Rights monitors and emergency measures

Aspects of a recent report by the nongovernmental organisation Human Rights Watch (HRW), which describes the emergency measures in the area as a failure, may therefore not be in consonance with the assessment of many Nigerians. President Goodluck Jonathan last May declared a 6-months emergency rule in Borno, Yobe and Adamawa states in a bid […]

Aspects of a recent report by the nongovernmental organisation Human Rights Watch (HRW), which describes the emergency measures in the area as a failure, may therefore not be in consonance with the assessment of many Nigerians.
President Goodluck Jonathan last May declared a 6-months emergency rule in Borno, Yobe and Adamawa states in a bid to end the Boko Haram insurgency that was claiming lives and decimating economic activities in the region. The measures were extended for another three months when they were due to expire last November.  
The HRW’s Global Rights Monitor 2014 World Report notes that the emergency rule had so far failed to curb atrocities and sufficiently protect civilians. This report, which reviews human rights practices around the world was made public a day after the newly appointed Chief of Defence Staff, Air Marshal Alex Badeh, vowed that the military must put an end to the insurgency before next April.
The report laments the killing of more than 400 people in 2013 as a result of inter-communal conflicts in parts of Nigeria, with scores others rendered homeless.
According to the group, Nigerian security forces engaged in human rights abuses in many parts of the country, noting that only in few cases were investigations or prosecutions of those violent crimes or human rights abuses carried out.  The report also documents abuses in the North by the insurgents, and highlighted what it says was the heavy-handed response by security forces.
The sub-titles of the report include Boko Haram violence; inter-communal and political violence; conduct of security forces; government corruption; violence and poverty in the oil-producing Niger delta; health and human rights; sexual orientation and gender identity; freedom of expression and media; and key international actors.
The report opens a critical debate on what actually constitutes ‘failure’ (or ‘success’) in the government’s fight to defeat Boko Haram.
 It has become almost a tradition among rights groups to sit in judgment over the internal affairs of developing countries, especially those in Africa. Many of the organizations appropriate the power to set arbitrary standards for African societies and sit in judgement when they don’t measure up.  But this should mean that the universal standards of the sanctity of human life and due process-even in life and death situations-should be ignored.
The emergency rule was imposed in the three affected states in the North-East region of the country to achieve specific objectives of bringing the insurgency to a speedy end to create the environment for normal socio-economic activities to re-start. If until the past few weeks the emergency rule practically brought down the alarming spate of violence in that region, it would have substantively served the purpose it was meant for.
In as much as it is contentious to characterise the emergency as a failure, it is also a fact that is not without shortcomings. There have been reported cases, some of them well documented, of security forces going outside the rules of engagement to undertake extrajudicial killings, including summary executions. Such incidents should be documented for farther investigation and prosecution by relevant bodies.
Following widespread expression of public concern, the military authorities were forced to release information suggesting that 1,400 Boko Haram suspects had in fact been in their custody for years without a legal process. It is such arbitrary-and potentially illegal conduct-of the military that gives free reign to persons and organisations to draw their own conclusions.  
Suspects in detention without trial should be freed if there is nothing incriminating against them.
A legal process should be commenced without further delay in the case of others where there is evidence linking them to the insurgency and other crimes.