By joe emenaha, qibborchambers@yahoo.com, 08061322337, 08051550365
A state of emergency is a governmental declaration which usually suspends a few normal functions of the executive, legistative and judicial powers, alert citizens to change their normal behaviours or order government agencies to implement emergency preparedness plans. It can also be used as a rationale for suspending rights and freedoms if guaranteed under the constitution. Such declarations usually come during a time of natural or man-made disaster, during periods of civil unrest or following a declaration of war or situation of international or internal armed conflict.
Rights and freedoms may be suspended during an emergency, for instance freedom of movement.
Though fairly uncommon in democracies, dictatorial regimes often declare a state of emergency that is prolonged infinitely for the life of the regime or for extended peroid of time so that derogations can be used to overide human rights of their citizens usually protected by the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).
Articles 4 of (ICCPR),permits states to derogate from certain rights guaranteed by (ICCPR) in time of public emergency.
Any measures derogating from obligations under the covenant however, must be to the extent required by the exigencies of the situation.
Indeed the power to decide initiation of the state of emergency defines sovereignty itself. The summaries of principles to be observed during a state of de-facto state of emergency are as follows: (i) principles of legality (i) proclamation (iii) notification (iv) time limitation (v) exceptional threat (vi) proportionality (vii) Non- discrimination (viii) compactibility (ix) concordance and (x) complementarity of the various norms of international law.
A state of emergency can be abused by being invoked, tor example, 10 diiuw d bicsit to support internal oppositions without having to respect human rights.
Derogations by state having ratified or acceded to binding international agreements such as the (ICCPR) the American and European conventions on Human Rights and the International Labour Conventions are monitored by independent committee, regional courts, etc.
Almost all democracies and other types of government have a constitutional provision for state of emergency.
The conditions for declaring a state of emergency are almost the same in all democracies.
Emergency constitutional provisions of France suffice. Article 16 of the French constitution of 1958, allows in time of crises an extraordinary powers to the President. Article 16, gives the head of government “extraordinary powers” in exceptional cases leading to an effective a state of exception.
The constitution provides that when the institutions of the Republic, the independence of the nation, the integrity of its territory or the fulfillment of its international commitments are under grave and immediate threat and when the proper functioning of the constitutional governmental authorities are interrupted, the President may declare a state of emergency after consultation with relevant arms of government.
It may also give the military authority, the power to act in place of civilian authorities, if a decree specifies it explicitly. The conditions are both that the state is confronted with exceptional circumstances and that the regular institutions are disrupted and cannot effectively govern. Thus the National Assembly may not be dissolved during the exercise of emergency powers; Military authorities may take police powers, if they judge it necessary. Fundamental liberties may be restricted, such as the right of association, movement and legalisation of searches of private places, etc.
In 2005, during the French civil unrest, President Jacques Chirac declared a state of emergency for 3 months. It was challenged by 74 law professors and the Green party on the ground, the state of emergency was unnecessary and compromised fundamental liberties. The challenges was thrown away by the French supreme court maintaining that the rapid spread of violence and the possibility that it could recur justified the state of emergency.
In India, there are three types of emergencies that can be declared namely; (i) National emergency (ii) State emergency and (iii) Financial emergency.
National emergency is caused by war, external aggression or armed rebellion in the whole of India or part of the territory.
In such an emergency, Fundamental Rights of Indian citizens can be suspended. It modifies the federal system of government to a unitary one.
State of emergency is declared on a failure of constitutional machinery in a state. Nearly every state in India has been under a state of emergency at one point or the other. It is commonly known as “President Rule”. During such an emergency, the President can take over the entire work of the executive and the Governo'” administrates the state in the name of President. The legislative assembly can be dissolved or remain in suspended animation in the state, when the parliament makes laws on the 66 subjects of the state list. All money bills have to be referred to the parliament for approval. In this situation, ministers (commissioners) of state legislature are not allowed to perform action in the state.
As for financial emergency, if the President is satisfied that there is an economic situation in which the financial stability or credit of India is threatened, he or she can declare financial emergency.
The President can reduce the salaries of all government officials, including judges of the Supreme Court and high courts
All money bills passed by the state legislature are submitted to the President for his approval. He can direct the state to observe certain principles (economic measures) relating to financial matters.
Having examined the basic principles and rationale behind declaration of state of emergency in some other countries other than Nigeria, the inexorable question to ask is this, “Is President Goodluck Jonathan right to declare the state of emergency in the affected states”. Secondly are members of the “Northern Elders Forum” right to oppose the declared state of emergency?
From my considered view, the President is right to declare the quasi-state of emergency in the affected state.
Though belated, it is most relevant and proper to do so. There is no doubt that the facts on the ground support, resort to Constitutional provisions and declaration of state of emergency.
Does the activities of the Islamic extremist sect, Boko Haram, since 2009 justify the imposition of state of emergency? The answer is a yawning yes.
