ZARIA MILITARY- SHI'ITE ISLAMIC SECT CLASH; A CALL FOR JUSTICE

The crisis in Zaria between the shi’ite Islamic sect/movement and the Nigerian army escorting the motor Cade of the Chief of Army Staff which led to the loss of scores of lives of the members of the sect demands a very close attention from the government. Life is sacred and the protection of it should be on top of the agenda of any responsible government. The wanton, indiscrimate or illegal denial of it is an aberration to the sound democratic principle and a blatant disregard of the sanctity of life which should be of concern to everybody notwithstanding tribe or color. Violence in its entirety should be managed and curtailed before it becomes full blown. Like a wild fire, violence if not carefully managed can systematically spread beyond its origin, its smoke can unpredictable cause havoc on great number of people. Though there were disparity on the numbers of lives lost quoted by media but certainly, there were casualties as a result of the clash. The Nigeria Army spokes man Sani Usman, gave their own reason why they had to open fire, that ‘the Shite members barricaded the road Mr. Buratai’s motorcade was passing to pay homage on the Emir of Zazzau, and also to attend a review parade by 73 Regular Recruit Intake at the Nigerian Army Depot in Zaria; that the sect numbering hundreds carrying dangerous weapons barricaded the roads with bonfires, heavy stones and tyres. He further added that all attempt to pacify them prove abortive and they (the sect) started firing and pelting the convoy with stones and dangerous weapon. He further added that the troops responsible for the safety and security of the Chief of Army Staff on hearing explosion and firing were left with no choice than to defend him and the convoy at all cost as well as open up the barricaded road for law abiding citizens. On the other hand, the leader of the sect El-zakzaky gave his story that the members of the movement who were unarmed were gathered for a ceremony at their Husainiyyah base to change the flag on the dome of the building to herald the beginning of the month of Rabiul /Auwal- the birth month of the Prophet of Islam, Prophet Muhammad, dismissing the claim of the spokes man of the Nigerian Army. The two diametrically opposed stories have led to situation of ‘your word against mine’ in need of a thorough investigation to uncover the truth of the incident. Looking into the reason given by the Army spokes man and the plausibility thereof and the sharp conclusion of the Army spokesman that the barricaded act of the sect was a deliberate attempt of the sect on chief of defense staff, Buratai’s life raises a question of a fore knowledge on the part of Army spokesman on the attack but did not give any reason(s) or motive why the leader of the shi’ite sect want Buratai dead. The Army spokesman in defense of their brutal act made mention of the Rules of Engagement and code of conduct. Section 217 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) enabled, established and gives power to the armed forces. particularly, paragraph (c) of section 217 (2) provides that Nigeria’s armed forces shall suppress insurrection and act in aid of civil authority to restore order when called upon to do so by the President, Commander-in-Chief. As a follow up Section (8) (1) and (3) of the Armed Forces Act, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, (LFN) 2004 permits the military to use necessary force to quell crisis resulting in deaths, injury and damages to property. From the above section one could deduce that lethal force should be the very last resort, it should not be employed if the treat to life or injury as a result of crisis is not imminent, direct or immediate or in extreme cases if death has not resulted from crisis. As for the property, any damage or destruction to property as a result of crisis that does not occasion or carry with it the likelihood of risk to or lost of life should not encourage the use of maximum force. The spokesmen of the army would have done a beautiful job at convincing Nigerians about their side of the story if they had presented a car dented or pierced with bullets or a broken wind screen as a result of the heavy stones and weapons thrown at them to crystallize their point. I want to believe there are so many ways trained military men can disperse angry mob or rioters without necessarily using lethal force against them. “It is inexcusable for troops to stand aside and watch the security situation deteriorate leading to loss of lives or damage to property without intervening. Such intervention should, however, be based strictly on sound judgment and within the ambit of the code of conduct for internal security (IS) Operations while exhibiting good professional ethics”. This is the word of the Army spokes person himself, Colonel S.k Usman when speaking about the responsibilities of the Nigerian Army in Conjunction with police force in the protection of lives and properties within the country. In the instant case, there were no wounded army or casualties recorded before the army open fire on the angry mob who supposedly