Opinion
The Folly Of Amnesty
It is a sarcastic irony that reads like a piece of drama. It is punctuated by a long suspense such that the audience could neither predict the end, nor assimilate the theme.
This farce I dare call Boko Haramism (permit me that usage) is even more compounded by its lack of defining theme and character. And with the precariousness of the amnesty bouquet in which the accused is now the jurist, it is doubtful if the episode will produce heroes.
Until the latest farce that opened a chapter of amnesty for Boko Haram sect, many of us had waited with bated breath to know the new approach the Federal Government would adopt to tackle the insurgency in the North, most especially against the backdrop of President Goodluck Jonathan’s earlier rejection of Northern leaders’ agitation to grant the blood-letting monsters amnesty. Many had even expressed confidence in the ability of the Nigerian State to muscle out the Boko Haram insurgents without descending from its high temple to bow to the majesty of the criminal elements. How wrong we are!
By now, those who are calling for amnesty for Boko Haram and try to draw a parallel between the amnesty granted the Niger Delta militants and the proposed one to Boko Haram insurgents must have seen the folly of their arguments. To every discerning mind, the two evoke a union of incompatibles. While the Niger Delta militants had a genuine cause and quickly grabbed the confectionery of amnesty with both hands, the Boko Haram terrorists have refused to be appeased by whatever means.
The Boko Haram sect has ridiculed the Nigerian state by rejecting the Federal Govern-ment’s amnesty bouquet, insisting that it had committed no crime either against the Nigerian state or thousands of its victims it has either crippled physically or psychologically or even hacked to death. On the contrary, the blood-sucking sect thumbed its nose at the Nigerian state and spite us with hubris arrogance and theological assurance that it owns the moral force to forgive and pardon the Nigerian state for daring to challenge its existence and raison deter. In other words, it was its murderous majesty that must be appeased to pardon the Nigerian state. What a sarcastic irony!
Everywhere in the world, it is the dog that wags the tail. How come the reverse is the case in Nigeria? Blame not the Boko Haram. It is the Federal Government that conceded so cheaply to the amnesty script that should be held responsible for the insults. At no time had the Boko Haram sect asked for forgiveness or pardon from the Federal Government.
The amnesty for Boko Haram is rather a well crafted script written by the Northern leaders to provide a soft landing for the criminal gang and allow the sect get away with a slap on the wrist despite the heinous crimes its memers have committed against innocent souls.
Jonathan had about a month ago regarded the Boko Haram as faceless miscreants he could not negotiate with, much less grant pardon. How come two weeks later the President allowed himself to be blackmailed and bundled into accepting to grant amnesty to the sect he once described as ghosts? Or have the ghosts unveiled themselves? Such political volte face is a feature of a lame.
I want to believe that the proposed amnesty offer to Boko Haram is a reflection of our collective incompetence to take the bull by the horns. Pity that it is the innocent that lick the wounds of the injury.
And now that the amnesty offer has detonated in our faces and has even produced a theological conundrum of who should forgive who, the question is: how do we resolve this impasse?
The amnesty offer has been further burdened with internal strangulation especially with the decline of activist Sheu Sani and Islamic cleric Datti Ahmed to serve in the 26-man Presidential Committee on Dialogue and Peaceful Resolution of Security Challenges in the North.
The Federal Government’s insistence to continue with the amnesty offer in spite of the Boko Haram’s rejection has particularly raised a fundamental question of who the Federal Government wants to pardon. Is it the Abubakar Shekau-led sect that has vehemently rejected the amnesty confectionery or the Northern leaders that glibly talk of amnesty? The truth is that we are still scratching the insurgency issue on the surface. The offer is more of a political solution than a real love for peace. And from all indications, it may come back to plague us.
Boye Salau
Opinion
Ndifon’s Verdict and University Power Reform
Opinion
As Nigeria’s Insecurity Rings Alarm
