Govs see local govts as personal property – Gen Garba (retd)

The Director General of the Nigerian Army Resource Centre, Maj. Gen. Garba Wahab (retd.) shares his thoughts with SOLOMON ODENIYI on the unending terrorist attacks in the North-East, the resurgence of suicide bombings, and the pivotal role the judiciary plays in ending the scourge

We have been fighting terrorism for over a decade, leading to the loss of lives and properties. Is there an end in sight?

Terrorism does not go. You people are making a mistake. You see, everybody thinks terrorism is something you can just switch on and off.  It’s not.  To start with, those who are into it have an ideology. An ideology is something in the mind and the brain. The man believes in it and he joins up. Are you going to clean the brain? Terrorism or insurgency is not something you end overnight. We need to learn from Colombia. Colombia has been facing its case for more than 30 to 40 years now; theirs is about drugs.

They believe there is so much money to be made from drugs. Initially, they were allowed. By the time the Americans saw the effect of cocaine on their streets with their young ones, they turned against it and said, ‘No, you must stop this.’ But the fact is that those who are the rebels in Colombia are doing so because of cocaine. Up till today, they are still there even though the situation has mellowed down a little bit.

So, it doesn’t just go away like that.  A lot of effort is required, and the military alone cannot stop it. The military can provide an enabling environment where the government will be able to correct those things that created the opportunity for them to be terrorists. It is not the military that will create jobs. It is not the military that will talk to people and say, don’t do this again. We are leaving a lot of things undone. We expect the military to do them all. It is not a war between two countries.

Even during a war between two countries, somebody must be ready to say, ‘Okay, let us stop it’, and the other party must agree. The military alone can’t solve it. In the past, we used five factors in the military for security.  We call it the DIMES construct. The first one is Diplomatic or politics. It is the most important. Good governance is politics. ‘I’ is for information and that is why the media is being called in. There is the ‘M’, which stands for the military; the next is the Economy, and the ‘S’ is for Social. We are only making use of the ‘M’.

That’s why the army pays an allowance to those in these areas to spend and improve the economic situation in their regions. People shout and accuse them of encouraging terrorism financing. If you don’t do some economic activities in that place, things will become worse. This is because people will become poorer. When they are poor, you can’t tell them not to go into terrorism.

What is your view about state governors’ interference with local government funds?

People are advocating that local governments must be allowed to perform. If local governments are performing, a lot of things that will be done at the local government level will engage a lot of people. But no, the state governors are not allowing them (the local governments).

Governors look at local government as their property. Will the military create local governments? Will they force local governments to function? It is not possible. So, it is not the military that can solve the issue of terrorism.

They are only expected to provide an enabling environment for people to discuss, and for the government to solve the problems that have created all these issues.

When the people of Gwoza had forgotten that terrorism was still in the country, and deadly suicide attacks occurred. What do you think is responsible?

When you do things and they are working, nobody goes to sleep. You believe things are normal. You are dealing with people who have vowed that this is their way of life. Gwoza used to be one of the flashpoints in the North-East, and for a very long time, things were relaxed. People are now going about their jobs, thinking things are okay.

Recently, we had our monthly lecture series and one of the doctors at the Defence College spoke about how women were being engaged by terrorists to be involved in suicide bombings. She spoke recently before the Gwoza incident happened. She said point blank that terrorists would make use of more and more women than men because the belief is that everybody will be suspicious of any man. The first woman that detonated the first bomb in Gwoza was a woman with a baby. Nobody would have ever suspected a woman who was carrying a baby.

But there is more to that. It might be because of the threat to her life and that of her family. In Zamfara State, women are the master logistics suppliers. Now, they give them money to trade and make money so that when they buy those things they need, nobody is going to suspect. That’s the thing we are facing. The military cannot solve that.

It is a societal issue, and the military can’t be everywhere. Suppose a trader bought two bags of rice yesterday, and today, the trader finished selling it; nobody is asking questions about the number of persons she sold the rice to. The military cannot solve the insecurity in Nigeria. That’s not their responsibility. To start with, the easiest thing is good governance.

But you once said the judiciary holds one of the keys to ending terrorism in the country.

Let me start by saying there are three arms of government: the executive, the legislative, and the judiciary. I’m starting with the legislative arm of government. They make the laws. The executive implements whatever policy they want to execute. It must be in line with the law, which the legislature has made. But the third arm is the judiciary which interprets whatever the legislature and the executive are doing; they are the interpreters.

Anybody who runs afoul of the law of the country anywhere in the world, the judiciary is expected to try them. Failure to try them allows them to think that the offence is something they can get away with. When people start thinking like that, then the level of impunity in society becomes uncontrollable. With that, it becomes very difficult to have law and order.

