WOW! WHY ARE THE IGBO ELITE NOT SPEAKING OUT ON THE BIAFRAN ISSUE OR IN RESPECT OF THE CASE OF NNAMDI KANU?
I am really surprised to observe that the only notable people that have spoken out on the Biafran question and the detention of Kanu are Bishop Kukah and Wole Soyinka. The situation is even worse with lawyers from the Igbo ethnic group. None of the leading Igbo lawyers have uttered a word. But also, none of the leading human rights lawyers in Nigeria has uttered a word. Why?

Speaking out on the matter does not necessarily mean that you should support the separatist movement either in whole or even in part. Also, it is totally possible to oppose the movement, while recognizing that the continued detention of Kanu is wrong. For instance, I do not support Kanu's approach to the problem. But I recognize the problem. Also, I may not support separation, but I support Kanu's right to free speech. I do not believe that he violated any law by any of those things he said. I think that people should fee free to speak their minds and others should feel free to counter them with their own views. All that Nigerians need is a genuine debate on the nature of our union. It would have been nice of the Government could lead the debate. But when the Government prefers to sweep things under the carpet, the people should be free to initiate the debate.
It is not wise or helpful for the Igbo elite to keep quiet on this matter. If they oppose the separatist movement, they should come out and say so. If they support it, they should come out and say so too. The only reason, they are silent is that they are afraid. They are either afraid of what the Government may do to them and their businesses if they showed any support to the movement or what some restive Igbo youth might think of them if they opposed the movement. But that is wrong. You must be brave enough to come out and state your position.
It is by speaking out that the world would know what the majority of the Igbos and Nigerians think. It is not right to be silent and leave the rest of the country to guess where you stand. The feelings in the rest of the country today is that all the Igbos want to secede. But I know that is not the truth. Silence is dangerous and counterproductive. It does not help the country at all. It cannot solve the problem and it cannot kill the question.
For me, I have always maintained that the quest for separation is only one of the alternatives, and it is not the best of the options. But we really need to consider the other options. Keeping quiet out of fear is really not good and it hurts everybody. It hurts the entire country and it hurts the Igbos. We need to start discussing all the options, with emphasis on alternatives to separation.

Read More

Central African Republic: Progress on Special Court
More Efforts Needed to Get It Operating
– The Central African Republic transitional government, the United Nations, and donors should intensify their efforts to establish a Special Criminal Court, 23 Central African and international human rights groups said today.
In June 2015, the Central African Republic’s transitional government promulgated a law passed in April to establish a Special Criminal Court inside the national judicial system, consisting of national and international staff, to investigate and prosecute the gravest crimes committed in the country since 2003, including war crimes and crimes against humanity.
“Our organizations welcome the steps taken by the transitional government to put an end to impunity for atrocities committed in the Central African Republic, notably through the establishment of a Special Criminal Court,” the groups said. “These efforts must continue and be supported by international actors to ensure that the court envisioned on paper becomes a reality as quickly as possible.”
Despite a difficult security situation, the Central African authorities have taken some first steps to establish the court. The government has, among other measures, selected and made available a building to enable the first investigative and prosecutorial activities of the court. It has prepared some of the decrees required for the court to function, and developed job descriptions for recruiting the court’s future staff. The UN has continued to support this process, notably by sending a team of experts to assess the logistical and financial needs of the court, and by preparing a project plan to support the establishment of the court.
Public civil society letter on the Special Criminal Court in the Central African Republic
Grave human rights violations are still being committed in the Central African Republic. Nongovernmental organizations recently documented more than 100 killings, as well as the destruction of vital infrastructure and 20 cases of sexual assault in the course of sectarian violence that has shaken Bangui since the end of September. These figures most likely represent only a fraction of the grave crimes that have been committed with total impunity in the Central African Republic.
The Central African justice system is still too weak to investigate and prosecute such crimes. This is why the Special Criminal Court has a leading role to play in the fight against impunity in the Central African Republic, the groups said.
Presidential and parliamentary elections in the Central African Republic are slated for December 27, 2015, with a possible second round planned January 31, 2016, if no candidate receives a majority of the votes. Many local human rights organizations fear a new wave of violence around the elections.
“It is urgent that the Special Criminal Court be up and running to try these crimes and to clearly signal that abuses of this kind will no longer be tolerated,” the groups said.
The effective operationalization of the court will only be possible if the Central African authorities have the means and opportunity to assume full ownership over it and take increased leadership in establishing it.
In this regard, an existing steering committee could play a key role in developing a common vision of the Special Criminal Court and guiding all measures required to get the court up and running, including, but not limited to, the recruitment of personnel. The steering committee includes the transitional government, the UN, and some international partners. It should meet regularly, the groups said.
The court’s provisional budget should be quickly finalized so the search for funding can begin, the groups said. For the court to succeed it will also be essential to recruit international experts with proven experience prosecuting grave international crimes, who are willing to work closely with their national counterparts. Donors should begin to mobilize the funds and technical support essential for the court’s effective operation.
The fight against impunity for grave crimes committed in the Central African Republic, and cooperation with the International Criminal Court (ICC), must stay firmly on the agenda of the future government and of international partners who support peace and the rule of law in the country, the groups said.
The ICC is also conducting investigations in the Central African Republic but will most likely only prosecute a few suspects. The ICC is complementary to the national judicial system and the Special Criminal Court.
“It is clear that justice for the grave crimes committed in the Central African Republic is an essential building block for durable peace in the nation,” the groups said. “Financial and logistical support for the Special Criminal Court is both an indispensable investment in the future and a moral duty toward victims who have suffered so much.”
- Human Rights Watch
                          
