Insecurity in North-East: Why more people should speak up

Power in democracy is about being held under scrutiny by your fellow citizens. Being criticized and assessed by your fellow citizens is the price elected public officials must pay. It goes with the territory. Do citizens automatically become enemies of the government in power by expressing honest opinions about how leaders are running the country? […]

Power in democracy is about being held under scrutiny by your fellow citizens. Being criticized and assessed by your fellow citizens is the price elected public officials must pay. It goes with the territory. Do citizens automatically become enemies of the government in power by expressing honest opinions about how leaders are running the country?

Former Vice President Atiku Abubakar’s November 3rd, 2014, international press conference on security has attracted fierce reaction from President Jonathan’s Senior Special Assistant on Public Affairs, Dr. Doyin Okupe. The medical doctor-cum politician said in the most unbecoming language that “Atiku needs psychiatric test.” What did Atiku say to warrant this puerile and intemperate outpouring of vitriol on a leading opposition politician? Atiku is not only a key opposition figure, but also a former vice president in Nigeria. Therefore, he has the right like any other fellow citizens to express an opinion on the country’s deteriorating security situation, which has turned Nigerians into captives of fear. Atiku Abubakar is a stakeholder in the North-East and, therefore, he cannot pretend to be indifferent to the deteriorating security situation in the region, his own political zone.
We are talking about a security situation that has gone so bad that a large swathe of the country’s territory has been captured and occupied unchallenged by the Boko Haramterrorists. Is the people’s hope for liberation from terrorist occupation not a legitimate expectation? Did Atiku commit a crime for expressing embarrassment at the loss of Nigerian territory to terrorists and the fact that the military appears helpless or powerless to liberate the occupied areas of the North-East?
Did Atiku break any law for joining millions of other Nigerians to express concern at the worsening security situation? Is Nigeria not sending a wrong message to potential external enemies by its apparent paralysis in the face of a rat-tag band of terrorists that are freely taking territory and renaming occupied towns in the North-East? Does urging the government to be tougher on terrorists amount to a criminal offence?
It is on record that former Vice President Atiku Abubakar has criticized the Boko Haramterrorism more forcefully than his critics can readily admit. The North-East is today a bandits’ territory, where people are living under constant fear of terrorist attacks and occupation. The people in these areas are desperate, leaving their homes in droves, as internally displaced persons (IDPs). It is, therefore, legitimate for former Vice President Abubakar to call on the government to act more resolutely to save his people from the terrorists’ siege.
As Atiku clearly pointed out, the basic functions of any government anywhere is the protection of the security, well-being and happiness of the citizens. Being in the opposition does not take away the right Atiku has as a stakeholder in the North-East to advise the government to respond more decisively. If the country’s citizens supported the imposition of state of emergency because of the dictates of security challenges, they also have the right to express honest opinions where the counter-terrorism strategies are not producing the intended results.
No patriotic politician celebrates if terrorists overwhelm the country’s security system. Atiku’s intervention was borne out of concern to help the government review its strategies to address the questions why the situation is getting out of hand. Atiku has been in government before and, therefore, he would be the last person to undermine the government’s counter-terrorism efforts.
As a key stakeholder in the North-East, however, he has a responsibility to speak on behalf of his people and call for government’s more robust response. I find nothing obnoxious in Atiku’s expression of concern over the frightening security situation. Our National Assembly members occasionally invite the country’s security chiefs to review the strategies of fighting the Boko Haram. In a democratic system, it is not unusual for citizens and other leaders to make constructive criticisms when things go wrong. Therefore, it is wrong for anybody to assume that the former vice president is an “enemy” of the government because he drew the attention of the government to the pathetic situation of the people of the North-East.
Terrorism is not a political issue, but a national challenge, which should not be viewed within the prism of partisan politics. Atiku didn’t raise concern about the security situation in the North-East because he is an opposition politician; he did so because he is a concerned Nigerian, who is pained daily by the loss of lives to terrorists’ invasion and occupation of Nigerian territory. Nigerian territory is not negotiable. While all politicians should work together and speak with one voice over the terrorism challenge, people in government should welcome constructive criticisms. Honest criticism doesn’t diminish Atiku’s patriotism. He understands the pains of the victims in the North-East because he lives with them. And asking the government not to abandon these poor people to their fates does not make him less patriotic than his critics.