"Give me the liberty to know, to utter, and to argue freely according to conscience, above all liberties." --John Milton (1608-1674)By this treatise, I seek to argue a type of liberty that according to conscience, I am aware of the danger I expose myself. Yet, I am not persuaded to do otherwise. The contents of this article may be misconstrued and misused. Yet, my perception remains unhindered. I am not gullible to recognise that those bent on mischief will use the article out of context to marshal self- interest. Even, the title may be considered offensive and a licence to attack the messenger instead of the message. Yet, I could possibly not let slip an opportunity to scream from my keyboard about the events overtaking us in a democratic dispensation. Our sensibilities are gradually being eroded by despotic tendencies and affront to the rule of Law. The earlier contrary opinions are proffered, the sooner the perpetrators will retract.The latest ‘security breach’ for which Major Hamza Al-Mustapha, the former Chief Security Officer of General Sani Abacha is now detained by the Directorate of Military Intelligence should not be accepted on its face value. Its principle and processes must be questioned and the State must not be allowed opacity in breaching the rights of a fellow citizen. No matter the breaches committed - being ‘seized’ from a maximum-security prison by the apparatchiks of the State hardly differs from the tactics at the inception of the monstrous regime of General Abacha.For the avoidance of doubt, I have never met nor know agents or anyone close to Mr. Al-Mustapha. I have not sold my conscience for ‘Ghana Must Go’. My case is made as the watchman advising of danger on the horizon. I offer no appeals. I seek no respite for the Major. If at all, I wish anything for the fallen hero of a despised regime: my wishes are: his difficulties will symbolise that in our nation, justice takes its natural course. But, could justice take a natural course when the Nigeria Army under the watch of its Commander in Chief, who has a vested interest in a complaint against the Officer, ‘abducted’ an indicted citizen in the custody of the Courts; and we still believe in the Obasanjo type of democracy. Whether the former security Officer is an anathema is not the issue. What has happened in the name of a ‘security breach’ may well become a pattern by which the Nigeria Army is once again mandated by this government to overstep its bounds. The issue here is about the place of the military in Civvie Street. Is the military taking the place of the police and the courts? Must the military be used to intimidate citizens because one of its own requested an in-house inquiry? Just because the state of the nation is perilous, must we accept any excuses or reasons provided by a government we do not trust and a leadership that is holding its citizens to ransom? So, what have we heard of the so called ‘security breach’? It was news for a few days. It may possibly or deliberately have been blown out of proportions as a message to our Military Adventurists. Initially, the military top echelon could not confirm the ‘ security breach’. It was news to them as it was to the nation. What an administration that is not even trusted by its politician; at least Governor Orji Kalu has advised that much, attempted was to raise suspicion within military ranks. That ploy is very dangerous or perhaps reckless, if it was unintended. A military that is suspicious of its men will not be cohesive to face an external aggressor because its aggression is directed within to sap its fighting power and espirit de corp. Now that Mr. Obasanjo has taken enough time to absolve the military; and has spoken openly about Mr. Al-Mustapha; yet not providing substantial facts of the incident – should we not question the wisdom of the president to offer his views on a matter that is presently under investigation by staffers under his command? Could the utterances of the president bias the outcome of the investigation? Are there overzealous officers in the investigation panel willing to conclude the inquiry in favour of the president’s misgivings? Where is the fairness by which a government must serve saints and sinners? Could Mr. Obasanjo truthfully state categorically as the president of this nation and Commander- in- Chief of its Armed Forces that the former Chief Security Officer can expect to be dealt with fairly until proven guilty? Let this president be tutored in the responsibility of his office to the citizen. He must refrain from providing his views on a matter for which court orders are disrespected and flagrantly ignored by the Army he leads. Did the Abacha Government not perpetrate the same wonton disregard? So, where is the difference?As the president did not narrate the facts of the breach remain conjectural and just before delving into the ‘facts’ so far published - in a saner society, an arrest of this nature is statutorily protected, so that the State does not lock up its citizens and employees indefinitely for its apocryphal reasons in the name of state security. The use of ‘state security’ as a license for many ills in our nation was an excuse by which the government of Mr. Abacha purloined the Nigerian Treasury. Was it not the same reason for which Alhadji Gwarzo was allowed a freehand to taxpayers money with reckless abandon? Are some State Governors not suspected of siphoning taxpayers’ money for the same ’state security’ vote (allocated funds) reasons? Let us be candid, the term ‘state security’ covers a multitude of sins and could be used anywhere and anyhow against the citizen. It is consistently used to divert funds; and now to