President Muhammadu Buhari and the Federal Government have been told not to stay aloof and watch the alleged ongoing genocide in the English speaking part of Cameron. Already about 35,000 people from Southern Cameroon are said to be taking refuge in Cross River State which shares boundary with Cameroon. This is as a Community leader from Southern Cameroun who lives in the United States, Edwin Ngang, said that the political elite from the Southern Cameroun have been cowed by the government of the country.

 A group of people under the aegis of Nigerian Ambazonian Sovereignty Recognition Society, NASORES, explained that Cameron had been encroaching on the Nigerian territory in Boki axis of Cross River State after taking over Bakassi Peninsula. National Director of NOSORES, Hon. Cletus Obun said that timely intervention of President Buhari would be of tremendous relieve to Nigeria that is sorrounded by Franco-phone countries.

Obun, who was a former member of Cross River State House of Assembly representing Boki State Constituency said, “The targeted aim of shrinking the Nigerian territory is too painful and must not be allowed. “We will not stand aloof and watch people who are much in our image be maltreated, dehumnised and annihilated.” He called on the Federal Government “to campaign for the permanent solution to the problems of the indigenous minority English- speaking peoples of Cameroun by calling for an exclusive referendum on the choices of restoring their independence as Ambazonians or staying as Camerounians.

“To campaign for an “international peace-keeping force” to enforce NASORES’ call for an immediate cessation of hostilities between the Cameroun armed forces and the Amba fighters. “To plead that the Federal Government of Nigeria return to playing its natural role of peace making through conflict preemption and prevention not only in the Gulf of Guinea region; where its own immediate security is being threatened but in the rest of Africa by invoking the principle of territoriality. “To encourage Nigeria that now braced by this sacred jurisprudence of the principle of territoriality that is acknowledged Byau constitutive charter article 4(b), and by “the threat to peace” clause in United Nations charter article 51 and by its global commitment in the 2005 UN “responsibility to protect” (r2p), a unilateral intervention by the federal government will be the right thing to do since it will stop the ongoing war and its accompanying targeted genocide of the English-speaking peoples of Cameroun.”

He recalled with dismay the judgment that ceded Bakassi to Cameroon, adding,”we considered the known and surreptitious politics surrounding the so-called World Court judgment on Bakassi Peninsular and the consequent Green Tree Agreement. Neither Nigeria nor the people of Ambazonia find solace in this.” Continuing, he said, “I am sure that you are aware of the socio-political and economic storm raging over Southern Cameroun. Peaceful demonstrations demanding for a free and independent State have been met by repressive reprisals.

 “Now, the government of President Paul Biya in Northern Cameroun has, in the bid to asphyxiate the bourgeoning demand for the Republic of Ambazonia, a part successor to the “Federal United Cameroon Republics, resorted to mass arrest, annihilation of perceived champions of the struggle, pogroms in small enclaves, graduated to full scale genocide since 2017 against the patient, oppressed and deprived people of Ambazonia. “To the uninformed, this blood-strewn canvass for sovereignty appears distant, faint and inconsequential. But to any Nigerian patriot and for anyone with inbuilt sensors to see beyond today, the conflict in South Cameroun should naturally grip attention, arrest focus and prick conscience. “It is even more pragmatic for Nigeria and Nigerians to look not only with a sense of human sympathy at the trails of the Ambazonian people but must search again with filial-feeling drawing on the sense of nostalgia, as to how things were, before we arrived at the current separateness occasioned by pencils drawn over cardboard sheets by the colonial authorities and the regrettable misfortune that was the February 11, 1961 so-called referendum.

“The time has come to call on the international community to discard the blanket of silence woven over Southern Cameroun while the region is on a wild loop of fire. It is time to speak up and let the various treaties, convention and accords binding on the member-countries of the United Nations begin to take their cause. “And we count that Nigerian authorities take this great and honourable leap not just as the giant of Africa but a direct beneficiary of a peaceful and quickest resolution of the conflict.

