6 hours Ago By Monday Eze
The Ndi Igbo of Eastern Nigeria have a proverb which states that: “Iro di n’ulo di ka agwo abali isi, onweghi onye mara ebe odebere isi”. This proverb when translated means that the enemies within are like the night snake, no one knows where it is headed. This typically describes the scenario within President Bola Tinubu’s administration.
So far, the greatest challenge of the Tinubu presidency is not any of Mr. Peter Obi or Alhaji Atiku Abubakar who were the two main opposition candidates who contested against President Tinubu in the 2023 Nigerian presidential election. In the same way, rights activists like Omoyele Sowore, Prof.
Chidi Odinkalu, Dr. Sam Amadi and others who criticise some policies and programmes of the federal and state governments are not the problem of President Tinubu’s administration. Media activists like Mr.
Oseni Rufai, Seun Akimbaloye, Dr. Reuben Abati et cetera who point the Tinubu presidency to the verified needs of the people of Nigeria cannot be said to constitute the problems of the Tinubu administration. To be precise, the above-mentioned persons and others who fall into those categories are merely acting within the precincts of their respective democratic rights for the good of the country.
This is enough to say that President Tinubu (GCFR) should stop looking outside his government for the causes of the challenges which his administration is currently having. The real ‘enemies’ of the Jagaban presidency are within the government and even inside Aso Rock and they are easily identifiable by the avoidable crises they create for the administration from time to time. The recent arraignment of 43 persons including minors before the court on charges of treason by the Nigeria Police and other officials of the Tinubu administration is one example of the several acts of bad faith intended to embarrass the Tinubu presidency by insiders in his administration.
In Nigeria, the offence of treason is defined under the Criminal Code Act, Cap C38, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004. How can a 15-year-old rustic minor who might not be able to differentiate an ordinary banner from a flag be arraigned in an open court for treason without any protection for his identity? What happened to the juvenile courts in Nigeria especially when the prosecutors indicated on the charge sheet that suspect no. 40 was aged 15? Is it not embarrassingly fallacious and incredible for Nigerian security agencies to tell the world that those haggard looking and despondent creatures they arraigned before the court were the planners and executors of the August 2024 protests? Section 40 of the Criminal Code Act defines treasonable felony as: “Any person who: levies war against Nigeria or assists in such warfare; attempts to overthrow the government or instigates rebellion; aids or supports external enemies; engages in treasonous activities.
” From the foregoing, the key elements or ingredients of the offence of treasonable felony which the prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt include but are not limited to intent to overthrow or harm the government, actions or support for external enemies, participation in treasonous activities. According to the prosecution, the proof of evidence available to them in the matter included statements of the 43 suspects or defendants, Nigerian Army’s letter on the arrest of the protesters with Russian flags and their names to Area Command, Nigeria Police, Zaria dated August 5, 2024, 76 Russian flags; two fire extinguishers, one first aid box, two prepaid meters, a bag containing aluminium pipes, two pipes service wire and one flash drive on statements of suspects and scene of crime. It is clear that the prosecution has nothing to establish any of the afforested key elements or ingredients of the charge it had preferred on the minors.
First, the intention of the minors in getting involved in the August 2024 protests was to “End bad governance in Nigeria” and it was clearly stated before, during and after the protests. They had no intention, not to talk of the capacity, to “overthrow or harm” the government. The second point is that granted that the minors were alleged to be holding Russian flags, Russia is not at war with Nigeria and cannot be said to be enemies of the nation.
So, the actions of the minors in holding Russian flags were not “actions or support for external enemies”. Above all, notwithstanding that the actions of the minors could be mischievously stretched into the precincts of the ‘actus reus’ of the offence of treason, the prosecution lacked any evidence of means are in the suspects. Like we know, except for strict liability offences, mens rea is a fundamental requirement for grounding criminal charges! Some pundits suspect that operatives of the Nigerian security agencies and the prosecution in this matter conspired to embarrass the Tinubu administration for the obvious reasons that they, the security operatives, who are also victims of bad governance, could have participated in the “End Bad Governance” protests if not for regimental constraints.
Speculations hold that both the operatives and the prosecution chose to vent their support for the August 2024 protest by creating a national embarrassment out of the prosecution of the suspected protesters as a way of drawing the attention of the government to the hardship all over the country. It is clear that both the Federal Government and President Bola Tinubu were truly embarrassed by the handling of the suspected minors. If 15-year-old children are interested in overthrowing the government of their country, then such a government needs a thorough self-examination and immediate positive adjustments of its programmes and policies.
On their own part, such children, upon arrest, should be taken to reformatories and not exposed to criminal prosecution. In all, it is the desire of this piece that beyond the unconditional release of those children as rightly ordered by President Tinubu, those children who have allegedly been tortured and detained under inhumane conditions for close to a quarter of a year should be thoroughly rehabilitated. President Tinubu should not miss the lesson from this development.
He should make radical adjustments in his economic and agricultural policies to address the hunger and hardship in the land because it is difficult for any given citizenry to support any administration with empty stomachs..