incarcerate. Whatever, crime the former Chief Security Officer has committed, his Commander-in-Chief must be honest enough to allow the allegations to withstand the standards of scrutiny. To deny such fundamental rights is to revert to what General Abacha had done when in power.As earlier alluded, the facts so far are thus: Whilst in custody, the former Chief Security Officer acquired a mobile phone; telephoned the president’s special number; fortunately for the president, he was able to hear first hand the account of an aggrieved citizen; and unfortunately for the junior officer, he did not abide by the conduct of his military service. Whatever he told the president is between both men unless the telephone conversation was recorded. If it is adjudged that the president’s recollection of what was said is superior evidence to Mr. Al-Mustapha’s such will be unfair. To accept the version of Mr. Obasanjo’s account is to forget that as honourable as he may be – generally, politicians are untrustworthy. Mr. Al-Mustapha inalienable rights as a private citizen must be preserved. Being a soldier does not remove private rights. Otherwise, those citizens that bear their minds to this president risk detention. Did General Abacha not do the same? In fact, in most developed parts of the world, there is a telephone number for the citizen to call their presidents. This debacle only exposes us as a backward democracy. It is no gainsaying the telephone calls to the seat of power are never attended by heads of governments, there are impenetrable gateways sifting the calls. If Mr. Obasanjo wants to measure his popularity in the country, let him provide a telephone number by which his staff could record calls made to that number. He would hear an earful. It is a leader far removed from the people he serves that fears a prisoner thinking the “unthinkable” and doing the “undoable”. A leader in the service of his people is one that thinks the “unthinkable” and does the “undoable” to improve the lives of the governed. General Abacha thought the “unthinkable” and did the “undoable” to affect the lives of our people negatively. We accepted Mr. Obasanjo to do the “undoable”, when with his empty boast he reposed confidence in us that he did not care whose Ox is gored. Is the Ox of Mr. Mustapha over what is reported as a telephone call worthy of tampering with? If this is not a misuse of power, what else could it be? General Abacha did the same.The accounts in newspaper reports may well turn out to be untrue and that destroys the premise of my treatise. For the sake of decency, I hope the reports are wrong and the premise of this treatise is, too. What remains unattended is the need for this government to proscribe lengthy detentions without charge. No decent society locks up its citizens without testing its evidence in a court of Law or Court Marshal the officer. If the Directorate of Military Intelligence requires the former Chief Security Officer investigated, could it not have been done through an application to the court? As no court order released the detainee to the Nigeria Army, it begs the question, what orders have the president and Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of the Federal Republic Of Nigeria given to overrule the decision of the Army. As a civilian president, who swore to protect each and every Nigerian – what has he done? The seizure by the Army, though may be necessary, the procedure is wrong. The Commander-in Chief must live up to his responsibility and order the return of the detainee to the custody of the courts. If the Army requires Mr. Mustapha for an inquiry, let it go to the Maximum Prison, where he is detained. The rights of a fellow citizen must not be violated because he is a man many Nigerians loathe. What we are forgetting is that despots never start their attacks on those that are strong in the society. They always pick on the vilified and the weak. In spite of temptations to misuse power, this administration that remains comatose in the service of our people, as the Abacha administration must at all costs refrain from alarming the populace. Why have I dared to write on a topic to exercise what Milton regarded as a “liberty to know, to utter, and to argue freely according to conscience…? On several occasions, since the Nigeria Army “abducted” Mr. Al-Mustapha - I have thought of Pastor Martin Niemoller – who said: “When they came for the Jews, I did nothing, for I am not a Jew. When they came for the Socialists, I did nothing, for I am not a Socialist. When they came for the Labour Leaders, the Homosexuals, the Gypsies, I did nothing, for I am none of these, and when they came for me, I was alone, there was no one to stand up for me. This is an exaggeration of present day Nigeria. I admit that much. The genesis of evil is never an act that is colossal. It tries and extends permissible limits that silence allows. That was abundant during the governance of General Abacha. Are we to believe that a telephone call wrongly placed; an insult to the ears of Mr. Obasanjo is enough to ride shod on a citizen’s constitutional rights? For the sake of our freedom and democracy, I hope I am wrong that the man who is not shy to proclaim his ‘born-again’ beliefs; who we fondly regard as “Uncle Sege aka Baba Iyabo” would sustain an improper act perpetrated in his name and under his watch.
Mr Odutola is a solicitor of the Supreme Court, England and Wales and a Lawyer at a Firm of Solicitors in London, England.
|
# 
Your Comments
Please make The Square an enjoyable experience for everyone by refraining from gratuitous ad-hominem contributions, defamatory comments and off-topic posting. Such posts will be removed.