Human rights violations and international protection in Nigeria

Human Rights Violations in Nigeria: An Assessment of the Procedures and Strategies for the International Protection of Human Rights

As the world moves towards a global conscience, it is becoming increasingly clear that those nations that would abuse the doctrines of human rights as acknowledged in the international arenas, and by most of today's nation-states, and certainly by world public opinion will soon be forced to the answer to the global conscience. That is, they will at some future date consistent with the expression of global public opinion be held accountable for acts of aggression arising out of political or religious or economic expansionism. Already the response to these acts of aggression by the international communities in the various forums of the United Nations (UN), the European Union Court and other fronts is debate and attempts to negotiate an atmosphere of calm in which to resolve international differences.

Chief among the issues receiving international political and public attention are human rights violations. Human rights violations brought international pressure and public opinion to bear upon the Apartheid government of South Africa, and, subsequently, over a period of time, political change was realized in that country as a result of world scrutiny and opinion. Today, Nigeria is one country, among many others, which stands accused of human rights violations (Kamminga 1992; Amnesty International 2008). Most notably in the foreground is Nigeria's illegal incarceration of its citizens without charging them for committing a crime, providing them a trial or legal representation, and secretly executing prisoners (Amnesty International 2008). Many such executions are alleged to be a result of the government's efforts to protect its foreign corporate investment relationships in Nigeria's rich natural resources by eliminating voices of opposition that call attention to environmental or political injustices (Livesey 2001 58).

Chief amongst such cases is that of Ken Saro-Wiwa, who, on November 10, 1995, was taken from is prison cell by military personnel acting on behalf of the government (Wiwa 2001 xi). Saro-Wiwa's son, Ken Wiwa (2001) writes that his father was taken to a military prison where, after five attempts, was finally successfully hanged to death (Wiwa xii). Saro-Wiwa had a trial (Wiwa xii), unlike many of those imprisoned in Nigerian jails go to prison and remain imprisoned without a trial (Maier 2000 3). Saro-Wiwa's trial was deemed a miscarriage of justice, and world condemned as such by humanitarian groups and world leaders (Wiwa xii; Jega 200 97).

Writing about the illegal imprisonment of people who speak out against the government, Karl Maier (2000) writes:

Among the victims were the Ogoni rights activist and playwright Ken Saro-Wiwa, who had been hanged, and retired General Shehu Musa Yar'Adua, a political power broker who had died after receiving a mysterious injection in prison. The leading political figures of the day were held incommunicado. They included Chief Moshood Abiola, the Muslim millionaire whose election as president in 1993 was halted by the military despot Babangida, and Obasanjo, the only soldier who had ever handed power to an elected civilian. Nigeria, many feared, would explode into a civil war that could spark a humanitarian disaster (Maier 3)."

Nigeria has been consistent in protecting its position from its vantage point of its United Nations seat. Nicholas Wheeler (2002) exemplifies this use of UN protection when he points out in his book when he discusses the situation that lead to genocide in Rwanda:

In the absence of Western intervention, the only alternative was for African states to take the lead. In its Presidential Statement of 30 April the Security Council had requested the Secretary General to investigate this possibility. In response to Boutros-Boutros Ghali's requests, Ghana, Ethiopia, Senegal, Nigeria, Zimbabwe, Zambia, Congo, Mali, and Malawi came forward with offers of troops for phase two of the deployment of UNAMIR II. In doing so they made it clear that they would need equipment, heavy lift support, and their costs underwritten by the UN. Given the UN's budgetary crisis, financing UNAMIR II depended upon Western states (Wheeler 229)."

What this shows is that leadership in African nations which stand accused of human rights violations are slow to reaction to those conditions in their neighboring African states. It shows, too, that the African states are willing to use public opinion as a means of extorting money from western nations in order to respond to humanitarian issues such as was going on in Rwanda. In other words, the well being of their citizens and African neighbors are weighed against the profit that can be gained from exploiting the very citizens of their country as a natural resource to gain humanitarian dollars. No economic venture is closed to the corrupt and powerful leaders that would circumvent the laws and judicial process in order to benefit from that circumvention.

The Story of Ken Saro-Wiwa

The story of Ken Siwo-Wiwa is one of an activist, a man who posed a threat to the forces that would treat the citizens of Nigeria as perhaps too simplistic in thinking to be aware of what is going on around them. Saro-Wiwa was an educated man, a wealthy man, whose wealth did not overshadow the pride nor the love he felt for his country and for his people. His father, Ken Wiwa writes, was the product of a British classical colonial education (Wiwa 19). Siwo-Wiwa was also a journalist, and a successful entrepreneur (Wiwa xi). His own colonial experience and education left him keenly aware of the motivation behind foreign interests in Nigeria, and prepared him to be able to impart his knowledge and understanding to his fellow Nigerians and to provide them leadership (Wiwa 19). Wiwa was capable of providing the leadership that his fellow Nigerians needed, because the powers of government had, in a post-colonial environment aligned themselves with whatever interests served to benefit the powers in control on an individual level. It was clear that the interests of the Nigerian people and Nigeria as a nation had been subordinated to individual interests within the country, and to foreign interests outside the country which would support the government so long as natural resources continued to exist for exploitation (Livesey 58).

