The Arewa Consultative Forum and two prominent Northern leaders on Monday disagreed on the composition of the committee on amnesty for the extremist Islamic sect, Boko Haram.
The PUNCH learnt of this just as the House of Representatives said it supported the move by the Federal Government to grant amnesty to the sect members.
For now, the National Security Adviser,Col. Sambo Dasuki (retd.); the Chief of Defence Staff, Admiral Ola Ibrahim; and a representative of the State Security Service, are believed to be among those on the list of the committee members.
While the two activists – Mallam Shehu Sani and Dr. Junaid Muhammed – are of the view that nothing worthwhile would come out of the amnesty, the ACF thinks otherwise.
Sani, who is the Executive Director of the Civil Rights Congress, told one of our correspondents that the process so far adopted by the Federal Government in announcing the plan to constitute the committee was faulty.
He said, “Before the amnesty, there must be first and foremost, a committee accepted by the government and also recognised by the sect.
“Now, setting up a committee that is constituted by friends of the government and security agents will not be accepted by the insurgents. All committees that had been set up in the past were dismissed by the insurgents.
“And again, if you have a committee to serve as a mediator, it should extract a commitment to a ceasefire for at least six months and within this period, issues about victims of Boko Haram could now be addressed.”
Sani dismissed those who attended a meeting that informed the plan to set up the amnesty committee at the Presidential Villa last week as “government apologists” who knew little about Boko Haram and its mode of operations.
He went on to warn that, “If we are not careful, we will fall into a trap where hundreds and billions of naira will be paid to people who are not part of the insurgency. As far as I am concerned, this amnesty is not going to work and it is very likely that the group will dismiss the amnesty.
“We have to ask ourselves ‘will the Boko Haram group accept the amnesty?’
“ I doubt it very much in the sense that amnesty pronouncement by the Federal Government is like putting the cart before the horse.”
Muhammed, who is the Convener of the Concerned Northern Politicians, Academics, Professionals and Businessmen, said it was laughable that known government apologists were the same people being consulted.
According to him, there is nothing new that “these men have to offer.”
He asked, “Who are these so-called northern elders that went to the Villa? Which north do they represent? Is it the same Ango Abdullahi, who was a vice-chancellor that is now a northern elder or is it Paul Unongo?
“These are government apologists. How can they now be interlocutors between the government and Boko Haram? This is something I find puzzling.
“If you collect something from somebody and then you go back to the same person to want to mediate what do you get? This whole thing is a complete circus. Now that the government has decided to play its own game, let us see what they can achieve.
“Now that they have decided to negotiate with ghosts and grant amnesty to ghosts, let us see those who will deliver the ghosts to them.
“You do not give amnesty for nothing; is it amnesty to Boko Haram or amnesty to the people of the North who the government considers as adversaries?
But the ACF expressed the view that the committee should be allowed to perform its duties.
“The setting up of the committee to look at the viability of granting amnesty is the beginning of a process. We should give it a chance to succeed “the forum said through its Publicity Secretary, Mr. Anthony Sani.
The ACF specifically took on Sani by challenging him to come up with a better alternative method of making Boko Haram members lay down their arms and embrace.
The group said, “It was not ACF that went to the Villa but some northern elders who did under Alhaji Maitama Sule. The ACF has also supported the option of amnesty that can lead to dialogue.
“But we do not want to believe in the submission that nothing will come out of the amnesty, precisely because it is an offer to enable the “ghost” or “faceless” group to come to the negotiating table, since the use of force has not yielded any result.
“If Sani has a better alternative to both the use of force and amnesty, then he should let the government know it for public good.”
Efforts to get the spokesman for Abdullahi proved abortive. Telephone calls put to his personal assistant rang out without any response.
Meanwhile, the House of Representatives has said that granting amnesty to Boko Haram is part of the responsibilities of the government to protect the lives and property of the citizenry.
But, the Senate gave conditions for granting the group amnesty, insisting that the victims of its attacks should also be compensated by the government for the proposal to succeed.
The Deputy Majority Leader of the House, Mr. Leo Ogor, who spoke on the matter, told The PUNCH in Abuja on Monday, that President Goodluck Jonathan did not need the approval of lawmakers to grant members of the sect amnesty.
He added that so long as the amnesty would guarantee a lasting peace in the country, the House would support the President.
The House deputy leader spoke further, “This is not a bad issue (amnesty). If the President can achieve peace through amnesty to Boko Haram, I don’t see why the House will not support it.
“However, it is an administrative matter that does not require our approval. Our approval comes when there are financial implications; which will require appropriation.”
Shortly before its members proceeded on the Easter break, the House had passed a resolution urging government to consider the option of discussing with the sect’s members.
On its part, the Senate, through its Leader, Victor Ndoma-Egba (SAN), said the proposal was welcome if the negotiations took into account the victims of Boko Haram’s activities.
The Senate Leader argued that it was necessary to draw experiences from other countries in bringing to an end the terror activities in the country.
He noted that in addition to military strategies, a “back door approach” such as amnesty should be considered in bringing an end to the violence, but with conditions.
“In doing this, the terms of the amnesty must be carefully negotiated. The victims of the terror must be in the picture of whatever is being put together,” he said.
According to him, such victims should get some reprieve in form of compensations while the insurgents enjoyed amnesty.
He further argued that in reaching any meaningful conclusions on amnesty for Boko Haram, “there must be a guarantee that the amnesty will bring the violence to an end.
“This means that those who would be negotiating on their behalf must have the full mandate of the group; not that after it is granted somebody will say that they are not party to the agreement.”