“This could be seen in the refugee burden that Nigerian is bearing and the peace initiatives she will be forced into, if the Ambazonia war independence flies to heights unimagined. We recall what Nigeria lost in men and material to the conflicts in Liberia, Sierra Leone, Congo now in Burkina Faso, and elsewhere in the world “Historically, the people being beaten, maimed and killed by the government of Cameroun were once affiliates of Nigeria. These were citizens of the British-administered Cameroun. They had representatives at the Eastern Nigeria House of Assembly and parliamentarians from there were among the best you could anywhere in the world at that time.

“Through the manipulation of an uninformed elite and the lukewarm attitude of some Nigerian leaders at that time, this key territory was allowed to slip off the radar of Nigeria. By a small margin, the British-administered Cameroun voted to merge with other parts of Cameroun. “That political marriage has not worked. The north has been and continues to constitute a wobbling cog in the progressive ambition of Southern Cameroun. What the departure of British-administered simply meant that Nigeria was stripped of any neighbor with a cultural and linguistic similarity.

“You are aware that our nation is surrounded by Francophone nations, who sometimes even conspire against issues of security and trans-global diplomacy. While Ambazonia can no longer be a full part of Nigeria as it was in the past, the possibility having a closer ally in aspects of economy, diplomacy, cultural ties and reliable proximity to one looking after the other, is too titillating to be ignored. “Any effort in the direction goes to fulfill the dreams of nationalists like Chief Obafemi Awolowo who saw a possibility in Nigeria flaunting her strength across West Africa not only in the way she settles conflicts but also in extension of her economic and cultural propensities to her immediate neighbours. Let me say the formation of Nigerian- Ambazonian Sovereignty Recognition Society, is preceded by the creation of a similar organization through what has now been internationally dubbed the Calabar Declaration.

“The “Ambazonian Liberation Movement” (ALIM) of Nigeria is a brainchild of the indigenous people of Nigeria of the Bakassi extraction and who continue to draw sympathy from a large spectrum across the Nigerian society. It is needless to stress how, Nigerians who hassled, chassed and pushed out of the ancestral homes following the ill-fated judgment which ceded wholesome Nigerian territory to Cameroun. “Many of our kindred are in refugee camps, other are roofless, in squalor and with no sense of dignifying living because the government of Cameroun regards and treats them as adversaries or intruders. ” This is a major determinant in our decision to take up the gauntlet and plead with our countrymen and women to see the war in Southern Cameroun as ours to win through Diplomacy of Necessity while discarding the lies fueled through the tunnels of deceit, cover-up and crass intimidation.”

 Also briefing Edwin Ngang said: ”It is terrible and so sad that these wounds have resurfaced, but I fear it was always going to be thus with the exclusion of the English-speaking minority from the affairs of state. ”The only practical solution, from a distance, is a political settlement with either a United Nations or African Union peace-keeping contingent being placed on the ground to enable an immediate cessation of violence, ensuring a humanitarian protective intervention and a cooling- off period to create the conditions to allow an equitable settlement to be hammered out. “Building on lessons learned, autonomy but not separation in a close-knit federation is the formula for lasting peace and should be embraced as a solution. ”We have to admit the real and/or perceived denial of justice to a people is what creates radicals from moderates. This is because is its denial HOPE at the same time bringing hopelessness- all of these the breeding ground of extremism. “Another instance of hesitation that ended up as denial of justice to Ambazonians in Viscount waverley’s floor speech is when he invoked the sanctity and primacy of the rule of the law.”

www.vanguardngr.com

Nigeria president Muhammadu Buhari on Friday was reported to have moved to intervene in a power tussle between the political and traditional authorities in the north central Kano State.

Tensions had been high in Kano over a move by Governor Abdullahi Ganduje to oust the Emir of Kano, Muhammadu Sanusi II after a fallout deemed to be political in nature.

The Daily Nigerian portal cited an inside source at the presidency as confirming the news. Other portals have since reported same.

