Can Nigeria’s Anti-Terrorism Law Address the Boko Haram Threat?
The Boko Haram insurgency has the Nigerian government gasping for solutions. The militant sect which wants to see the creation of a pure Islamic state governed by Sharia law, has till date claimed the lives of three to ten thousand people in calculated bombings, targeted assassinations, and arbitrary shootings in north and north eastern Nigeria. Even though there are constitutional guarantees for dealing with terrorist threats, a co-ordinated response to the escalating Boko Haram violence has, however, been missing.
Interestingly, there is – on paper – a concrete legal response to tackle the brutal reign of terror perpetrated by the group, even in the midst of serious allegations of extra-judicial government high-handedness. In May 2011, the Nigerian National Assembly cleared the “Terrorism Prevention Act of 2011” and this was signed into law by President Goodluck Jonathan on June 3, 2011. The Act was in conformity with international standards, including UN guidelines. It addressed the issues of prevention, prohibition, and combating terrorism, as well as the financing of terrorism. It “also provides for the effective implementation of the ‘Convention on the Prevention and Combating of Terrorism’ as well as the ‘Convention on the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism,’ and prescribes penalties for the violation of its provisions”. These penalties can range from a 20-year jail term to death sentences depending on the severity of cases. The Act also facilitates help from foreign governments by way of mutual assistance, information sharing, and extradition with regard to terrorism–related offences. But the law grants tremendous powers to law enforcement agencies to haul suspected terrorists with hardly any judicial oversight, and consequently, the law has been severely criticised by various national and international human rights groups. Thus, even though the law is yet to come into force – as per recent statements of the Inspector General who denied the existence of any such law for cracking down on Boko Haram operatives – the resurgence of Boko Haram activities in recent months and its use of suicide bombings to create further panic have compelled the federal government to amend this rather recent piece of legislation. The changes seek to: broaden the definition of a terrorist; introduce military trials for Boko Haram militants; transfer of complete authority to the office of the National Security Advisory as the lead agency for dealing with the terrorist groups; along with allowing death penalty for terror suspects if found guilty as charged. Presently, the Terrorism (Prevention) Act 2011 (Amendment) Bill, 2012 as enshrined in the Report of the Conference Committee on the Terrorism Act 2011(Amendment) Bill 2012 has not received the approval of the Senate in the Nigerian National Assembly. But the gradual politicisation of Boko Haram activities, along with evidence that political parties are covertly supporting the group to serve their vested interests, would mean that the green signal for the amendments may take longer than expected.
An anti-terrorism law is indeed a commendable step in a country like Nigeria, peopled as it is with numerous ethnic groups. A legislation of this scale was indeed long over due and its significance cannot be over estimated. Some important and forward-looking provisions include: the facilitation of the ratification and enforcement of international and regional conventions, and treaties on terrorism which Nigeria has signed over the past couple of years. Also, the act enables closer collaboration with other nations to learn from their expertise in counter-terrorism. But a closer look at the draft of the law reveals some glaring inadequacies that belie Nigeria’s claims to be a federal republic that is ready to follow the example set by advanced liberal democracies. The spirit of the Act is quite evidently more reactive than proactive as it denies the terrorist that most fundamental of rights i.e. to defend himself until proven guilty. The right to counsel and a fair hearing are the cornerstones of modern criminal jurisprudence which are not given much space in the Act, as it exists today. The line between where the right of the suspect ends and that of law enforcement begins is quite blurred. The law enforcement agencies have arbitrary powers for the investigation and prosecution of terrorists. In fact, a November 2012 Amnesty International November 2012 Report entitled “Nigeria: Trapped in a Cycle of Violence,” blames the Nigerian security forces for exacerbating the Boko Haram crisis in the north of the country because of their tendency towards brutal force in the crackdown of suspected terrorists. The report documents the various human rights violations committed by the security forces including the burning of homes and detention without trial, torture, enforced disappearance, and extra-judicial executions. But, most unfortunately, the Act does not address the root socio-economic causes responsible for the proliferation of Boko Haram activities. The proposed amendments do not address these concerns either. They are more focussed on giving the government more sweeping powers for tackling the scourge of terrorism sweeping the country. The Act does not seem to factor in the possibility of brutal crackdowns leading to an atmosphere of further militarisation and hostility.
