|
Buhari, IBB, Marwa part of
Nigeria’s problems -Oroh
Abdul Oroh, a
consummate human right activist and former journalist, is the deputy chairman of the House of
Representatives Committee on Human Rights. Oroh, naturally, will frown at
anything that has to do with human rights abuses, especially when it has to do
with the victimisation of journalists. So following the House resolution to
investigate the alleged arbitrary arrests of media persons by the State
Security Service, the lawmaker wasted no time to lampoon the authorities of
reminding Nigerians of the dark days of the totalitarian regimes in the
country. In this interview with National
Assembly Correspondent Uchenna Awom, he bares his mind on this development and on power-shift in the country and in
his home state of Edo. Excerpts:
For
the second time in 10 weeks, the House took a motion to condemn arbitrary
arrest and rights violations by the SSS. What do you make of the
situation?
There
is reason to believe that the State Security Service (SSS) is yet to adapt to
the present climate and culture of democracy in the country. The agency retains its old practices
under past military dictatorship.
My belief is that the time has come for the government to take a good
look at the role of SSS in security management in the country. And in doing this, some pertinent
questions will be raised and answered.
One question is: Has the SSS been able to effectively manage the
internal security of the country?
To this I will say, no!.
There
have been ethno-religious conflicts all over the country. There have been security breaches to
the extent that the military had to question some of its own for breaching
security.
We
have seen a situation where public officers have been murdered in cold blood
and the SSS could not work with the police to apprehend the criminals.
We
have been witness to armed insurrection all over the country and the SSS was
unable to provide adequate intelligence to put down the insurrection, to the
extent that the military had to be drafted in.
Prior
to the Yelwa - Shendam problem, a motion of Urgent National Importance
was brought to the floor of the House of Representatives in June last year
calling for a state of emergency in Plateau State because of the killings,
ethnic killings. Between then and
a year after, the SSS could not provide enough intelligence to enable the
appropriate authorities nip the problem in the bud, until it exploded into the
mayhem for which a state of emergency was declared. Many communities were wiped out and the democratic
institutions of the state were suspended as an aftermath.
Indeed, there is need for us to take a
second look at the SSS. The agency needs to be restructured in order to enable
it meet with the challenges of democratic consolidation and rid of its siege
mentality, rather than use it as an instrument of terror to harass journalists,
to break down walls, and confiscate newspapers. It cannot be allowed to continue
in pursuit of this dubious internal security philosophy which equates the
security of the President with the security of the state.
I believe this is wrong. The President
is better secured if we have greater freedoms and greater democracy with an
open society, devoid of totalitarian processes
Why
did the House of Representatives appear to inadvertently support these excesses
of the SSS operatives by refusing on two occasions to condemn them when motions
were brought against them?
I personally feel disappointed that the
House seems to feel the activities of the SSS cannot be questioned on its
floor. We have a House Committee on National Security and Intelligence which
ought to scrutinize the activities of the SSS. One of its mandates is to exercise
oversight functions on the activities of SSS and the office of the National
Security Adviser. And if the SSS is harassing and trampling on the fundamental
rights of citizens, then the House must condemn its actions. In fact, the House
must decide whether to scrap the SSS or to restructure it. Not condemning these
sorts of actions at all is clearly sending the wrong signal to the SSS that its
men can carry on business as usual
To
what extent are the innuendos from commentators that many of the representatives
may not have won their elections and so are afraid of the SSS?
I
do not see that as a reason. If anyone was not validly elected, the electoral
commission would not have declared him or her so. And if they did, the election
would have been challenged and maybe overturned by the election tribunal.
The actual reason is that there is this
perception out there that the SSS, being a secret service organization, should
be protected from public scrutiny. This perception existed even in England
until the MI5 was brought under the control of parliament. Officially, in
England, the MI5 and MI6 did not exist.
I
deem the United States system as worthy of emulation in this matter because
that country subjects even its own internal security service to public scrutiny.