“You know the president hardly interferes in matters of states. But on this issue, the president had to just interfere. The president is not happy with the governor for taking the unpopular decision of balkanizing the emirate and making moves to dethrone the emir.

“The president therefore summoned Ganduje on Thursday and directed the Director-General of the DSS to call for emergency meeting with governors of the North West.

“The governors are led by the governor of Kaduna State, Nasir El-Rufai, who first met and briefed the president on the matter on Thursday,” the source is quoted to have said.

Buhari’s intervention comes on the final day the Kano State government had given to the emir to respond to a query of financial misappropriation and to explain why he should not be suspended.

Reports say the fallout between the two men was due to perceived support of the emir for the main opposition candidate in this years gubernatorial elections which Ganduje won after a supplementary vote to secure his final term in office.

The Emir, a former Central Bank governor, has had his powers split after Ganduje split the Kano Emirates – which dates back to centuries – into five. He appointed four extra emirs with the same powers as Sanusi.

Source: Africa News

Nigeria’s president Muhammadu Buhari surprised many when he did not deliver a speech at his inauguration on Wednesday.

The 76-year-old former military leader faces a long list of challenges, including combating a sluggish economy, high unemployment and a decade-old Islamic insurgency.

Buhari will need to create jobs if he is to turn around the country’s fortunes over the next four years. Nearly a quarter of the workforce is unemployed and most of its 190 million people live on less than $2 a day.

“Our expectation is that Mr President will now focus more on the issue of security, employment and agriculture because these are the core areas,” said Basil Ejidike, who chairs the APC in southern Anambra state.

Reactions to inauguration

Some social media users were critical of the absence of a speech. Software developer Tosin Olugbenga called it was a “missed opportunity”.

“It is an opportunity for the president to speak to Nigerians and give further assurance of his commitment to a better Nigeria,” he said in a tweet.

A nation in trance

Buhari now has a second chance to turn campaign promises into policies aimed at stimulating economic growth.

Nigeria’s economy grew by 1.93% last year, its fastest pace since the recession. Growth of 2.1% is forecast by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) for this year, though that would be among the slowest rates in Africa.

Tackling insecurity across much of the country is already a priority. The military is fighting jihadist group Boko Haram and an offshoot linked to Islamic State in the northeast, while contending with communal violence over grazing land in central states.

A separate surge of bandit attacks and other violence in the northwest has forced 20,000 to flee to neighbouring Niger since April, the U.N. refugee agency said on Tuesday.

REUTERS

As many as 39 people have died in election-related violence in Nigeria, as the country awaits the results of this weekend’s voting in what is forecast to be its tightest poll since the end of military rule in 1999

Current President Muhummadu Buhari, 76, a former military ruler is seeking a second term on an anti-corruption platform.

He faces off againstbusinessman Atiku Abubakar, 72, a former vice president who has promised to expand the role of the private sector.

The election was held on Saturday, but violence and problems with electronic voting machines meant voting continued in a small number of places before polls closed on Sunday.

The ballot was initially due to take place last week, but was postponed just hours before it was due to begin, with the authorities citing logistics.

PIncumbent President of Nigeria Muhammadu Buhari

Nigeria’s 73 million eligible voters chose from a pool of more than 70 presidential candidates, although only those from the two main parties — Mr Buhari and Mr Abubakar — are seen as having a chance.

The President last year publicly denied social media claims he died and was replaced by a Sudanese clone, and also courted international controversy in the past by suggesting his wife “belongs in the kitchen”.

The Situation Room — which represents more than 70 civil society groups — gave Sunday’s figure of 39 deaths, citing data from Lagos-based consultancy SBM Intelligence.

In one incident, seven people were killed in a shootout between Nigerian army troops and a gang.PMahmood Yakubu, chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC),said an electoral official had been shot dead by unknown people.

The president’s office declined to comment, while the opposition candidate Mr Abubakar condemned the violence in a statement.