Attahiru Jega describes Nigeria's post colonial economic environment as having been hard hit by the transition away from colonialism, and in a "comatose state (Jega 2000 204). However, others perceive the post colonial period very differently, suggesting that the governmental leaders withheld from the Nigerian people the fruits of commerce and industry (Wiwa xiv). Wiwa says that Nigeria ought to be the economic pride of the black man (Wiwa xiv). It is rich in natural resources (Wiwa xiv). Prior to its emancipation from colonial control, oil was discovered in the Niger Delta region, where the exploitation of oil since 1960 has brought in $600 billion in oil revenues (xiv).

Nigeria has one of the lowest per capita incomes in the world and external debts of $40 billion. Most depressing of all is that, unlike many oil-rich nations, Nigeria has little to show for its wealth. Its infrastructure is prehistoric, overwhelmed, and poorly maintained. Many of the roads are potholed death traps, and the telephone system is notoriously inefficient, almost useless by Western standards. There are frequent power shortages and virtually no running water... Schools and universities are under funded and in a state of permanent neglect; teachers and lecturers are poorly paid, if on time. Nigerians routinely die of treatable diseases like malaria and tuberculosis, while AIDS and stress-related illnesses stalk the collective health of the nation. Most hospitals would be best described as mortuaries; simple and routine operations are often a matter of life and death. Infant mortality is among the highest in the world, and life expectancy is only fifty-four and falling. Life in Nigeria is nasty, brutish, and short, as my father often used to say (paraphrasing Hobbes) (Wiwa xiv-xv)."

When taken into consideration with other segments of the picture coming from Nigeria, such as its response to the UN's request for African intervention in Rwanda that evoked a response equivalent to intervention for dollars. We see that the implication here is that the government is corrupt, withholding from Nigerians revenues that would greatly improve the lives and opportunities of Nigerians. It is out of this thought that Ken Saro-Wiwa's voice rose to lead the Ogoni people in standing up for their rights to their natural resources and as citizens of Nigeria. It was the voice, once counted amongst the elite, that now spoke up for the disenfranchised that resulted in the arrest of Saro-Wiwa (Wiwa 34-60).

As is often the case, a government that holds the people's hero hostage must either release that hero, and succumbs to the ideologies that the hero expresses, as was the case with Nelson Mandela in South Africa. or, the government must eliminate the hero and in so doing hope that the ideologies of the hero dies with him or her. Such was the case with Ken Saro-Wiwa who was hanged with eight fellow activists by the Nigerian government (Livesey 58).

Human Rights Violations in Nigeria

The dynamics that have been described here between Shell, Nigerian governmental officials, the environment, and the people is the reason that Nigeria continues to be on Amnesty International's list of countries that engage in consistent and persistent practices of human rights violations. Peter van Tuiijl (1999) points out that the United Nations has a Codified Universal Declaration on Human Rights (Tuiijl 493). It is, many people believe, part of the mission of the United Nations to respond to acts of human rights violations. Indeed, following the death of Ken Saro-Wiwa in 1995, there was "talk" of UN sanctions against Nigeria, but sanctions were never instituted against Nigeria (Maier 18). The importance of Nigeria to the United States and to other nations, especially western nations, was too important to alienate the country with economic sanctions (Maier 18).

Visa restrictions and other light sanctions were all the United States and its European allies could or would muster to support democracy in West Africa's regional superpower. When Abacha announced in December 1997 the arrest of his deputy, General Oladipo Diya, a Yoruba, on allegations of plotting a coup, there was hardly a murmur from the international community. Six months later, the "coup from heaven" took place (Maier 19)."

It might be pointed out here, too, that those impacted by the visa restrictions would be news media journalists, especially those independent journalists who are necessary to the industry and to the free world in order to get politically unbiased news. It would also impact those watchdog agencies, like Amnesty International, causing them delays in being able to make the necessary site visits for verification of information and conditions in prisons, hospitals, and infrastructure.

That there were no more stringent sanctions attached to Nigeria following the death of Saro-Wiwa and eight of his activists colleagues, especially when former U.S. President Bill Clinton, British Prime Minister John Major, and even the Queen herself protested the hanging of Saro-Wiwa; and then six months later a "coup from heaven," brought about regime change in that country speaks volumes. It would be great to say that in the days following the coup and the reins of power transferring to General Obasanjo instilled confidence and hope in Nigerians. That, unfortunately, was not the case at the time when the Niger Delta region and Lagos broke out in riots (Maier 19).