The
security service needs to be accountable to the public. It cannot continue to
operate as a body outside the democratic environment and the provisions of the
Constitution. Why would the SSS arrest a journalist and detain him for more
than 24 hours without taking him to court? Why would the SSS use axe to break
the face of a newspaper house, and occupy it and arrest journalists or any of
the staff there?
I
don’t believe it is within the limit of the powers of the SSS to do these
things. Under totalitarian environmental, they could do that, but now we are in
a democracy. They certainly do not have such powers and so ought to be checked.
If
the country’s security agencies have not acclimatised to the new
democratic climate, what about the press and civil society?
Nigeria
has the tradition of a free press. Right from the colonial days, no government
has ever been able to completely annihilate the Nigerian press. The
Constitution has guaranteed freedom of expression. Article 19 of the United
Nations Declaration of Human Rights guarantees it. The African Charter of Human
and Peoples Rights, which is a domestic law in Nigeria. also guarantees press
freedom. And the Nigerian press has been very patriotic. It has operated within
the philosophy and concept of fighting totalitarianism, corruption,
dictatorship and injustice in Nigeria. Nobody should imagine that the press
will depart from this approach with the persistence of an atmosphere that
threatens the rule of law and perpetrate injustice, dictatorial and
totalitarian tendencies and violates the rights of the people.
Public
perception is that those of you in civil society and rights advocacy groups
have not adjusted in line with the new dispensation either.
Civil society groups in this country are
still very vibrant. Their attitude, though, is no longer adversarial as it used
to be. They are collaborating with various government institutions, on police
reforms, on criminal justice reforms, and on environmental sector reforms. I
have also met others working with women to combat child labour and women
trafficking. We have had NGOs setting agenda for issues on constitutional
reform. The Electoral Reform Network has produced a model electoral law for
Nigeria. The United Action for Democracy has also produced a model constitution
for Nigeria. All these ideas were generated through series of debates to help
push the process of constitutional reforms with the aim of producing a new
constitution that all Nigerians can defend. That they showed solidarity with labour
to check soaring price regimes of petroleum products does not mean that their
perspective has not changed.
Government
seems to be reforming everywhere but not the SSS
It
is the responsibility of government to do so and not civil society groups. And
by ‘government’, I mean also the National Assembly. It is the duty
of the government to reform the Intelligence sector, the law enforcement
sector, the administration of criminal justice and the internal security
sector. Appropriately, reforming national security and intelligence will enable
government effectively intervene and manage internal security crisis situations
based on accurate information instead of the arbitrariness that characterise
the operations of the SSS.
Why
was there this deafening silence from journalists - who are also Reps
- during the debate on the motion brought by Halims Agoda to condemn the
actions of the SSS against the Insider Magazine?
There was no deafening silence. The
Speaker as presiding officer during the debate simply exercised the privileges
given to him by the Rules of the House of Representatives, which we made and
adopted. The Speaker is at liberty to give the floor to whoever he wants. In
his wisdom, he sensed that those of us who are journalists who wanted to speak - Abike
Dabiri, Osita Izunaso - would all condemn the actions of the SSS with the
same reasons. He did not want to muzzle us but wanted to hear from
non-journalists whose views, he believes, would be more dispassionate and
devoid of sentiments based on professional affinity. At the end of the day, the
motion was amended to ordering the Committee on National Security and
Intelligence and the Committee on Justice to investigate the attack on Insider Magazine.
We did raise our hands to speak.
With
all your years of advocacy for the entrenchment of the freedoms of the
individual, like the freedom of speech and expression, you appear to give silent support to your people’s attack on PDP Trustee
Chairman Tony Anenih who expressed the view that the governorship of Edo State
should shift to the Central Senatorial District.
‘Attack’ is not the word to
use, because my people, that is the Edo North indigenes, have immense respect
for Chief Tony Anenih. In fact, they are very loyal to him. The appropriate
term is that they are a bit unsettled by the statement attributed to him.
Anenih is one leader that is well respected in the entirety of Edo State and
the Edo North people expect a portrayal of dynamic statesmanship from him and
the other leaders in the question of power-shift. They expect him to be fair
and just in this matter.