Instead a more effective approach for the government would be to work towards reducing the vulnerability of Nigerians living in the north by investing in a better transport system, border patrolling, and critical infrastructure. Security agencies need to position helicopters, cruisers, hi-tech security cameras, close circuit TVs in public buildings in all strategic locations. Intelligence gathering tools and training of personnel in forensic science, data storage and retrieval and general information management related to counter-terrorism need to be upgraded for more timely and efficient delivery. The problem of terrorism in Nigeria is more deep-seated than a constitutional law can ever reflect. The state of primary education in Nigeria is quite abysmal and overhauling of the education curriculum should be taken up as a priority concern. A more sustainable approach is required for tackling the socio-economic challenges plaguing north-north eastern Nigeria, as a mere anti-terrorism law cannot be the cure for all ills.
The system of a Central Police Command in Nigeria has lent itself to becoming fierce, corrupt, and undisciplined. Many informed voices are clamouring to usher in a system of state police as the only feasible option for resolving intra-conflicts. However the Parry Osayande-led Presidential Committee on the Reorganisation of the Nigeria Police has vehemently denounced the creation of a state police by deeming it costly and irrelevant for Nigeria. It has also recommended the scrapping of the Ministry of Police Affairs as it has “unjustifiably domiciled” the budget allocations of the police. Instead, the report called for the police to be empowered to determine its own projects by drawing up its own budget and be held accountable for the allocated funds. And therefore, as per the assessment of the report, police-related matters should be promptly delegated to the control of the Nigeria Police Council, which was established through the 1999 constitution. This muchawaited report on police reforms was released in August 2012 and has remained at the centre of an intense debate. Concrete, unanimous solutions still appear distant. The dangerous trend of drafting in army personnel for internal security operations has to be reversed by investing in comprehensive police reforms which must include improved training, salary, and equipment. But it is worth pondering over, if the recent plans for introduction of police reform can at all have any lasting impact in the absence of fundamental socio-economic change. The dialectics of police reform, if resolved, can only make a localised and thus, a temporary difference. For really alienating the support base of terrorist groups and diverting them to alternative avenues of employment, the government has to relax its highly centralised political-economic stranglehold of the country and re-distribute its oil money in creating enablers for growth and development; this will be the only acceptable solution.
References
- Bolaji Omitola, “Terrorism and the Nigerian federation”, African Security Review, October 30, 2012
- Hakeem Onapajo & Ufo Okeke Uzodike, “ Boko Haram terrorism in Nigeria”, African Security Review, August 22, 2012
- Alice Hills, “Policing a plurality of worlds: The Nigeria Police in metropolitan Kano,” African Affairs, December 14, 2011
- “As Nass Revisits Anti-Terror Law,” Allafrica.com, January 29, 2011 at http://allafrica.com/ stories/201201301878.html
- “Country Reports on Terrorism 2011 – Nigeria,” UNHCR, January 2, 2013 at http:// www.unhcr.org/refworld/docid/501fbca9c.html
- “Nigeria: Trapped in a cycle of violence,” Amnesty International, November 2012 at http:// www.amnesty.org/en/library/asset/AFR44/043/2012/en/04ab8b67-8969-4c86-bdea- 0f82059dff28/afr440432012en.pdf
- “How debate on anti-terrorism bill splits senate,” This Day Live, December 23, 2012 at http:/ /www.thisdaylive.com/articles/how-debate-on-anti-terrorism-bill-splits-se…
- “Non-passage of anti-terror bill delays trial of Boko Haram suspects,” The Guardian, Nigeria, November 20, 2012 at http://www.ngrguardiannews.com/ index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=105417:non-passage-of-anti-terror-billdelays-trial-of-boko-haram-suspects-&catid=1:national&Itemid=559
- “Nigeria: Senate, House Approve Anti-Terrorism Bill,” Library of Congress, February 24, 2011 at http://www.loc.gov/lawweb/servlet/lloc_news?disp3_l205402537_text
- “Legal Responses to the Boko Haram Challenge: An Assessment of Nigeria’s Terrorism (Prevention) Act, 2011,” Forum on Public Policy, University of Lagos, Nigeria, 2012 at http://forumonpublicpolicy.com/vol2012.no1/archive/oyebode.pdf
- “Boko Haram’s persistent threat in Nigeria,” Institute of Defence Studies and Analyses
- (IDSA), March 29, 2012 at http://idsa.in/backgrounder/BokoHaramsPersistentThreatInNigeria_BabjePothuraju_190312
- “Police Reform – As Presidency Considers Osayande Report,” Leadership, August 26, 2012 at http://allafrica.com/stories/201208270805.html