“No politician’s ambition is worth the blood of any innocent Nigerian,” he said.

The number of deaths reported by Sunday was below the final death tolls in previous elections in Africa’s most populous country, but in the past most unrest has taken place after results were announced.

P Nigerian election observers watch votes being counted

What’s at stake?

A credible and relatively calm poll would open a new chapter in the chequered political history of Nigeria, where nearly six decades of independence have been tarnished by military coups, endemic corruption and secessionist movements.

“From Tuesday onwards we should have a substantial number of results,” said Festus Okoye, an election commission official.

The contest between Mr Buhari and Mr Abubakar, commonly called “Atiku”, hinges on revamping an economy struggling to recover from its first recession in 25 years, which it slipped into in 2016 and emerged from in 2017.

P Electoral officials compile voting results

Nearly a quarter of the workforce is unemployed, while the cost of living has also risen rapidly.

Mr Buhari has focused his campaign on rooting out corruption, but critics say there have not been any significant convictions in his first term.

Mr Abubakar has said he would aim to double the size of the economy to $900 billion by 2025.

Reuters

As Nigerians gear up to choose their president on Feb. 16, there is good reason to fear a return to military-style dictatorship. Following incumbent Muhammadu Buhari’s extraconstitutional suspension in January of Nigeria’s chief judge, who heads the Supreme Court that has final say in election disputes, the main opposition candidate, Atiku Abubakar, requested U.S. and EU intervention for the “survival of Nigeria’s democracy.”

This is more than idle rhetoric. Buhari, an ex-general who led a short-lived military junta in the 1980s, was elected president in 2015 by Nigerians who (like this writer) accepted his claims to be a “reformed democrat.” However, his four years in office have highlighted the difference between accepting the principle of elective government and being a true democrat. In Nigeria, like elsewhere in today’s world, the biggest threat to democracy comes not from generals instigating coups but from authoritarians-at-heart winning elections, only to use their democratic mandate to rule anti-democratically.

Half of Nigeria’s 59-year post-colonial history has been spent under various military dictatorships, but this year marks the 20th anniversary of the return to democratic rule. While the country has seen its fair share of ups and downs during this period, some tangible progress has been made in the spheres of freedom of expression, judicial independence, rule of law, and general civil liberties—and certainly in comparison with the military era.

In the past four years, however, Buhari’s government has serially ignored court orders, harassed and arrested journalists and activists, deployed security services to intimidate political opponents, and unforgivably sanctioned the killings of hundreds of unarmed civilians on multiple occasions with the impunity of a power-drunk dictatorship. Yes, security services have been known to overreact even in advanced democracies, and civilians sometimes get hurt in the process. But what distinguishes governments committed to upholding fundamental human rights—such as the right to not be killed while demonstrating peacefully—are the post-incident actions they undertake to ensure such tragedies never repeat themselves. No such luck with the Buhari government.

Following the recent army killing of unarmed protesters in October 2018, rather than express remorse, Nigeria’s army brass falsely claimed that demonstrators had attacked soldiers who simply did what President Donald Trump told U.S. soldiers to do in the same situation: start shooting. Such callous impunity can only thrive in an army confident that its commander in chief will indulge such excesses. Buhari is, by any reasonable standard, personally responsible for the killings of unarmed civilians going unpunished under his watch.

In addition to all this, opposition figures such as former President Olusegun Obasanjo are warning that Buhari’s ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) party is readying to rig the Feb. 16 elections, an allegation lent credence by the irregularities and violence involved in a recent gubernatorial poll that the APC was determined to win at all costs. In perhaps the Freudian slip of the year, commenting on the gubernatorial election, ruling party chairman Adams Oshiomhole said: “I think that for democracy to flourish, only people who can accept the pain of rigging—sorry, defeat—should participate in an election.”

