It is a settled fact that most of the provisions of the law in Nigeria, like in other democratic countries, derived their operational strength from the constitution.
From the position of law arise the issues of human rights, which enumerate the rights of individuals and the responsibility of government, especially, in the area of providing the essential socio-economic comfort and security for the people.
As a matter of fact, the constitution defines the responsibilities of the citizens to the country, and the leadership, the same way it creates chances for aggrieved citizens to air their views. To the extent that there is provision for peaceful protest against the government if other options fail to make the government to respect the peoples’ rights, and or part thereof.
It is not clear if there is any provision in the constitution, and therefore, if it is in the law, that citizens should go extra mile to either disrespect the country or a constitutionally instituted leadership for whatever reason. It is not clear if the constitution allows individual or group to be more powerful than the country and or the leadership.
All these postulations have become necessary in view of the ongoing noise by even those who are supposed to know and teach the simple tenets of the constitution and law, about the violation of the human rights, of not only the publisher of SaharaReporters, Omoyele Sowore, but also the leader of proscribed Islamic Movement in Nigeria (IMN), also known as Shiites, Ibrahim El-Zakazaki and the leader of another proscribed Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu as well as others with their supporters.
One is not clear where the human right begins and end for a citizen that doesn’t believe either in the country as an entity in the case of Nnamdi Kanu, or in the leadership that is democratically elected, as in Sowore. To be sure, in the constitution, another provision is made for testing the “legality” of the election of leader in law court, up to the Supreme Court level.
One is aware that the only way the constitution provides for the change of leadership and or government therefore, is by election (to vote out bad leaders). If there is any other method in a democratic set up all over the world, I will be glad to be educated on that.
It amounts, therefore, to carrying the logic of human rights violation or other accusations against the security operatives to ridiculous point for anyone, much more, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) like Femi Falana to be shouting his head off about the arrest and rearrest of Sowore.
It is an arrant arrogance and disrespectful to the constitution for anyone to be talking about violation of the human rights of Nnamdi Kanu who does not even believe in the country called Nigeria, much less it’s leadership. Ditto for El-Zakazaki, who, though believes in the country, but does not believe in the leadership.
We cannot continue to turn logic or the constitution or the law on its head simply because we don’t like who is on the saddle or we are quarreling with which part of the country the leader comes from.
Let us imagine for a while, a situation where Sowore succeeded with his REVOLUTION “to bundle Muhammadu Buhari out of power” as he put it, what would have been the next?
Put differently, if Sowore had succeeded with the REVOLUTION and he became the President, who would he rule or govern? Does he or do the motley crowd jumping about crying law law, human rights, human rights think the over 15 million people who voted for Buhari will sit down and do nothing?
If they don’t sit down and do nothing, then what is Sowore inviting to the country called Nigeria? And also, if El-Zakazaki had succeeded in becoming the leader of the country through a means other than the constitutional democracy, how would it look like?
And people are there blaming the security operatives who are employed and paid to keep the country safe from disintegration, anarchy, confusion, misdirection by egocentric people from performing the duties conferred on them by the constitution, and law?
Maybe those who are accusing Buhari and the security operatives of violating the human rights of Sowore, El-Zakazaki, Nnamdi Kanu and others like them have never heard about law breakers. If they don’t know or know but pretend not to know for whatever reason, they are thos who go outside the constitutional provisions and therefore, law in their attempts to flex muscles.
It never occurred to them that if Sowore, Kanu and their likes are allowed to tread on the land with their jaundiced and warped crusades, more of their types will rise, and may result into, at best, every community having its president or in Nigeria becoming a jungle nation.
I beg, let’s leave human rights violation or law jargon out of the prevailing cases of rebellion. Simple and clear.
If you don’t believe in the leader, fine. But if you are out to dethrone the leader through means other than the constitution and law, you don’t need to be told that you are in conflict with the system itself. And if you are in conflict with the system, you should be able to know and take whatever happens…as the consequences.
Not even in advanced democracies will such attitude be condoned.