Governor Fayose, others reckless because they have immunity – Prof Odinkalu

How has it been heading the National Human Rights Commission of Nigeria, especially in view of the country’s low rating in terms of respect for human rights?It has been challenging; it gives us an opportunity to try things new and differently. We don’t really have perfect answers to the issues that challenge us so the […]

How has it been heading the National Human Rights Commission of Nigeria, especially in view of the country’s low rating in terms of respect for human rights?
It has been challenging; it gives us an opportunity to try things new and differently. We don’t really have perfect answers to the issues that challenge us so the Commission has got to keep inventing and creating in accordance with the laws that govern us.
The Electoral Act 2010 frowns at hate speech by politicians during campaigns and has even made provisions for penalties for offenders.  What is your Commission doing to see that this is enforced?
I am sure you must have heard the Commission on hate speech and violence.  It is fair to say that the Commission takes credit for putting hate speech on the agenda in this circle of election because it has not been done before. People were prepared to tolerate it but we are now saying it can’t be tolerated because it is not right for our polity. We are not interested in who wins or which candidate wins; we are interested to see that Nigeria wins and Nigeria cannot win if we sow hatred along the path to power.
At the moment that is what the leading political parties are trying to do; the leading candidates are not doing enough to stamp down the language of hate and also the social media has been transmitting a lot of hate. So what we have done is to inject ourselves into the social media space to alter the language and give people the spectacles to also recognize hate and report hate. We have a team that is tracking hate speech in social media, we are tracking it in regular media and we are cooperating with civil society platforms  to make sure that we are able to track as much of it, quantify it, report on it, see whether we can get accountability for it.
Also we are trying to see if we can do the same with respect to violence because hate speech and violence are intimately related. We are working on both. You probably have seen  pre-election report and advisory; a substantial part of which  deals with violence and hate speech and that is what the NHRC is going to focus on during these forthcoming elections.
Talking about hate speech reminds me about an advertorial that was sponsored by the Ekiti State Governor which came under heavy condemnations from several quarters,  including from you who issued a statement denouncing it. Beyond that statement what practical steps have you taken to correct that kind of hate speech?
To begin with, condemning something credited to a sitting governor is not usual in Nigeria and I think we should acknowledge that. But we can’t sit down and watch the country go down the drain by worshipping people in temporary positions of power because some day they are going to leave office and the damage that they had left behind would continue to hunt us. I am not interested in what people say about the candidate; they are big enough to handle themselves.
Like them or don’t like them Murtala Muhammed served this country very well; Umaru Musa Yar Adua served this country very well. General Sani Abacha has done his service and is gone and they are no longer here to defend themselves, they did not define for themselves what part of Nigeria they came from. It is wrong, unacceptable and unlawful for anybody to invoke them and where they come from as a way of making a point about whether or not somebody who comes from a particular part of the country can live for one day or one year. And if we don’t have the courage to tell the people who do that we are unfit for office and I will not do that. I would speak my mind, people don’t have to agree with me but it is a responsibility of the chair of the NHRC to have an independent mind. I will continue doing it until my time ends. In that case it was credited to Governor Fayose and he has not denied it. Under the law Fayose enjoys immunity from legal process as a sitting governor.
But there are things that go beyond legal process. Diminishing the moral voice of a sitting governor is a form of accountability and that is the accountability that the NHRC can levy and in my view we are levying. We are not just watching him but all governors. In all there are 74 public officers in Nigeria who have immunity from legal process; it is not just Fayose. Every governor and his deputy; that is 36 of them multiply by two making 72; plus the President and his vice making it 74. Every one of them we are watching from the Commission, especially in this season because we want them to elevate the tone for our country. They have special responsibilities which is why they are given immunity.
They are not given immunity to run amok and get impunity. Because of that we expect them to behave themselves in a particularly honourable manner and if they don’t I will say so. For instance,  I have said that Governor Amaechi’s statement that if they don’t win the elections they will take to the streets is irresponsible; that is not the kind of thing I expect a serving Governor to say. I have also said so about Governor Shema’s statement about cockroaches. So if any governor goes beyond the pale because they are protected by immunity I will call them out. Let’s be clear this is not about Fayose alone; we are worried about the comportment of people who enjoy constitutional immunity and they have got to keep a line that is defensible.
Apart from the Fayose advert, several others are still appearing in the media with all sorts of hate language. Are you doing anything specifically to stop this?
We are also trying to educate people to understand what hate speech and language means. When you are targeting people with reference to identities they cannot change and you are trying to invoke violence or use language that could invoke violence against people. We are trying to give people the skills to recognize when the line has been crossed because the Commission cannot police everything.
Therefore the more people who have the skills to do this the more likely we can make progress. I think the first thing here is education, awareness, enlightenment. You don’t want a situation whereby hate speech triggers mass slaughter because by that time you are already beyond being able to save people so the basic strategy is mitigation and prevention through enlightenment. If we get to the point whereby accountability has to be levied we will deal with that but I am still hopeful that at least we can mitigate it as significantly as possible.
Still on Ekiti, I am aware that the APC in the state recently forwarded a petition to your Commission alleging human rights violations by the governor. What are you doing about it?
At the moment we have received about 12 different petitions on different aspects of elections across the country. As for that particular petition by the APC in Ekiti against the governor we have received the petition and we have put in place an investigation team that is working on it. I don’t comment on pending cases as such but there is an investigative team that is handling it and immediately after this interview I am going into a meeting with the review team led by the Executive Secretary of the Commission.
Let’s go back a little to the Apo killings on which you had issued a detailed report that received wide commendations. What did it take you to come up with such a thorough report?
We took evidence and we were guided by such evidence and the law. It is as simple as that. I don’t think anybody should be in this for popularity or commendation or indeed unpopularity and criticisms. There are people who didn’t like what we did and there are those who liked what we did, but the most important thing is for you to be able to justify whatever position you reach with reference to evidence, law and a clear conscience. With those three I am not worried at all with regards to our report on Apo.
But are you not worried that the report on the Apo killings has not been implemented?
I am not that worried about it. The Department of State Services (DSS) has gone to court to challenge it. The judge excused himself because he announced his own interest and the case has gone back to the chief judge of the Federal High Court for reassignment.
They have a constitutional right to seek judicial review and the important thing is that they are using lawful processes to challenge the decision. I am happy with the decision because they are entitled to exercising their rights.
You also issued a report on the Baga incident in 2013 which revealed cases of rights violations but there was no indictment on the military in that report…
I don’t know what people call indictment,  but the report was factual and again it made some people happy while others were not happy. People formed their views about it but we were quite clear about what we found and what we didn’t find and even what remained to be found.
We have not been able to finish just that because thereafter Baga, Monguno, Marte and the neighborhood went into adverse hands and there had been violence there until recently when the Nigerian forces have got the upper hand thankfully.
Mopping up is still taking place. The President was in that area which is a hopeful sign and so it is a continuing narrative. The story of what transpired in Baga has not ended but we also want to be careful in making sure that we don’t necessarily endanger the neighborhood or indeed the personnel further. So at the right time we will try and conclude that narrative.