wanted to assassinate the chief of Army staff. Furthermore, one of the cardinal principle of rules of engagement reads, “The principle of minimum force and proportionality must be applied at all times; whenever operational situation permits, every reasonable effort shall be made to control the situation through measures short of using force, including personal contact and negotiations; the use of lethal force shall only be resorted to if all other means to control the situation have failed or in case of unexpected attack or suspected Improvised Explosive Device (IED) attack during which a delay could lead to loss of life or serious injury to personnel; and that any force applied must be limited in its intensity and duration; it must also be commensurate with the level of threat posed”. From the above, a high level of discipline is expected from the military men and part of that discipline is to be patience and not to resort to lethal force without first exploring all other avenue. Once again, taking the story of the army spokes man in the light of the above principle of the military code of rules of engagement and conduct for internal security, the reason why they had to open fire at the Shi’ite sect is untenable, and an abundance of irresponsibility on their part and a total lack of professionalism. Even if in true the army sought to dialogue their way through but the mob rejected, the extent of the army’s resistance should have been proportional or be commensurate with that of the sect not over and above it. The story of the army spokesman that after the sect refused every entreaty they started to fire and that they heard an explosion which necessitated retaliation on their part does not hold any water. In line with the laid down principles of rules of engagement, the military has failed here because hearing a gunshot or explosion is never an avenue to fire upon civilians until and unless the guns were pointed and fired at them. In extreme cases the military must have recorded some casualties before retaliating. As I have mentioned above, the lack of any mutilated body of any military man escorting the chief of army staff or a destroyed property occasioning risk to life does not support the claim of the army spokesperson. Be that as it may, even if we want to argue that the sect had harmful weapons and they were willing to use it against the motor Cade of the chief of army staff, it is unspeakable and the height of lawlessness for the army to kill over one hundred lives because of threat to one life. As if the scene massacre is not enough, the pursuit of the life of the sect leader who was not at the scene of the incidence and the killing of his family is barbaric and condemnable act not belonging to modern society. On the other hand, the story presented by the leader of the Islamic that the movement were gathered in a celebrative mood at their Husainiyyah base, to change the flag on the dome of the building to herald the beginning of the month of Rabiul /Auwal- the birth month of the Prophet of Islam, Prophet Muhammad coincided with the advent of the new month on the day of the incident. if the sect had being in possession of the weapon claimed by the escort of the chief of army staff and if they had barricaded the road as claimed also, it simply means they were battle ready and wanted to carry out their insidious plan they had etched and when the military fired at them they would have retaliated in equal measure, but the story of the army spokesman lack retaliatory action by the sect when they fired upon them. In a democratic society like ours rule of law prevails, not rule of force; there is equality of everybody under the law. Any democratic nation that allows this kind of terror reign supreme will in no time disintegrate into chaos. Justice must not only be done, it must be seen to be done. In fact it must be made public for the whole world to see. This is the only way the families of the victims and the movement all over the world can be appeased of not resorting to any retaliatory move which may affect Nigeria in a most unpleasant way. The existing wound of Boko Haram ungodly act still strike terror into the core of our existence. This is why it is imperative for the government of Nigeria to make sure justice is adequately served because the lack of it thereof may breed another fertile ground for violence on the side of the victim’s family or the sect which may be akin to the present Boko Haram carnage visited on the people of Nigeria. Already, they have sympathizers in Iran, Iraq, Bahrain and Indonesi who have signified interest in the incident through different diplomatic channels; some have started protest with regards what happened in Zaria while others are patiently waiting for the outcome of the federal Government on the matter. It is imperative for the Buhari led administration to get to the root of this matter and bring those guilty to book so as to prevent the imminent consequences of lack of justice from the sects’ sympathizers. WE DEMAND JUSTICE ON BEHALF OF THE VICTIMS OF THE ZARIA CLASH BETWEEN THE MILITARY AND THE SHI’ITE ISLAMIC SECT. S.A ADEOGUN ESQ