Obasanjo pledged to whip Nigeria into shape and to stamp out malfeasance wherever it might lurk. "There will be no sacred cows. Nobody, no matter who and where, will be allowed to get away with the breach of the law or the perpetration of corruption and evil." Nigeria must change its ways in order to "ensure progress, justice, harmony and unity and above all to rekindle confidence amongst our people. Confidence that their conditions will rapidly improve and that Nigeria will be great and will become a major world player in the near future (Maier 20)."

The change of government, for many Nigerians, represented a change only in the main players of the dynamics in Nigeria. Today, Nigeria remains on Amnesty International's list as a human rights violator for false imprisonment, imprisonment without due judicial process, lack of legal representation, corrupt courts, prison overcrowding to the excessive numbers of prisoners, and reports that some prisoners spend as long as ten years incarcerated before going to trial (Amnesty International 2008). The CIA World Fact Book reports that the last two elections in Nigeria, 2003 and, again, in 2007, were "marred" by voting irregularities and violence (CIA World Fact Book 2008). In April, 2007, Umaru Yar'Adua was elected president, bringing about a reluctant end to the presidency of Olusegun Obasanjo (CIA World Fact Book 2008). The CIA World Fact Book reports that the 2007 elected government could, if successful in instituting changes that it espouses as supporting, bring about vital changes in Nigeria that will make a big difference to its economy and as regards its human rights violations. However, a year after those elections, and recently as February, 2008, Nigeria continues to make Amnesty International's list of nations associated with human rights violations (Amnesty International 2008). This, again, goes back to the areas of arrests, incarceration, judicial process and even using the prison system to house mentally deficient individuals like persons with Down's Syndrome (Amnesty International 2008).

There is no measuring the human rights violations of a government from one government administration as its ousted to the next. There is no measuring human rights violations by way of saying they are less serious violations. They are what they are, and until Nigeria makes progress in addressing those issues, it will continue to be criticized as a nation that abuses human rights.

Non-Governmental Organizations

Over the past two decades there are non-governmental organizations in Nigeria, and in Africa regionally, that respond to human rights violations and perform monitoring of violations (Maier 110). Women in Nigeria (WIN) is an organization that is dedicated to the advancement and equality of women in Nigeria (Maier 110). A primary focus for WIN is gain as equal a playing field in rights for women as men now have afforded to them (Maier 110).

In 1985, the Association of Democratic Lawyers formed the Civil Liberties Organization (CLO) (Maier 111). This organization and the Campaign for Democracy (CD) with the CLO and WIN have advocated for rights, freedoms, and civil liberties on behalf of Nigeria's population (Maier 111). Other groups include Women in Development (WID), and National Council of Women's Society's (NCWS), again, advocates for women's rights (Maier 112). Other organizations monitor financial exchanges and the financial health of the government (CIA World Fact Book 2008). Nigeria, like other African nations, is subject to the discretion of decisions made by the There are several pan-African non-governmental organizations which operate as peacekeeping forces in Africa. One, is the African Union (AU, and formerly known as the Organization of African Unity, OAU). Another is the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) ECOWAS was involved in the post-independence transformation of the Congo (Crupi, 2005, 106). The AU is actually a regional organization, and ECOWAS is a sub-regional organization (Crupi, 106). The Southern African Development Community is yet another group, and is product of post-Apartheid South Africa (Howard, 2007, 56). ECOWAS and the AU have different powers of authority, while the SADC really limits itself to a mediating role (Crupi, 106).

The AU was created in 1999, and positions itself as a monitoring group.

The charter of the AU is to promote African solidarity, to defend state sovereignty, to protect people's rights, to advance peace in the region, and to further good governance and democracy (Cupri, 106)."

Even though these organizations have different regional or territorial designations, they are subject to the discretion of the AU and other decision-making organizations that originate in Africa and are concerned with those activities intended to monitor human rights violations, keep peace, prevent and circumvent violence. Of course, these are all discretions that take into account the sovereignty of borders and nations, and it is only with much debate, usually at the level of the United Nations and the AU that decisions to impose the charters of these organizations is decided upon (Cupri 106).

Peter van Tuiilj says that in the past 25 years NGOs have served to fill the institutional and geographical gaps that allow people to exercise their rights (Tillj 493).