                     
                                                              

Read More

In South Sudan’s Brutal Chaos, Civilians in the Middle

In South Sudan's Brutal Chaos, Civilians in the Middle

"I'm lucky to be alive," Mary Nyandio, mother of six, told me, one recent morning in Nyal, a rebel-held town in southern Unity state, now home to tens of thousands of people internally displaced by brutal government-led attacks. Seated on a mat under a tree, she described how soldiers had captured her and about 20 other women, forced them to walk for hours carrying looted goods, then raped many of them, eventually setting them free. "We were abducted to be killed but some soldiers said let's just rape them."

Her experience is shockingly common, especially in Unity state, where ethnic Nuer sub-clans are now being pitted against one another -- as they were during Sudan's long-running civil war in the '90s-- in a terrible cycle of state-sponsored violence.

South Sudan's current war, which started in December 2013 over a political feud between president Salva Kiir, a Dinka, and former vice president Riek Machar, a Nuer, has been especially brutal, marked by ethnic targeting and massacres and widespread use of child soldiers. It has driven more than two million people from their homes, with 180,000 still in squalid UN compounds across the country.

Despite a peace deal signed in August, the Unity conflict, which began with a massive government offensive that started in April, has morphed into smaller attacks and counter-attacks. Government forces--who led the offensive in the spring—more often play a secondary role to armed youth in tracksuits. But the ongoing attacks continue to brutalize civilians and drive them from island to swampy island in search of safety and food.

Back in Juba, the bustling capital now wracked by soaring inflation and crime rates, nearly everyone I met earlier this month was pessimistic and on edge. The long-awaited opposition delegation finally arrived this week, but many still fear the resumption of major hostilities given the string of violent incidents and ongoing attacks since the peace was signed. If they are right, South Sudan could yet be plunged into another long and desperate war with untold human rights abuses and humanitarian costs, from which warlords and weapons traders will be the main beneficiaries.

When I visited Nyal in the first week of December, people were still arriving in dugout canoes, hungry and traumatized. Most had been attacked many times, even in places where they had fled seeking safety. "We hid in the grass with our nose just above the water," recalled a pastor from Mayendit, who took his family to an island where there were multiple attacks. Community leaders alleged that in addition to the killings, rapes, destruction and looting that come with each attack, a group of 53 cattle keepers died in Leer, a government-controlled town, after locals locked them into a shipping container while looting their cattle.

Also in recent weeks, violence flared up in Western Equatoria, the pineapple state, with a string of skirmishes between disgruntled "Arrow Boys" and government forces. The area had been known for its relative calm, despite the scourge of attacks by Lord's Resistance Army rebels in past years. The government's response to the threat, including deploying commandos and helicopter gunships, has, as elsewhere, reportedly led to serious violations such as unlawful killing of civilians and destruction of civilian property, displacing tens of thousands of people from several areas, leaders from the area told me.

In the Bahr al Ghazal region, where government and suspected rebels fought outside Wau town in early December, the governor recently arrested 14 civil society members for signing a petition critical of army abuses of civilians. Oil-rich Upper Nile state also remains a flashpoint for more fighting and attacks on civilians.

President Kiir's increasingly repressive and dictatorial style is salt to an open wound. Security officials have repeatedly cracked down on media, detained journalists, critics, and suspected opponents across the country, further polarizing society. UN officials and public intellectuals have been expelled and publicly chastised for insinuating criticism. The ruling elite, now influenced by the Dinka Jieng Council of Elders, is intent on carving up the country into 28 states through barely concealed gerrymandering that has embittered other ethnic groups.

