning a specific act, that's what I mean by being in the war front.

That's why I said Obasanjo was in the "war front" durring attacks by the army on Fela.

Of course he was not in the actual war front where the attacks took place.

But Obasanjo was intimately involved in the Fela affair.
Meaning he was in the "war front"