Edo Central has produced a governor
before in the person of the late Professor Ambrose Alli. Edo South has produced
two governors - Ogbemudia and Lucky Igbinedion. By 2007, Igbinedion would
have been governor for eight years.
I
think it is the turn of Edo North which has never produced a governor for the
state to do so in 2007. Chief Anenih should now show the dispassionate
statesmanship for which he is known in Edo by supporting the shift of power to
Edo North in 2007. He commands such awesome respect in Edo North that some
people take his word as law in some instances. He should therefore be sensitive
to the feelings of the people of Edo North.
We, the Edo North people believe that
the Chief is probably flying a kite. In other words, it is not a decision that
has been taken or concretized. It is not an irrevocable position either. It is
part of the political process.
At the appropriate time, we believe that
the Edo North people with our brothers from the Central and South Senatorial
Districts will sit in dialogue over the matter, with Chief Anenih presiding and
the decision will be taken to shift power to Edo North. Then people of Edo
North will be made to feel as belonging to Edo State. For now, they feel marginalised. They are not reckoned
with in the scheme of things.
What
has given vent to this perceived marginalisation?
This
is not a matter of perception. It is real. All persons alive are free to go see
for themselves. Edo North people have been fiercely loyal to the leadership in
the state over the years and this loyalty has not been reciprocated. We have
worked hard to respect institutions in the state, yet there is no community in
Edo North with pipe borne water. Most of our roads are hardly motorable with
most communities hardly accessible by motorable roads.
But
you had a “Vice President” of the Federal Republic of Nigeria in
the person of Admiral Mike Akhigbe.
And
so did the Edo Central. Admiral Augustus Aikhomu, from Edo Central, occupied
that same position - first as Chief of General Staff like Akhigbe and
then as Vice President for a
total of about eight years. In this Rourth Republic, Edo Central has had a
ministerial slot and by 2007 they would have had it for eight years. The
Central Senatorial District has had the Speakership of the House.
Some people argue that Edo North has the
reputy governorship of the state, but the Deputy is not the Governor. He acts
at the pleasure of the Governor. He has no powers at all. There is no basis for
comparison. We have been marginalised in the scheme of things.
If
Akhigbe occupied the second highest office in the country and could not provide
infrastructure, such as motorable roads for your people, why have you now
elected him as the leader of Edo North?
While in that position, Akhigbe
commissioned work on some key roads in Edo North and the entire state, but he was there for merely nine months. As
he left office, the projects were abandoned. One of such roads is the
Agenebode-Auchi road. That is by the way.
In
appointing him as Edo North leader, the prime consideration is his integrity as
a person, as an officer, and as a lawyer. Akhigbe is straightforward and very
forthright leader, who will be fair to all. He is well respected in the country
and in Edo North.
We believe that he should be able to
lead the people of Edo North and negotiate what is due to us as citizens of Edo
State and as citizens of Nigeria. We think he has the requisite stature, the
necessary national connections, a rapport and friendship with the leaders of
Edo South like Chief Ogbemudia and of the entire state like Chief Anenih. He is
respected in the whole of the South-South.
We
have confidence that he will help us articulate the strategy and plan that we
will use to negotiate the restoration of our rights and to initiate a process
that will confer equal citizenship of Edo State upon the marginalised citizens
of Edo North.
He
is a good choice and those of us in the National Assembly will work with him to
ensure that he gives effective leadership to our people.
With
such fierce loyalty to Chief Anenih and the multi-ethnicity factor, do you
think the Edo North people will ever pursue the governorship to its end?
The
whole Edo State is monolithic. We have the same ancestral background. Most of
us have our origins from Benin and were part of the Benin Empire. We have been
together from the Midwest Region till now that Edo State has been created for
us.
In Edo North, we are united by the
poverty of our people despite what some choose to magnify as sub-ethnic
differences. Diversity of dialects and ethnicity does not translate to division
in Edo North or Edo State. We are not asking for an Edo North governor but a
governor of Edo State from Edo North in order that we can have a sense of
belonging.