The principles behind the sect “Jama’atul Ahlis Sunnah Lidda await WAL Jihad” popularly called Boko Haram is largely made up of people who believe in the supremacy of eastern educations or Islamic education. It is in keeping with Islamic jurisprudence that believes that there is an extent a society would develop without being corrupt, warranting the overthrow of such society. It is in keeping with Islamic worldview that believes that Islam is the only true religion and that non believers in Islam must be converted by force, necessitating the idea of Holy war “Jihad”.
Indeed in Nigeria, the introduction of Sharia in some state of North was the beginning of “official” recognition of Boko Haram sect by Muslims in Nigeria. The age long aspiration of “dipping the Koran into the Atlantic ocean in Lagos” was one of the driving forces. However, it must be stated in a true federalism, there is nothing wrong for any of its component units to decide how to be governed.
The concept of “Jihad” posits that it is an “honour” to kill an infidel. This is what is popularly referred to as “honour killing”. It is further posited that any Muslim who dies in the course of “honour killing” goes to paradise and is provided with 72 virgins. This brand of teaching was popularized during the life and times of late Yaser Arafat, which was indeed the beginning of world-wide terrorism. In some cases like in Israel and other surrounding countries, the family of the would-be suicide bomber is paid and provided for; Some families even watch in T.V and celebrate the dead of the “honour suicide killer”.
That “Boko Haram” sect is a furtherance of Islamic culture of Jihad cannot be overemphasized. The introduction of Sharia law was in the first stage.
Book Haram suicide bombing was the second decisive stage.
Since the unveiling of “Boko Haram” part of Islamisation of Nigeria, the sovereignty of Nigeria, security- wise since 2009 has been challenged.
In July 2009, the group took up arms against the Nigerian police in some states in the Northeast and held those states hostage for above five days. Many policemen were wasted until the Nigerian army was called upon to arrest the situation.
After the 2009 episode, they have changed strategy into guerrilla warfare. Since then under a new ruthless leader, Imam Abu Muhammed Abubakar bin Muhammed, popularly known as (Shekan) they have carried out deadly attacks on the Nation and made demands on the Nigerian government which inter alia include the full implementation of Sharia law in Nigeria “enshrined in holy Quran” as well as immediate release of all the members of the group who were detained and in the custody of security agencies and the prosecution of those they alleged were involved in the death of their leader during the 2009 attack.
From 2009 till date, the sect has murdered over 4000 Nigerians in cold-blood without the slightest provocation. Their attacks mainly, concentrated in the Northeastern states of Borno and Yobe, particularly in Maiduguri and Damaturu. Their targets include government officers, security agents, churches and even U.N.O headquarters in Abuja. From historical perspectives, organized violence and war have been the main method of Islamic establishing its territorial integrity and sovereignty..
One of the indices of a failed state or failing state is the inability to provide security for its citizens. In the two states, everyone is at the mercy of the Boko Haram overlords who slaughter people at will and terrorize the people. A conservative catalogue of their recent crimes include the killing of 18 hunters in Damboa early this year, the killing of late General Mohammed Shuwa in November 2012, the killing of WAEC officials, suicide attack on Borno police command headquarters in June 2012 cold blooded murder of four teachers in Maiduguri in March 2013, the killings of Indians and Chinese workers in Maiduguri and over parts of Borno State. The killings of thousands of Christians in their worship places, in buses arid in bus terminals are too numerous to mention.
That the sect has defied the authority of the federal government, and despised the sovereignty of Nigeria is not in doubt. That the sect has overt and covert support of some prominent Northern leaders is not in doubt, and that explains why at any stage, no matter the degree of destruction, the sect has supporters and defenders.
Having seen that the facts on the ground support extraordinary measures indeed state emergency actions, does the constitution of Nigeria provide for any measures to deal with such situations? The answer of course is an affirmative yes. Section 305 (1-6) of the 1999 constitution as amended’ provides for emergency measures.
Section 305 (3) specifically states that the President shall have power to issue a proclamation of a state of emergency only when (a) the federation is at war
the federation is in imminent danger of invasion or involvement in the state of war.
there is actual breakdown of public order and public safety in the federation or any part thereof to such extent as to require extraordinary measures to restore peace and security, (d) there is a clear and present danger of an actual breakdown of public order and public safety in the federation or any part thereof requiring extraordinary reasons to avert such danger, (e) there is an occurrence or imminent danger on the occurrence of any disaster or natural calamity, affecting the community or a section of the community in the federation, (f) There is any other public danger which clearly constitutes a threat to the existence of the federation or (g) The President receives a request to do so in accordance with the provisions of subjection (4) of this section.