South Sudan's leaders have the power to stop the suffering. Even as they haggle over their deal, they should immediately and publicly condemn abuses everywhere, investigate the allegations, and should stop aggravating local tensions with heavy-handed tactics and repression. Even with the opposition delegation in Juba, violence and abuses against civilians by both sides could continue. A long-overdue UN arms embargo, which the African Union has sought to prevent yet more weapons from entering the country, should still be imposed. It won't end the atrocities, but it could slow down an escalation and reduce senseless attacks on civilians.

- Jehanne Henry is a senior Africa researcher at Human Rights Watch

Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone, powered by Easyblaze

Read More

Rwanda: International Tribunal Closing Its Doors
Governments Should Bring Remaining Genocide Suspects to Justice
– The formal closure of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda on December 31, 2015, makes it especially important for governments around the world to intensify efforts to bring remaining suspects to justice.
On December 14, the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) delivered its final judgment on appeal in the case against former Minister of Family and Women’s Development Pauline Nyiramasuhuko and five co-accused. Nyiramasuhuko was the first woman convicted of genocide by an international court. The court found her guilty of rape, among other crimes. The Appeals Chamber upheld convictions for most of the charges against Nyiramasuhuko, her son Arsène Ntahobali, and four local government officials, but lowered the prison sentences for all six defendants.
“The creation of the ICTR was an extraordinary evolution in the international response to serious and widespread human rights violations,” said Geraldine Mattioli-Zeltner, international justice advocacy director at Human Rights Watch. “It signalled that all serious crimes, whoever commits them and wherever they are committed, should be prosecuted and tried.”
In another significant development in December, Congolese officials arrested Ladislas Ntaganzwa in the Democratic Republic of Congo. The ICTR indicted Ntaganzwa – the former mayor of Nyakizu, in southern Rwanda – for genocide, incitement to commit genocide, and crimes against humanity, and transferred his case in 2012 to Rwanda for trial. He is currently detained in the Congolese capital, Kinshasa.
Human Rights Watch documented the Rwandan genocide in detail and has closely monitored the functioning of the ICTR since its creation. Alison Des Forges, senior adviser to the Human Rights Watch Africa division for almost two decades, published the authoritative account of the Rwandan genocide, “Leave None to Tell the Story,” and appeared as an expert witness in eleven ICTR trials.
The ICTR was created by the United Nations Security Council in 1994 in response to the genocide in Rwanda. Its mission was to prosecute those responsible for genocide and other serious violations of international humanitarian law committed in Rwanda or by Rwandan citizens in neighboring countries between January 1, 1994 and December 31, 1994. It was expected to try mostly high-level suspects and those who played a leading role in the genocide.
The ICTR has tried and convicted several prominent figures, including former Prime Minister Jean Kambanda; the former army chief of staff, General Augustin Bizimungu; and the former Defense Ministry chief of staff, Colonel Théoneste Bagosora. It indicted 93 people, sentenced 61, and acquitted 14, contributing in an unprecedented way to establishing the truth on the organization of the genocide in Rwanda and providing justice to victims.
The ICTR also established important jurisprudence in international criminal law and served as a precedent for the creation of the International Criminal Court, whose founding treaty was adopted in Rome in 1998.
However, the tribunal has had inherent limitations and attracted criticism, particularly from Rwandans. At the tribunal’s closing event, on December 1, the Rwandan justice minister, Johnston Busingye, reiterated the government’s criticisms of the lack of reparation for victims and the tribunal’s location outside Rwanda, and complained that genocide convicts were allowed to speak to the media. Others have criticized the relatively small number of cases the tribunal has handled and its high operating cost, as well as its bureaucratic processes and the length of time trials have taken.
Perhaps the ICTR’s most significant failure, Human Rights Watch said, has been its unwillingness to prosecute war crimes and crimes against humanity committed in 1994 by the Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF), the rebel group that ended the genocide and has been Rwanda’s ruling party ever since. As they took over the country in 1994, RPF troops killed thousands of predominantly Hutu civilians. Though the scale and nature of these killings were not equivalent or comparable to the genocide, the victims and their families also have the right to justice. Although the ICTR had a clear mandate to prosecute these crimes, not a single RPF case has been brought before the ICTR for prosecution.
Parallel with the work of the ICTR, the Rwandan justice system tried an impressive number of genocide suspects, both in conventional domestic courts and in local, community-based gacaca courts. The standards of these trials have varied enormously. Instances of political interference and pressure resulted in a number of unfair trials. Other cases have shown greater respect for due process.
Trials of Rwandan genocide suspects have also taken place in the domestic courts of several other countries, including Belgium, Switzerland, Germany, Canada, Finland, Norway, Sweden, the Netherlands, and France.
In some of these countries, such as France – which had backed the former government of Rwanda and supported some of the forces that went on to commit genocide – many years elapsed before trials began. The first trial in France – of Pascal Simbikangwa, a former member of the Rwandan intelligence services – took place in 2014, following the creation of a national war crimes unit.
The ICTR referred two cases to France. One was for Laurent Bucyiabaruta, who was arrested and released in 2000 by the French authorities, and rearrested in 2007 under an international arrest warrant issued by the ICTR. He is currently detained in Paris. The other, against Wenceslas Munyeshyaka, a priest accused of genocide and crimes against humanity, was dismissed on October 2, 2015, by a French court, citing a lack of sufficient evidence.
The ICTR has referred other cases to Rwanda, including those of Jean-Bosco Uwinkindi, in 2011, and of Bernard Munyagishari, in 2012. Their trials in Rwanda have not yet concluded. The ICTR also referred to Rwanda the cases of six fugitives: Ladislas Ntaganzwa, three other local officials, a military officer, and a businessman.
To obtain the transfer of cases from the ICTR, the Rwandan government undertook legislative reforms aimed at meeting international fair trial standards. Some of these have been important and positive – for example, the abolition of the death penalty in 2007. The ICTR agreed to transfer cases to Rwanda for domestic prosecution in 2011 after further reforms.
“Human Rights Watch has documented major legal reforms in Rwanda in the last few years, but believes that the Rwandan justice system still lacks sufficient independence and that fair trials cannot be guaranteed in all cases,” Mattioli-Zeltner said. “The Rwandan authorities should ensure that judicial officials can make decisions without government interference, especially in politically sensitive cases.”
The ICTR is handing over three other cases to the Mechanism for International Criminal Tribunals. This residual mechanism takes over a number of essential functions of the ICTR and the ICTY – the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia – including appeals, retrials and review proceedings, protection of victims and witnesses, supervision of enforcement of sentences, and assistance to local jurisdictions.
Its top priority is to secure the arrest, transfer, and prosecution of eight remaining fugitives, five of whom are to be tried by Rwanda and three by the mechanism itself: former Defense Minister Augustin Bizimana, the former commander of the Presidential Guard Protais Mpiranya, and Félicien Kabuga, a businessman.
The execution of international arrest warrants has posed a major problem. Neither the ICTR nor the residual mechanism have their own police to carry out arrests and depend entirely on the cooperation of states where suspects are living.
At the ICTR’s closing event, Rwandan Justice Minister Johnston Busingye called “upon states where indicted genocide suspects are sheltering to understand that they owe a duty to humanity, and to the Rwanda victims, to ensure that those suspects are brought to justice.”
Countries should do everything in their capacity to bring remaining suspects to justice, Human Rights Watch said. The residual mechanism should continue actively searching for the eight ICTR fugitives, and countries should provide the necessary assistance and cooperation.
“Diplomatic pressure on countries where Rwandan genocide suspects are living to step up efforts to apprehend and prosecute them is of primary importance,” Mattioli-Zeltner said. “The UN Security Council should make clear that they will be held to account, wherever they may be, and that justice for the Rwandan genocide does not end with the closure of the ICTR.”
- Human Rights Watch

