Federal Government’s amnesty plan for Boko Haram members suffered
another setback on Thursday as the President of the Supreme Council for
Sharia in Nigeria, Dr. Datti Ahmed,rejected membership of the newly
constituted Presidential Committee on Dialogue and Peaceful Resolution
of Security Challenges in the North.
His action came less than 24 hours after the Executive Director of the
Civil Rights Congress, Mallam Shehu Sani, turned down his membership of
the committee on the grounds that he was neither consulted nor informed
by the Presidency.
Ahmed, a medical doctor, said he rejected membership of the committee
because of the bitter experience he had with the government when he
voluntarily tried to mediate between the authorities and members of the
violent Islamic sect, Boko Haram, last year.
Alleging insincerity on the part of the government during an an interview with the Hausa service of the British Broadcasting Corporation, he said the composition of the amnesty committee was faulty.
Ahmed argued that the Chairman of the panel and Minister of Special
Duties, Kabiru Turaki, as well as the Secretary, who is a nominee of
the Office of the Secretary to the Government of the Federation, would
always tell the government what it wanted to hear and “not the truth.”
He said, ”Previously, I made such moves twice and it wasn’t the
government that asked me to do that. We had reached a stage where, had
the government agreed with what we resolved with the sect members, by
now we would have forgotten everything. Nigeria would have witnessed
peace by now.
“When we told the government everything we discussed with them, and the
agreement we had which were not difficult to meet – that first of all
if the dialogue was truly genuine their wives and children that were
unjustly detained should be released because they committed no crime.
“We advised the government on that; we said even if government
continued to detain them, there was no any gain in doing so. The
government said they would release them but it did not. That act showed
there was deceit on the part of the government. We also said if these
people were released, a place should be arranged where we would sit and
discuss matters.
“Secondly, the chairman of this committee is a minister and the
secretary too works for the government. So whatever we discuss, they
are the ones who will write and take it to the government. So, I
believe if this meeting is done, what they will write will be full of
lies.
“They will feed the government with what the government wants to hear
and we would be in trouble with the ordinary Nigerians. The minister
and secretary will tell lies to the government and we would be left
quarrelling with young Nigerians;, young enough to be our children.”
According to Ahmed, from past experience, the government was not
sincere and it did everything to ensure that the earlier talk failed.
He said, “It was just like we were going to have a peaceful resolution
the next day and what the government should have done was not something
difficult. It was just for them to release their (Boko Haram members)
wives and reduce tension in Yobe and Borno states and stop persecuting
the people there.
“The government said it was going to do that but it did not. It is the
same government that wants to do that now? It is the same (Goodluck)
Jonathan and his representatives and we are the same people, nothing
has changed.”
Boko Haram, had in March 2012, picked Ahmed as a mediator between it
and the Federal Government. It said his choice was based on the fact
that its former leader, the late Mohammed Yusuf, served as a member
that represented Borno State in the council of Sharia in Nigeria.
But a few days later, Ahmed pulled out of the process after details of
the discussions appeared in the media. He did not say who he thought
had leaked the information.
He had said, “This development has embarrassed us very much and has
created strong doubts in our minds about the sincerity of the
government’s side in our discussion, as the discussion is supposed to
be very confidential to achieve any success. In view of this
unfortunate and unhelpful development, we have no option but to
withdraw from these early discussions.”
When Sani turned down his membership of the committee, he also
expressed doubt about the viability of dialogue with Boko Haram without
first, a discreet meeting held between individuals who enjoy the
confidence of the sect and members of the sect.
“You cannot simply wake up one day, announce amnesty and set up a
committee without consulting them. You must have persons who on that
committee have access and respect of the members of the sect to
initiate discussions with them. A committee headed by a minister in
this government does not make any meaning to me,” he had said.
But the Presidency, apparently unperturbed by the rejections, said that
‘grandstanding and negativity” won’t resolve the Boko Haram insurgency.
Special Adviser to the President on Media and Publicity, Dr. Reuben
Abati, in an interview with one of our correspondents in Abuja on
Thursday, argued that it was more of grandstanding if those found to be
eminently qualified to contribute to ending the sect’s violence were
“invited by the President and the best they could do is to reject the
offer.”
On Sani, Abati said his argument that the committee would fail in its
assignment because some persons were not included was not tenable.
He said the best thing the rights activist should have done was to
accept the invitation to serve and then make the names of persons the
committee could talk to available to his co-members.
Abati was however upbeat that the present administration would succeed in its quest to restore peace to the country.

No comments:
Post a Comment
place your comment