The Senate had held several meetings with security agencies to find a- way out of the heightened terror attacks on innocent citizens, especially in parts of the North.
The PUNCH learnt of this just as the House of Representatives said it supported the move by the Federal Government to grant amnesty to the sect members.
For now, the National Security Adviser,Col. Sambo Dasuki (retd.); the Chief of Defence Staff, Admiral Ola Ibrahim; and a representative of the State Security Service, are believed to be among those on the list of the committee members.
While the two activists – Mallam Shehu Sani and Dr. Junaid Muhammed – are of the view that nothing worthwhile would come out of the amnesty, the ACF thinks otherwise.
Sani, who is the Executive Director of the Civil Rights Congress, told one of our correspondents that the process so far adopted by the Federal Government in announcing the plan to constitute the committee was faulty.
He said, “Before the amnesty, there must be first and foremost, a committee accepted by the government and also recognised by the sect.
“Now, setting up a committee that is constituted by friends of the government and security agents will not be accepted by the insurgents. All committees that had been set up in the past were dismissed by the insurgents.
“And again, if you have a committee to serve as a mediator, it should extract a commitment to a ceasefire for at least six months and within this period, issues about victims of Boko Haram could now be addressed.”
Sani dismissed those who attended a meeting that informed the plan to set up the amnesty committee at the Presidential Villa last week as “government apologists” who knew little about Boko Haram and its mode of operations.
He went on to warn that, “If we are not careful, we will fall into a trap where hundreds and billions of naira will be paid to people who are not part of the insurgency. As far as I am concerned, this amnesty is not going to work and it is very likely that the group will dismiss the amnesty.
“We have to ask ourselves ‘will the Boko Haram group accept the amnesty?’
“ I doubt it very much in the sense that amnesty pronouncement by the Federal Government is like putting the cart before the horse.”
Muhammed, who is the Convener of the Concerned Northern Politicians, Academics, Professionals and Businessmen, said it was laughable that known government apologists were the same people being consulted.
According to him, there is nothing new that “these men have to offer.”
He asked, “Who are these so-called northern elders that went to the Villa? Which north do they represent? Is it the same Ango Abdullahi, who was a vice-chancellor that is now a northern elder or is it Paul Unongo?
“These are government apologists. How can they now be interlocutors between the government and Boko Haram? This is something I find puzzling.
“If you collect something from somebody and then you go back to the same person to want to mediate what do you get? This whole thing is a complete circus. Now that the government has decided to play its own game, let us see what they can achieve.
“Now that they have decided to negotiate with ghosts and grant amnesty to ghosts, let us see those who will deliver the ghosts to them.
“You do not give amnesty for nothing; is it amnesty to Boko Haram or amnesty to the people of the North who the government considers as adversaries?
But the ACF expressed the view that the committee should be allowed to perform its duties.
“The setting up of the committee to look at the viability of granting amnesty is the beginning of a process. We should give it a chance to succeed “the forum said through its Publicity Secretary, Mr. Anthony Sani.
The ACF specifically took on Sani by challenging him to come up with a better alternative method of making Boko Haram members lay down their arms and embrace.
The group said, “It was not ACF that went to the Villa but some northern elders who did under Alhaji Maitama Sule. The ACF has also supported the option of amnesty that can lead to dialogue.
“But we do not want to believe in the submission that nothing will come out of the amnesty, precisely because it is an offer to enable the “ghost” or “faceless” group to come to the negotiating table, since the use of force has not yielded any result.
“If Sani has a better alternative to both the use of force and amnesty, then he should let the government know it for public good.”
Efforts to get the spokesman for Abdullahi proved abortive. Telephone calls put to his personal assistant rang out without any response.
Meanwhile, the House of Representatives has said that granting amnesty to Boko Haram is part of the responsibilities of the government to protect the lives and property of the citizenry.
But, the Senate gave conditions for granting the group amnesty, insisting that the victims of its attacks should also be compensated by the government for the proposal to succeed.
The Deputy Majority Leader of the House, Mr. Leo Ogor, who spoke on the matter, told The PUNCH in Abuja on Monday, that President Goodluck Jonathan did not need the approval of lawmakers to grant members of the sect amnesty.
He added that so long as the amnesty would guarantee a lasting peace in the country, the House would support the President.
The House deputy leader spoke further, “This is not a bad issue (amnesty). If the President can achieve peace through amnesty to Boko Haram, I don’t see why the House will not support it.
“However, it is an administrative matter that does not require our approval. Our approval comes when there are financial implications; which will require appropriation.”
Shortly before its members proceeded on the Easter break, the House had passed a resolution urging government to consider the option of discussing with the sect’s members.
On its part, the Senate, through its Leader, Victor Ndoma-Egba (SAN), said the proposal was welcome if the negotiations took into account the victims of Boko Haram’s activities.
The Senate Leader argued that it was necessary to draw experiences from other countries in bringing to an end the terror activities in the country.
He noted that in addition to military strategies, a “back door approach” such as amnesty should be considered in bringing an end to the violence, but with conditions.
“In doing this, the terms of the amnesty must be carefully negotiated. The victims of the terror must be in the picture of whatever is being put together,” he said.
According to him, such victims should get some reprieve in form of compensations while the insurgents enjoyed amnesty.
He further argued that in reaching any meaningful conclusions on amnesty for Boko Haram, “there must be a guarantee that the amnesty will bring the violence to an end.
“This means that those who would be negotiating on their behalf must have the full mandate of the group; not that after it is granted somebody will say that they are not party to the agreement.”
The Senate had held several meetings with security agencies to find a- way out of the heightened terror attacks on innocent citizens, especially in parts of the North.
