To achieve this end I am suggesting that
Nigeria needs to adopt the template of a Truth and Reconciliation Commission to
clear its decks before it can move forward. I am aware that the administration of President Olusegun Obasanjo set up
a panel in Nigeria but its powers and
roles were far too limited.[1]
The Commission he appointed on June 4, 1999, was restricted to the
investigation of human rights abuses committed from December 31, 1983 until
taking office on May 29, 1999. However,
the Commission had serious shortcomings.
It assumed Nigeria’s problems started in 1983, it had no powers of
subpoena and it was subject to the jurisdiction of the courts.
The
new Nigerian Truth and Reconciliation Commission I propose will be free of
government control and have a remit that allows it to go back to 1914
Amalgamation of Nigeria up to the present time and examine the legitimacy of
the transaction which led to the purchase of the area called Niger area from
the Royal Niger Company (now Unilever) for £800,650. It suggested that most countries are birthed
from shared ideals; however, Nigeria seemed to have been created to fulfil a
business requirement. The question is
how do me move from a transactional relationship to build a nation of shared
ideals? Is it still possible? Therefore main remit of any such Truth
Commission will be to explore:
"The establishment of national shared
ideals, unity and reconciliation in a spirit of understanding which transcends
the conflicts and divisions of the past", the Commission's objectives will
be to:
(1)
establish the legitimacy of the transactional relationship that led to the
establishment of Nigeria; (2) establish as complete a picture as possible of
gross human rights violations and corrupt practices perpetrated between
1914-2012 by conducting investigations and hearings; (3) facilitate granting of
amnesty in exchange for full disclosure of truth for acts with a political
objective within guidelines of the Act and on condition in the cases of
corruption that appropriate restitution is made to their respective local
government areas; (4) make known the fate of victims and restore their human
and civil dignity, and allow them to give accounts and recommend reparations;
(5) make a report of findings and recommendations to prevent future human
rights violations. (6) make provision to
exclude all those who have admitted to gross human rights violations and
corrupted practices from any future political dispensation in return for their
amnesty and on condition that appropriate restitution is made. It will report to convocation of the Nigerian
people freely chosen through a democratic process.
These
should mean that traumatic events, like the Nigerian Civil War and the various
coups will be covered, ancient myths unravelled, hidden truths exposed. It will also question the legitimacy of the
amalgamation of North and South and the creation of States. The setting up of such a Commission will be
seen as a testament to the power of truth in the face of denial, the resilience
of the human spirit in the face of despair, the triumph of the Nigerian people
over the kleptocrats, the 100 percenters, mis-managers and crooks who’s only
ambition is the murder of their dreams and a reminder to all peoples, that
atrocities and injustice against the Nigerian masses must and will never stand.
It will also give voice to the words of
Franz Fanon who said:
‘The future
would have no pity for those men [and women] who, possessing the exceptional
privilege to speak words of truth to their oppressors, have taken refuge in an
attitude of passivity, of mute indifference, and sometimes of cold complicity’
The setting up of the
Commission will be part of a process that allows us to convene a sovereign
conference of the people, which re-examines the question that is Nigeria, and
determine future constitutional relationship of its constituent parts. It must be a process that allows Nigerian
people to reclaim their voice. A
process which brings out the courtesy of the Hausas, the principled
positions of the Tivs, the flamboyance of the Yorubas, the determination of the
Igbos and the very positive aspects the other tribes offer us.
I am aware that some
might argue that we would be letting criminals go scot free in order to aid
political expediency. I will draw them
to the quote from Kadar Asmal who argued that:
“I
therefore say to those who wear legalistic blinkers, who argue that immunity
would be an affront to justice, that they simply do not understand the nature
of the negotiated revolution that we have lived through, we must deliberately
sacrifice the formal trappings of justice, the courts and trials, for an even greater
good: Truth. We sacrifice justice for truth so as to
consolidate democracy, to close the Chapter of the past and to avoid
confrontation.”[2]
If we are to stand any
chance of moving forward as a nation we must construct a process which allows
its peoples to reclaim their voice and ‘Speak
Truth to Power’, but also that allows power a negotiated way out into
retirement. Power must be presented with
two alternatives negotiate or become oblivion itself.
A valid question about
this process, is does a Truth and Reconciliation process not re-open old wounds
and create more bitterness? However,
this is premised on a suggestion that the wounds were closed or healed in the
first instance. What remains abundantly
clear is that the wounds of old remain like an open sore, untreated and
festering as evidenced by Chinua Achebe’s recent book ‘There was a Country’. I
suggest that only a process that allow people to tell their own stories, to
reclaim their voice will lead us to the kind of progressive nation we
crave. We need to embrace the
belief that:
“A lie cannot use truth to sustain
itself’ and because of the importance of people being able to tell their
stories, because their identity was linked so inseparably with their stories.”[3]
I also think the proposal of a truth and reconciliation
process is not an abstraction limited to academic research but one that can
help uncover pervading myths. Judge
Albie Sachs, the intellectual force behind the South African Truth and
Commission who I was privileged to meet during my fieldwork for my doctorate argues
that:
“So I
think the reasons for a truth commission close to the event is to prevent
future generations from highjacking memories and manipulating them. Once could see the examples of Yugoslavia how
ancient stories began to be used at dehumanising the opposition.”
