Nigeria has no policy on Internally Displaced Persons – Prof. Ladan

What model of rule of law would you subscribe to?Rule of law is a concept that has many principles underlying it . It is about respect for human rights and as a principle, has to do with democratic governance. I do not have a particular preference model for rule of law  because for every human […]

What model of rule of law would you subscribe to?
Rule of law is a concept that has many principles underlying it . It is about respect for human rights and as a principle, has to do with democratic governance. I do not have a particular preference model for rule of law  because for every human society what is important is the due process of law which entails respect for human rights. When there is a denial of justice it is also evident that there is disrespect for the rule of law.
 President Umar  Al- Bashir of Sudan was recently in Nigeria for the African Union (AU) meeting even though an International Criminal Court (ICC) has an arrest warrant hanging on his head. Many people felt that he should have been arrested. Do you agree?
It is true that Nigeria has rectified the Rome Statute for the establishment of the International Criminal Court in 2001 and the court came into existence formally in 2002. It began trial of several persons including Al-Bashir around 2004. Nigeria signed and ratified the Rome Statute without any reservations. Among the obligation is that when the ICC makes  a request to any state party that has signed the treaty that there is a fugitive in the country who has been indicted formally by the ICC, each state party like Nigeria, upon such request is duty bound to arrest and surrender such fugitive. State parties cannot use any of its domestic laws or policy to get out of its treaty obligations to arrest and surrender such person.
The truth of the matter was that there was a written request from the ICC and the Nigerian government now said that it cannot discharge its obligation in effecting his arrest and surrendering him because there is an AU resolution that says that based on their conspiracy theory that the resolution at the Hague was only targeting African Heads of State and not the Heads of States or citizens of other countries. So AU passed a resolution that their member states should not comply with any request from the ICC under the Rome statute for the arrest and surrender of any African Head of State until the court reverses this conspiracy theory targeted allegedly only at African Heads of States.
   Here, Nigeria has a legal binding treaty obligation to arrest and surrender under the Rome statute. Second there is a conflict between Nigeria’s obligation under the Rome Statute with the AU resolution that no African Head of State or diplomat should ever be arrested and surrender to the ICC. So the issue of conspiracy theory is absurd.
The Federal Government argued that it did not invite Al- Bashi who came to attend an AU meeting on HIV/AIDS in Abuja, so since he was here on invitation of the AU therefore Nigeria cannot arrest and surrender Al- Bashir . Secondly,
Nigeria argued that Sudan was not a state party to the Rome Statute so there is no obligation on Nigeria to the Rome Statute and to a non-state party like Sudan. But that is a weak argument. AU resolution is not a treaty it is a soft law, in international law, it can never prevail or override a treaty. Also, that Al- Bashir came on AU invitation does not take away Nigeria’s obligation because the fugitive is in our jurisdiction regardless of what brought him and there was a written request for him to be surrendered.
 The argument that the Rome Statute has not been domesticated in accordance with Section 12 of the Constitution does not hold water either. It would have been better for FG to keep quiet.
There are so many treaties entered into by the Federal Government, ministries and agencies that are never domesticated,  how does this portray the nation?
This is a serious problem for us in Nigeria than in many other African countries. A treaty under international law can be bilateral or multi-lateral. Any treaty of whatever type or by whatever name you call it, be it protocol or convention, is voluntary and some treaties take a long time before they come into force so we still have time to negotiate on the subject matter that the treaty covers.
 First we should recoginise that it is voluntary; second if it is voluntary, we have an opportunity when we are ratifying the treaty to make it legally binding on us; to look at clauses, provisions and different articles in the treaty on any subject matter and indicate when we do not have the political will to carry out all the clauses or provisions of the treaty because some of these provisions in which we have reservations conflict with provisions of our constitution or existing national policy or practice hence we should not ratify them wholly and we may rectify only 80 per cent of the treaty, until we are ready after we have done our home work. That is the way, so if you ratify a treaty wholly without reservation and the treaty comes into law, the law of treaties is very clear, you cannot begin to use your domestic law or policy or constitution not to recognise that treaty. You will not be allowed to do that because it is a sign of irresponsibility and could attract sanction.
The truth is that we are not bound to enter into a treaty and if we enter into a treaty we are not bound to ratify it wholly. That should be the approach. Our problem here, like in many developing countries, is that we always rush to sign and ratify a treaty wholly without reservation and when it comes to implementation we use our domestic laws as an excuse. This is an act of irresponsibility.
In view of what is happening in Nigeria today what is your reaction to the challenges of internally displaced persons (IDPs)?
The number of IDPs in the last 14 years keeps on growing especially after every general election – 1999, 2003, 2007 and 2011. These people have been forcibly displaced from their homes, villages or local governments in Nigeria.  They remain citizens despite the cause of their displacement which may be post election violence or natural disaster.  Over 2.3 million Nigerians were displaced last year as a result of the July 2012 flooding.  They have not yet returned to their homes and there is another cycle of disaster, this is in addition to those displaced as a result of ethnic, religious and other conflicts. Irrespective of the conflict, the first challenge is that there is no national policy on IDPs in Nigeria that will give us a takeoff frame work on how to coordinate the activities of the federal, states and LGAs, relevant ministries, departments and agencies in the affairs of IDPs. We had a draft in 2006, reviewed in 2007, 2008 and 2009 and further reviewed 2010 and 2011 and subjected to stakeholders in 2012 and then we submitted final draft.
In African countries we have armed groups that are militias, insurgents or terrorists and states that have actually been responsible for displacement of civilians especially the vulnerable groups.
What is the solution to the almajiri problem in northern Nigeria?
Any child whose parents want to receive Qur’anic education must not be allowed to leave his/her LGA because the danger is not with the system itself but with a component of the system where parents out of poverty or ignorance of the Shari’a itself, in terms of their parental obligations of responsibility to give their children love, affection, value orientation and education until age of puberty send out their children.
 Some Malams who could not cope with feeding the children three times a day  release them to go and beg for alms. There is no begging for alms under the Shari’a; the Shari’a condemns begging and disapproves destitution hence we have the Zakkat system where you assist the needy.