It’s not only on the issue of insecurity; it’s in our lives generally that the judiciary has a serious role to play, and more importantly, in the level of insecurity because those who were arrested must be tried and tried fairly, firmly, and accurately.

Justice delayed is justice denied. Wasting time in trial means you deny those who have been kept in custody, their fair hearing, you deny them their rights and then you deny those who have done the job of arresting those people the appreciation for the job they’ve done. That is what we are facing today. That is why I said they have so much to do.

What then is the function of the police in this matter?

The police arrest, investigate, and prosecute. While the prosecution is going on, they keep the person on trial in the custody of the correctional services because the person cannot come from his house to the court. So, they are kept somewhere. That’s where the correctional service comes in. But it is the police and the judiciary that have so much to do in determining what happens in society. If there is a belief that they are not doing their investigation well, it will get to a point where everybody in the society feels nothing is working.

That’s why I said they have so much to do with what is happening. In the military’s old policy, when you are going out on internal security, a magistrate is expected to be there to follow you, but in the modern context, who recognises a magistrate again? They operate more at the local government level. Now, what is recognised in counter-insurgency is the High Court. Can any High Court judge follow any military? Before the military even goes out, if you are to borrow from the Americans who are using their system, when the military is planning an operation, the Ministry of Justice will meet the Ministry of Defence and come out with different definitions of problems they may likely face when they get there.

Since we started trying Boko Haram suspects in the country, we have recorded low convictions despite the several arrests made by troops. Does that not worry you?

I’m not going to quote any number. But my experience is that those who are arrested have not been prosecuted. Under the guise of ‘oh, the two sides have their case.’ In some cases, the judge will say the investigation is flawed. This is because they have not been part of what is happening. In a society where you have a problem, and you are saying something is flawed but you are not ready to advise on how to go about it.

This is a country that allows electronic evidence. How many courts in Nigeria still admit (electronic evidence), apart from Lagos? Even in Abuja, how many of the courts allow electronic evidence? The situation we are facing is not normal; it is different from a murder or something. It is terrorism. What terrorists are trying to do is instill fear in the minds of anybody. The terrorists are insurgents.

An insurgency is a situation where some people want to change the political pattern in a society to suit what they want, whether it is right or not.

That’s the essence of insurgency. They have decided to use terrorism as their strategy. So, two major issues are combined, and people are still saying we must treat their cases the same way we are treating stealing and robbery. Let us learn from the Americans.

What are the lessons you think can be learnt from the Americans?

The Americans knew if they followed the normal pattern of trial in their country, all the terrorists they had arrested would escape. We cannot go anywhere. This is our country. But then, you can’t continue to treat these people as if it is a normal case. This is not a normal issue. People are shouting; there is insecurity in the country. If you don’t try those who have been brought forward, then you’re encouraging those who are behind.

So, if somebody goes to them, and says, ‘Come and join us’, it becomes very easy to recruit. Even when we talk about amnesty, people are shouting, ‘Give amnesty’; in normal amnesty, you have a way where people go through the process of trial, and at the end of the day, the state pardons you.

But you go through a process. The idea is that the state wants to let you know you have committed an offence against it (the state). But at the end of the day, we’re not going to incarcerate you or put you anywhere. But you know that you’ve been tried. The trial may just be bringing them in. You are this person, and you are guilty of this offence and let him know he has been pardoned. We do this in the military; we call it admonishing. By this, you face a trial. It is in your record that you faced a trial. But where people have been kept somewhere, they’ve been investigated and then they can’t be tried because of one thing or the other, then something is wrong with the system.

Many of the cases against suspected Boko Haram terrorists are being dismissed for want of evidence. Don’t you think it is high time the military high command improved on that aspect?

You see, you are getting something wrong. It is not the military that’s supposed to collect evidence. They’ve gone forward to go and fight a battle. Those who are supposed to be prosecuting are supposed to be part of that team. If they don’t join the team, what do you do? That’s where the problem is coming from. Everybody left everything to the military.

It’s not just the military that should go out there to fight, and arrest terrorists. If you pick up suspected terrorists and you don’t collect some evidence, then you can’t take anybody to court. If they collect some evidence based on their own experience, which is not their job, then something is fundamentally wrong with the system. Everybody keeps on accusing the military, ‘You have not collected evidence’; that’s not their job.

For every internal security operation, the other agencies are supposed to be there. That’s why now, rather than say, military operations, they are calling it joint operations. So, when you say, ‘Let us tell our troops to improve on evidence collection’, it’s like you are saying it is your job to fight, collect evidence and prosecute. They are not the ones to prosecute. So, if they are not the ones to prosecute, the person to do so should come forward and start with the evidence collection right from the beginning.