Section 305 (4) states further that the Governor of a state may with a resolution supported by two-there majority of the House of Assembly, request the President to issue a proclamation of a state of emergency. There is existence within the state any of the situations specified in subsection (3) (c), (d) and (e) of section 305 and such situation does not extend beyond the boundaries of the state.
From the foregoings, that is from the facts on the ground and constitutional provisions, the President is well within his power to declare the quasi-state of emergency in the affected state.
This writer is of the considered view that more states qualify to come over the hammer of state of emergency for the country to enjoy wholesome peace and security.
Weighed against the breakdown of the foregoings, is the stubborn opposition of Northern Elders’ Forum to the declaration of the emergency justified? From the Islamic worldview and jurisprudence they may be justified. No doubt, the declaration of Sharia .laws in some parts of the state in the North was in tandem with Islamic agenda of Islamization of Nigeria. The incursion and unleashing of violence upon the citizens of this Nation who are not Muslims by Boko Haram sect, was in furtherance of the Islamic agenda. As rightly pointed out by “Middle Belt Dialogue” (M.B.D) Boko Haram is the military wing of Northern Islamic politicians.
That the “Boko Haram” supporters strand through the rank and file of Northerners is not surprising. It includes academicians, professionals, senators, and business moguls. The belief that the killing or wasting the life of a non-Muslim is an act of honour is at the root of the philosophy of “Boko Haram”. It should also be noted that sympathizers of Christian or non-Muslims are treated as infidels. That explains why some Muslims are attacked and killed.
This deadly virus of “honour killing” injected into the minds of youths by some acclaimed Mgllams or Islamic jurists is at the root of Islamic fundamentalism. If our
Muslim brothers really want to live in peace with other humam beings, this demonic and destructive doctrine must stopped. There must be conscious program to re-educate and re-orient the mindset of the Islamic children and youths. It should be noted that once such idea is sown and accepted in the mind of the young ones, no matter the height of educational achievement, in future, it does not change their violent mind set. This is pure indoctrination and make some scholars to posit that “religion is the opium of the masses”.
However from the nationalistic and patriotic angles, the opposition of the Northern Elders Forum is not only misplaced but misleading and unbecoming of acclaimed statemen and patriots.
That the security situation in most of the states in the North has gone beyond the management capacity of the affected state governments is not in doubt. What is surprising is that none of the Governors of these states were patriotic and bold enough to initiate the call of state of emergency in their respective states having recourse to section 305 (4) of the constitution.
From all available facts and the results so far achieved, all patriots in Nigeria should support the declaration of full state of emergency.
Any person or group or party that is against the declaration full of state of emergency in the affected states or even more states, in the interest of security of citizens of Nigeria and protection of over .territorial integrity should be branded enemies of state and treated as such.
In conclusion, if the people who are supporting “Boko Haram” or Islamization of some part of the country are patriots, they should support the current convocation of National conference of all ethnic groups where issues should be discussed in a “no hold bound” style. If “indeed, Nigeria wants to practice true federal structure, states that want sharia system of government where the majority of the citizens so desired should be allowed to do so. After all in the USA there is a state where “nudism” is allowed and practiced. But for any group or religion in Nigeria to think, they can force their views over others is an open call for war and disintegration of the country. And we pray that it cannot happen during the tenure of our President Goodluck Ebele Jonathan.
General Theophilus Danjuma (rtd) a professional coupist and a civil war veteran was right and hit the bull by the horns when he stated that Boko Haram sect and supporters have declared war upon Nigerians to greater extent than even the Biafrans.
To sum up, the President is urged to ignore ther hypocrisy and crocodile tears of the Northern Elders’ Forum as it is designed to hoodwink and misdirect him.
It must also be emphaisized that there is an ocean of difference between Niger Delta Militants and Boko Haram sect. Whereas the Niger Delta militants were fighting against environmental degradation, economic slavery,and marginalization. It also has known prominent leaders anf followers, whereas the Boko Haram is a non-descript group bent in the cold-blooded murder of any person that does not believe in Islam.
For former Head of State Major-General Buhari (rtd) to posit that Niger Delta Militants are on the same wave-lenghts with “Boko Haram” sect is indeed, unfortunate and unbecoming of a former military Head of State, who ought to know better, the depths of atrocities, the sect has unleashed on the sovereighty and security of lives and property of the citizens of this country Nigeria.
Buhari’s recent depositions during recent national and international broadcast gives credence to his Islamic fundamentalism and attests to the fact that he is ther promoter and supporter of the “Boko Haramism” in Nigeria.
From the recent increasing and deeping scale of Boko Haram operations in the North-East geo-political zone coupled with military assistance and encouragement by the Camerounian government, there is an imperative need for the president to take full emergency measures in the affected areas with the concomitant consequence of full military, take over and suspension of all civilan political structures. Except hard decisive measures are taken against the terrorists, they may become bolder and more dangerous and even dream of territorial conquest, occupation and expansion.
