Top elements in the Northern part of
Nigeria have disagreed with the National
Assembly on the proscription of two Islamic miltant groups – Boko Haram and
Ansaru–by President Goodluck Jonathan.
While the North through its two
prominent groups, the Arewa Consultative Forum and the Northern Elders Forum,
faulted the ban, the National Assembly insisted that it was a welcome
development.
To the ACF and the NEF, the Jonathan
administration has through the ban thrown a spanner in the works in its efforts
to end bloodletting in the North through amnesty for
Boko Haram and Ansaru members.
They said they were waiting to
see how the Federal Government would address the crisis in the
North.
In an interview in Kaduna, the
ACF’s National Publicity Secretary, Mr. Anthony Sani, argued that with the
ban, negotiations with Boko Haram would be difficult.
He asked, “Now that they (government)
have proscribed the sect, can they now negotiate with a non-existing group?
“Before, the government told us
that it was using a stick and carrot approach; that is,
negotiation and state of emergency; now that they have proscribed it
(Boko Haram), how will the negotiation work?
“It is the government that told us
that a stick and carrot approach will work together. Now that they have
gone to proscribe Boko Haram, let us see how they will apply
the stick and carrot. We pray that they succeed.”
Sani wondered if the government would
negotiate with members of the sect individually instead of meeting the group.
He added, “The government said
they needed the emergency in order to reclaim the seized town
taken over by Boko Haram. This made Nigerians, including us
(ACF) to give them the go-ahead. We supported the state of emergency to
reclaim seized part of the country.
“But now that they have proscribed
the sect, we don’t know how they will apply the carrot. Now, how can you
negotiate with an illegal entity? The group has just been
proscribed. They have announced it. They are applying the stick now but we don’t
know how they will apply the carrot.”
His counterpart in the NEF,
Prof. Ango Abdullahi, said the proscription contradicted
government’s efforts to negotiate with the sect.
Abdullahi argued that the
proscription of anything should come after the legal existence of such a thing.
He added, “As far as I
can understand, if there is an organisation registered with
the Corporate Affairs Commission and is operating according to the law before
it was registered; and then along the line, the organisation begins to infringe
on the laws that created it or even against its laws as registered with the
Corporate Affairs Commission, you can then go ahead and cancel its
registration.
“If its activities are violating the
law of the country, then issues like banning and proscription come into
play.
“But in this case, people say they
don’t know what this Boko Haram is, they don’t know the members and they are
trying to get the members to come out for dialogue .
“If you are looking for dialogue, you
have to expect that there will be people who will come out under certain
respectable conditions.
“Two things have
happened simultaneously- the declaration of a state of emergency
which connotes the declaration of martial law. You cannot expect somebody to
come and meet soldiers under emergency conditions and now you have the
proscription.”
No comments:
Post a Comment