But even with that, the military has even changed. For instance, in Giwa Barracks, in Maiduguri, they have a joint intelligence and investigation cell. It is not just about the military. If somebody is not doing his job, everybody blames the military. Every time, the military has not done this, the military has not done that; are they the ones prosecuting? People should stop ascribing what is not their responsibility to them (the military). That is part of what we’re saying. They are doing a constabulary job, not just a policing job, and yet everybody feels comfortable, and then, they turn around and blame them when in reality, it’s not their job.

Yes, some people are being trained. I was in the military police when I was in the service. I was trained as an investigator, but my investigation ended within the military circle. When it’s going out, I’m not the one to handle it, because I’m not the one to prosecute; the person who’s going to prosecute will join me.

Do you think an amendment to the Terrorism Prevention Act as being clamoured in some quarters will help in trying terrorism suspects?

It’s not the law; it’s the individuals. The law is there, the interpretation and implementation matter. If you have the best of all laws, if you don’t interpret them well, if you don’t do what you are supposed to do, you are still wasting time. It is about the mindset. Nigerians will need to change their mindset and their attitude to work.

Yes, no document is perfect. That is why any document in the military is subject to review. We have those reviewed every four years; we have that for five years. By the third year, we start looking at what the problems are, and a committee is set up to look at that. The Terrorism Prevention Act is to guide everybody who is involved to know their responsibilities, and how to go about things. The legal procedures to prosecute people on various offences are there. Beyond the guidance and the application, interpretation matters. That’s where the problem is coming from. It’s not about the act. The act may not be okay, but you can still make it work.

The constitution may not be okay, you can still make it work if you want to work. We need to change our attitude as Nigerians and see the country as truly ours and things must be made to work because if it’s not working, it is not one person who is going to suffer it, everybody will feel it. We are shouting today because everybody is feeling insecure. That is why we need to make things work for us to sleep well and enjoy our lives.

So, if we change the Terrorism Prevention Act, it doesn’t mean it’s going to work; it’s the people who are going to make it work. In the military, there is this saying, ‘The machine is as good as the man manning it. If you are not good at that machine, if you have the best of all machines, it will be wasted. You won’t be able to do anything if the machine is there, but if you are good and the machine is not okay, you will find a way of utilising it to suit what you want.

Do you agree with a comment made by the Chief of Defence Staff that the judiciary has been too soft on criminals?

Is that not what we are saying that they have so much to do? They should be fair and just. There should also be equity. If people feel that ‘yes, this man has committed an offence’, and the man has been tried fairly, everybody will have trust in the system. But where the punishment is too harsh or too soft, people will start doubting the workability of that system. So, it’s Nigerians and those in exalted positions who must be able to do something to ensure they have so much to do.

They (the judiciary) have so much to do. That is what I keep saying; they have so much contribution to be made to the security of Nigeria. Yes, they may be in court, or their offices, but their pronouncement, and their actions have so much impact on whatever happens in the four corners of Nigeria. So, if they do the needful, everybody will sit up.

There will still be people who will complain. And that is why they are there.

People will still complain. You can’t rule out criminal activities. So, I am not saying they must be jailed or incarcerated or kill everybody. But if justice is found, if justice is fair, and timely then a lot of people who are beginning to think in terms of being criminals will have second thoughts.

Should the government continue to lose cases against suspected Boko Haram terrorists, what will this portend for the country, the citizens, and the troops involved in counter-terrorism operations?

I am not a soothsayer, but we are seeing the effects, and it is not only on the troops but the entire nation. When they get to a point where they feel frustrated, and no matter what they do, the level of insecurity is not going down, they may get discouraged. We all need to work together as one entity to ensure that everyone plays their part.

Here at the centre, one of the recommendations we had from one presentation was that the attitude of Nigerians must change. We must take pride in whatever we do, and we must do our job correctly. In the military, for instance, if you have a situation where somebody writes your report about you, you can be entrusted to perform a job without supervision, you are a highflier.

Given the importance of the judiciary to the fight against terrorism in the country, has your centre reached out to the Ministry of Justice to convey some of your thoughts to them?

That is not my job. My job is to recommend to them which we have been doing. We normally send our reports weekly to all the ministries that are affected by our discussions. So, if we discuss something, and it touches on the Minister of Justice or Attorney General, we will send it to him irrespective of whatever he believes. We also ask for feedback. The Minister of Justice has responded once in one year, others don’t do, while some do, but we will keep sending it to them. The report goes to the NSA’s office, the Chief of Army Staff, the CDS, and the IG.