This argument is supported by a speech made by Adv. de
Lange during the President’s tabling of the recommendations relating to South
African TRC, where he stated:[4]
“Inner unity requires
reconciliation and this in turn requires the public recognition of the
historical truth. Those who are meant to
forgive must know what they are forgiving.
It is therefore insufficient to establish the historical truth in merely
an abstract manner. Instead, the
violence of the past and its causes must be named, the suffering of the victims
concretely established. Truth has
precedence over punishment, but also over amnesty. Acknowledgment legitimises amnesty silence
excludes it. Punishment can to a certain
extent, be negotiated. The truth
cannot. This is South Africa’s message
to societies in transition. There is no
reconciliation without truth.”
There still too many
myths in Nigeria; there is the story of how the first Prime Minister, Sir
Abubakar Tafawa Balewa consumed forty-two cups of tea at conference in London
because he was unaware of protocol. Yet,
when you saw him from old videotapes on You Tube, bestriding the globe after
Nigeria’s independence you saw the confidence of a man certain of his
destiny. When you heard him speak, his
diction was that of a well-educated and enlightened man, in fact was eloquence
had a silky feel, he was indeed golden in his voice.
In the myths also
surrounding the persona of the Rt. Hon. Dr. Nnamdi Azikiwe,
Phillip Emeagwali
explains:
“For
many of those who lived in colonial Nigeria, Nnamdi Azikiwe was a super-man
sent especially to free them from alien rule. Unable to understand Zik's
persona, fables were woven around him. A story has it that as a child, Zik saw
an old woman carrying a heavy load. Moved with pity, he offered to help her. On
reaching her home in the forest, the old woman who was in fact a spirit, asked
Zik what she could do for him. Zik requested for wisdom and power. The woman
obliged. She cut Zik into bits and boiled the flesh in a big pot. Later, she
magically brought him back to life. On her request, Zik killed the woman to
prevent her from performing the same feat for others. That explains his legendary
source of wisdom and power over his fellow man.
Another
has it that with the magical gift from the old woman of the forest, Zik managed
to extricate Nigeria out of a deadly situation. Ages ago, the Atlantic Ocean
was inhabited by a wicked mermaid who caused the water to overflow its banks
perennially to drown thousands of Nigerians. For a long time, the people of
Lagos prayed for a redeemer. None came. When Zik learnt of their predicament,
he went into the ocean and challenged the wicked mermaid to a contest. First,
Zik changed into a spirit, entered a bottle and then came out. Then he dared
the mermaid to do the same. The mermaid quickly changed into a spirit and
entered the bottle. But before it could come out, Zik corked the bottle and
took it away. Since then the Bar Beach has been given less trouble. The moral
of the fable was that if Nigerians annoyed the politician too frequently, he
could release the mermaid to torment Lagosians again. Could if be that he had actually released the
mermaid to cause the recent flooding of parts of Victoria Island?”
In the same way, myths
have been built up over the Nigerian Civil War, coups and the pre-independence
period. Only an open process independent
of the Nigerian Government can open up a space where people’s voices can be
heard and the truth established.
Finally, I believe the
adoption of such a truth and reconciliation process represents the only
opportunity to prevent a messy and uncontrolled schism with its devastating
consequences. It represents the last
chance saloon for the current crop of our ruling class to relinquish power and
the fruits of their corruption peacefully.
It is a compromise solution but one that might guarantee we move forward
beyond the present malaise. What is
certain is that Nigeria cannot go on as before, business as usual.
In drawing
from my research into the South African truth and reconciliation process I am
certain that while many countries emerge from a totalitarian or corrupt system
through a state of collapse rather than military victory, South Africa emerged
through negotiation, and therefore had to deal with the messy business of
compromise. It is a lesson that Nigerian
can learn. I know that many will be
concerned that I advocate for a process where truth might be compromised but
Judge Albie Sachs who I have spent some time with does not agree that truth
itself was compromised in the South African context, he concedes depending on
the definition of Justice, however, justice may have been partially
compromised.[5]
In
Nigeria like in the South African context, we will have to grapple with the
question of whether a moral basis exists for compromise. I suggest that the Nigerian process must have
an irreducible minimum and that is a commitment to truth. As Roberto Canas of
El Salvador puts it:
"Unless a society exposes itself to the truth it can harbour no
possibility of reconciliation, reunification and trust. For a peace settlement
to be solid and durable it must be based on truth."[6]