Read More

Military treated Buhari badly under PDP — Presidency

Military treated Buhari badly under PDP — Presidency


The Presidency on Saturday said Nigeria's military hierarchy did not treat President Muhammadu Buhari well during the tenure of Goodluck Jonathan as president of the country.

The Senior Special Assistant on Media and Publicity to the President, Mr. Garba Shehu, in a Facebook post, described the military's action as shameless.

In the run in of the March 28 presidential election, the Nigerian military claimed that it did not have the record of President Buhari's West African Examination Council result.

Reacting to online criticisms against Buhari for receiving some vehicles from the embattled ex-National Security Adviser, Sambo Dasuki, Shehu stated that the President was entitled to what he received.


"Cars are just a few in a litany of entitlements written in that law, although it is contestable to say that General Buhari had been given his due entitlements by successive administrations as provided thereunder. Regime after regime treated him as if he was not a former Head of State.

"The military in particular treated him so badly that its leaders kept silent when the PDP charged that he didn't have WAEC papers. One shameless Army Records officer said the former Head of State had no records at all under their system."

Shehu added that Buhari went without a full complement of armed guards from the Army until the April bomb attack on his convoy.

"It was at this time that the Chief of Army Staff (at that time) thought it necessary to reinstate the armed convoy to protect him. When they brought the two cars within a few days of his being bombed, the staff of the General were merely informed that this was from the Federal Government in fulfillment of its obligation to him," he said.


Copyright PUNCH.
Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone, powered by Easyblaze

Read More