Do
you see Anenih’s proposition as a ploy to install his son as a governor
and set a dynasty in Edo?
This
is not about Chief Tony Anenih, neither must it be personalised. And the
question of dynasty is misnomer here. Anenih has never occupied elective
office. His first appointment was that of minister. It is also unfair to paint
him as some power-wielding tyrant. To the contrary, Anenih consults widely. He
invites us and advises on issues and people have agreed and disagreed with his
views.
Again,
there is nothing wrong in the son or daughter of a prominent politician taking
up political office, either as appointees or as elected officials. But that is
not the issue. What is at stake here is equity and justice. If the people of Edo State collectively
decide to cede the governorship to the Central senatorial district and they
bring forth Anenih’s son, then so be it. It will then be left for the
rest of the zones or districts to accept or reject him through a free and fair
election. Like I said already, this is not the issue. The issue at hand is for
equity and justice and fairplay to reign. And for the purpose of continued
loyalty, the people of Edo North
should be given the opportunity to produce the next governor of the
state. We have been very loyal and we believe that this loyalty should be
reciprocated. It is our conviction that all the leaders of the state, including
Chief Anenih, should work towards actualising this appropriately placed desire.
Power in a state should rotate round its
component geopolitical zones. The same should also apply to the federation.
Which
geopolitical zone of the country do you favour to produce the President in
2007?
We
in the South-South have made a very strong case that it is the turn of the zone
to produce the President of Nigeria. However, considerations have been to the
fact that the North had voluntarily relinquished power to the South and did so
in good faith by going to the extent of presenting two Southerners as the
presidential candidates and supporting the re-election of President Obasanjo in
2003. There is some measure of understanding among us that it is only fair that
power should shift to the North.
At
a reception organised for the Ohanaeze
President-General, Professor Joe Irukwu, by the Item Union at Abuja,
South-South leader, Senator Anietie Okon said that the South-South had resolved
to support the South East for the presidency in 2007.
Aside
from what Senator Okon had said at the gathering of Professor Irukwu’s
people, I have been a supporter of Nigerian president of Igbo extraction. The
Igbo have distinguished themselves in many ways, including science and
technology, banking, business and commerce. They are people of very strong
character with respect for family values. They also want to live with other
Nigerians in the other parts of the country. Unfortunately though, the Igbo are
southerners like me, and I think we should allow a northerner.
When next it is coming to the South, the Igbo can make a very strong case like the Ohanaeze
leader did at the reception when he said that Igbo had only ruled Nigeria for
some months - less than a year. After 2007, the people of the South will sit
and take a decision. We have interacted for so long, like Irukwu and Okon
mentioned, that it will not be difficult for us to agree to the South East
producing the President after 2007. A President of Igbo extraction will finally
heal the wounds of the war and will be strategic in reconciling the Nigerian
peoples.
Nigerians
seem to have resigned to their fate in choosing between Generals Ibrahim
Babangida, Muhammadu Buhari, Buba Marwa and Vice President Atiku Abubakar. Who
among these do you believe is best suited to govern the Nigerian state, given
its peculiarities, in 2007?
Among
these persons, the Vice President has been relatively quiet. He has not
actually announced whether he wants to run. But my surprise is largely with the
ambitions of these generals. They have tasted power. They have been part and
parcel of the problems of this country. I do not know what new formula they
have for solving our problems. I think the North should sit and select a
candidate using, of course, the appropriate means.
These Generals have no solution to the
problems of this country. I do not want to attempt deciding for the North but
as a concerned Nigerian and as somebody who fought the totalitarian rule of the
military, especially the Babangida dictatorship, I wouldn’t want those
who almost plunged Nigeria into civil war coming back to rule the country
again. The North should search
their list of academics in the universities, their list of governors, federal
lawmakers at the National Assembly and pick out a suitable President for the
Federal Republic of Nigeria and not characters like Babangida, Buhari or Marwa.
|
