THE violent confrontation between Nigerian Army troops and the Islamic Shi’ite sect in Zaria, Kaduna State, will, if not properly handled, have far-reaching repercussions with an unpredictable end. Two issues are immediately raised by the bloodletting: one is lawlessness in the name of religion and, the other, the appropriate response of the security forces to lightly armed hostile civilians.
The Muhammadu Buhari government will need to act with firmness, even-handedness and foresight to douse tension and set a template for future engagements. Our security agencies must be trained on how to restore order when faced with violent and criminal behaviour by protesters.
According to the Army’s version of the episode, the convoy of the Chief of Army Staff, Tukur Burutai, was prevented from passing through the Zaria-Kaduna Highway on its way back from the graduation of new recruits at the Nigerian Army Depot, Zaria.
A video footage that has since gone viral on social network sites shows the black-clad Shiites blocking the road, some brandishing machetes, swords and sticks, arguing vociferously with senior Army officers, who tried in vain to reason with them to clear the road to allow the Army chief’s entourage a passage.
The Army spokesman alleged that troops saw the Shiites encircling Burutai’s position and interpreted this as an attempt to assassinate him. At this stage, the security detail forced its way through the Shiite throng. Perhaps because of the video evidence, the Islamic Movement of Nigeria, as the official name of the Shi’ites goes, has not disputed that it occupied the highway.
What it disputes are the military’s subsequent counter-attack on its Zaria headquarters, the homes and business premises of its members and the number of casualties.
Human rights bodies say that the military killed scores when it attacked the Shiite stronghold in Zaria. While the Army has reported seven persons killed in the fracas, activists say the number ranged from 40 to 100.
Shi’ites allege that two sons of their controversial leader, Ibrahim El-Zakzaky, were also killed, though their figures of over 1,000 killed have not been independently verified.
Viewed dispassionately, the Shiites were treading a familiar, lawless and provocative path. Since El-Zakzaky birthed the Shiite sect in the late 1970s, the group has shown scant regard either for the rights of others or the laws of the land. Frequent clashes with law enforcement agents have defined its trajectory in Nigeria.
Its frequent street processions, which it calls Muzaharats, or “political” activity that involves mass demonstrations against or for national and international issues that are of concern to Muslims, as well as in “solidarity with Palestinians and Iraqis,” sometimes end in violence.
During these demonstrations, they partly or fully block roads, obstruct other road users and violently confront law enforcement agents. Some are armed. In one confrontation with soldiers in July 2014, two of El-Zakzaky’s sons were among several persons reportedly killed. A well-known Islamic cleric, Mahmud Gumi, publicly rebuked El-Zakzaky a year ago for blocking the Kano-Zaria highway for several hours and urged the Shiites to respect other Nigerians and the law.
Religious rascality and lawlessness must be brought to an end in the country. We agree with the Kaduna State Governor, Nasir el-Rufai, that no one should henceforth be allowed a free rein for lawlessness in the name of religion as the Shiites have done for over three decades.
In a broadcast, a furious el-Rufai recalled how the IMN had been creating tension in the state such as attacking Gabari village where three persons died; illegally occupying highways and schools for four days; erecting illegal structures in defiance of explicit disapproval by state authorities; and staging violent disturbances in parts of the state using Molotov cocktails (improvised petrol bombs) and other offensive weapons.
He said, “Government also received reports that IMN acted like a parallel state, with total disdain for the formal structures of the Nigerian state and little regard for the rights of non-members.”
While all stakeholders should rally behind the judicial enquiry the state is setting up for “a factual, authoritative account” of the tragedy, we urge the military authorities to conduct an in-house enquiry on the amount of force deployed. The excessive use of force by the military should be curbed.
The force deployed when troops later raided the HQ and homes of IMN members was heavy-handed and vengeful. The military should review its rules of engagement in internal security operations. As experts in the management of violence, self-restraint should differentiate a disciplined military force from militias and graduates of military academies from warlords.
In civilised societies, security agencies employ non-lethal means, including water cannons and tear gas, to disperse protesters, not firearms and bullets.
Yet, the continued misuse of religion to create disharmony and oppress others has become prevalent in many Northern states. While the constitutional right to hold a peaceful public assembly has been affirmed by a subsisting Court of Appeal judgement, no one has a right to infringe on the right of others to peaceful pursuits.
This episode should be the last time the Shiites or any other group is allowed to deny others the right of movement.
The Northern state governors who met to call for restraint should remember that their unconstitutional sponsorship of religious activities, including the adoption of penal aspects of Sharia law in 12 states, emboldens groups like IMN and Boko Haram to seek to take their own interpretations of religious law to a higher level, where the authority of the state is rejected and violence becomes a route to that false “utopia.”
The Nigerian state should have a common-sense approach towards religion. Religious extremists in the North had been treated with kid gloves in the past, thereby fostering a culture of sectarian impunity. Many who staged the brutal Maitatsine uprising in Kano, Bauchi and the Bulumkutu riots in Maiduguri, Borno State, in the 1980s, save for their leaders, were not diligently prosecuted.
Since 1986, zealots have repeatedly rampaged through Northern states, with the traditional and political elite adopting a benign attitude. A planned crusade by German Christian evangelist, Reinhard Bonnke, was pre-empted by sectarian riots; another plan to host the Miss World Beauty Pageant in Kaduna was similarly aborted by murderous fanatics. On each occasion, prominent northern voices appeared to make excuses for the murderers.
State-sponsored Hisbah units continue to brazenly violate the rights of citizens to choose their lifestyle. These are inspirations for lawless groups operating outside the law in the name of religion.
The security agencies should probe the Iranian connection and financing of IMN and other groups in Nigeria. Nigeria should no longer be a dumping ground for incendiary religious literature, funding and indoctrination. The Foreign Affairs Ministry should have a robust response to the blatant interference in Nigeria’s internal affairs by the Iranian government.
The fear that a new terrorism front could be opened by El-Zakzaky’s followers is real. The initial denial of access by his family and lawyers to the detained IMN leader is wrong. No one has a right under the law to deny access to a detainee by his family and lawyer. He and other detainees should be arraigned in court or released in accordance with the Constitution.
The federal and Kaduna State governments should handle this issue with tact and firmness and all those who have broken the law should be swiftly brought to justice.(Punch)
Linda Ugwuye Ayade liked this on Facebook.