The international community is thus right to raise concerns about whether the upcoming election will be free and fair. On Feb. 16, Nigerians will be choosing not only their president but also their national assembly. Taking into consideration Buhari’s dismissive behavior towards the judiciary, a potentially rigged clean sweep of the executive and legislative arms of government by himself and his party could usher in an era of dangerously centralized power imperiling Nigeria’s modest democratic gains since the end of military rule in 1999. As of today, there are no credible polls indicating who might win the presidential election, and it is probably a toss-up.

The fact that Buhari still retains significant support among Nigerians despite his anti-democratic behavior requires explanation. One major reason is that Nigeria’s top political actors are all so morally compromised that an appeal by any of them to higher principles can always be persuasively dismissed by their opponents as hypocritical nonsense.

For instance, Atiku, Buhari’s main rival who accuses him of weakening democracy, has faced numerous allegations of corruption since serving as Nigeria’s vice president from 1999 to 2007. Additionally, the government that Atiku was a prominent member of itself oversaw massive election rigging and deployed widespread violence to stay in power. Meanwhile, Obasanjo, who is now accusing Buhari of wanting to rig the February election, was president at the time and once exhorted his party members to treat an upcoming election as a “do-or-die affair.”

Walter Onnoghen, the chief judge whom Buhari suspended, is claiming unconvincingly that it was due to “forgetfulness” that he did not disclose several sizable foreign currency accounts in his asset declaration. Moreover, prior to his suspension, he used his position to obstruct investigations into the matter. Corruption runs deep in the highest echelons of Nigeria’s judiciary. Many regular citizens thus feel scant sympathy for judges being muscled by the executive. They’re seen as part and parcel of the country’s corrupt elite, certainly no friends of the ordinary man.

Nigerian politics suffers from a moral vacancy, an acute shortage of credible political actors who could plausibly champion democratic values and set standards that others feel compelled to live up to. Ignoble actors evoking noble values they rarely uphold do not make for effective democratic role models. Hence many Buhari supporters remain unmoved by opposition claims that he is a danger to Nigeria’s democracy. To them, his rivals are hardly better democrats. Moreover, many Nigerians still see Buhari as, if not incorruptible, definitely far less corrupt than rivals like Atiku.

It also needs to be said that some Nigerian voters support Buhari precisely because of his strong-arm tactics. In a society where the corrupt always seem to have the upper hand and always seem able to defy institutional attempts to bring them to book, it is understandable that the instinct for some basic societal justice can easily translate into an impatience with institutions that appear stacked with people unable or unwilling to deliver basic justice.

This creates the opportunity for populist authoritarianism to hold significant appeal. Buhari’s justification of his suspension of the chief judge appealed directly to this societal hunger for justice. Pointing to Onnoghen’s attempts to frustrate investigations into his false asset declaration, he argued: “If justice cannot be done and clearly seen to be done, society itself is at risk of the most unimaginable chaos.” Nigeria’s political reality is stubbornly defiant of any simple good versus evil narrative.

In the final analysis, however, Buhari’s authoritarian actions cannot be described as anything other than detrimental to Nigeria’s democracy. The judiciary, as flawed as it is, has played a stabilizing role in post-election disputes, which in a country as volatile as Nigeria always have the potential to descend into violent confrontation. In a society as ethnically and religiously divided as Nigeria’s, democracy is as fragile as an egg; if not handled carefully, it could drop and shatter into a thousand pieces impossible to glue back together. That’s why it’s critical for the country’s judiciary to get reformed and strengthened by rooting out corruption within its ranks rather than suffering diminishment by Buhari. In practical terms, this would require corrupt judges to be weeded out by their peers, rather than by the politicians they are meant to hold accountable.

Irrespective of who wins the Feb. 16 election, the next few years must be spent ensuring that cornerstone values—such as rule of law, equality before the law, accountable government, free and fair elections, the right to nonviolent protest, and a free press—become sacred nonnegotiables in Nigerian public life, the democratic equivalent of the Ten Commandments. These are the dogmas of democracy, and only those who uphold them are truly worthy of calling themselves democrats.

Culled from Foreign Policy.Com