The charter of the NGO allows it to supplement, or even to supplant, a weak or absent state government (Tiilj 493). However, in the case of a country like Nigeria, where there are strong corporate interests, it is not likely that an NGO will ever be permitted by the United Nations to exercise its charter in a way that would see it supplant a government on the basis of human rights violations. Unfortunately, while western countries and European countries make strong noise when a particular violation is egregious enough to draw world community attention and public shock and outrage, as was the case of Kenb Saro-Wiwa, then the countries and leaders who seem to have the authority and the power to make changes or to have an impact make what might be described as courtesy noise to pacify a constituency.

We do, however, see NGOs stepping in with the full authority and approval of power nations behind them, as is the case with Somalia (Tiilj 493).

NGOs in Somalia are stepping into the void left by the state. As in many other countries, they have started to organize primary education, health-care services, clean water projects, transportation and environmental protection. NGO operations offer the only means through which Somalis can exercise their rights since after the failure of the U.N. intervention in Somalia in 1992, international support -- even for local NGOs -- has greatly diminished.(46) NGOs cannot continue this work indefinitely. The international community should revisit the Somali case and reexamine its responsibility to the country in the absence of a political administration. For whatever reason the state recedes from its responsibility to provide public services, if NGOs step into the ensuing void, they need to arrange for their accountability towards the people they are working with. In that sense, the homework of NGOs in Somalia and Bangladesh is quite similar (Tiilj 493).

As Tiilj points out, however, NGOs can only be a force for so long as the nations of peacekeeping forces that they are comprised of are able to back them (Tiilj 493). They require support and relief from the United Nations peacekeeping forces, and need for forums of debate and resolution to occur and resolve problems as expeditiously as possible (Tiilj 493). Not to resolve those problems, of course, would result in setting an example of transgression in sovereign territories (Tiilj 493). Expeditious transfers of authority to democratically elected persons and authorities are in the best interest of all involved, and if it can be done without violence, then that is even more desirable (Tiilj 493).

As we begin to experience a global community it is to be expected that some decisions will begin to be made on a global basis. Much the same way that those decisions to intervene or sanction a particular country are made now at the level of the UN or the AU in the case of Africa.

Conclusion

The case of Nigeria shows a need to be concerned about civil rights in Nigeria. The relationship between the government and foreign corporations is less concerning today because the oil exploration and exploitation has gone private (CIA World Fact Book 2008). However, it appears that companies, like Royal Dutch Shell, continue to enjoy privileges and opportunities in that country that continue to give Nigerians cause for concern and that makes people angry. So long as the people continue to feel animosity and dissatisfaction with that situation, the country continues to be vulnerable to outside forces that might want to exploit that dissatisfaction in ways that could lead to an unstable political and economic situation in the country.

As African nations take more control of their states, that control resting with the people by representation of democratically elected governments, then we can expect to see Africa take a more proactive role in policing itself by way of the NGOs it has created to do that. Even though progress is we slow, we are seeing, perhaps for the first time in history since decolonization of Africa, greater democracy and self-determination in the former colony states. Unfortunately, there are still many states, particularly in West Africa, that continue to be very unstable and prone to continued civil war, genocide and horrible violence. Nigeria is a state that is achieving some level of stability, if we are to believe more recent reports out of that country, even though human rights continue to be in need of improvement.

More and more we see the response of the world community evoking action within the United Nations and the NGOs. It is in the best interest of Africans and Nigeria that NGOs have a role in the country to help resolve conflict and human rights violations. Francis V. Crupi (2005), says that the reasons for this are:

Through active and resolute support of African sub-regional organizations, the United States can discourage the rise of failed states that can become fertile breeding grounds for terrorism, criminal activity, and pandemic diseases.

Supporting such organizations logistically and financially reduces the United States' "boots on the ground" footprint and the expenditure of scarce American military forces. Equally, it preserves the support of American public opinion that is loath to jeopardize the lives of its sons and daughters in a continent where many perceive we have no vital interests.

By supporting ECOWAS and its sister pan-African organizations, the United States symmetrically opposes an asymmetric foe -- transnational terrorism. Such organizations possess the agility and statelessness necessary to counterbalance the emergence of non-state actors such as al Qaeda.

By providing monetary support to African sub-regional organizations, the United States can foster development and elevate the international image of America while nurturing potential trading partners. This judicious investment could pay dividends in both political and economic capital. On the humanitarian front alone, America stands to gain the respect of the global community as well as the satisfaction of having taken the moral high ground (Crupi 106)

Nigeria has, since 2003, seen improvements in its infrastructure (CIA World Fact Book). Right now, according to the CIA World Fact Book, the problem that Nigeria is faced with is the tensions between Christians and Muslims, and this makes for a situation that needs to be monitored as closely as does human rights (CIA World Fact Book 2008). However, as reported by Amnesty International, there must be efforts made update, improve and expedite the justice system in Nigeria. That Nigeria now has active NGOs within the country, ADL, WIN, and CLO is indicative of progress in the right direction.