By Mahmud Shauibu Rimgim
Protesting is a fundamental right and an essential aspect of democracy, allowing citizens to express their dissatisfaction with their leaders. Historic examples include Martin Luther King Jr.‘s protests against racial discrimination in the United States and Nelson Mandela’s fight against apartheid in South Africa. In Nigeria, peaceful protests have often been a means to demand change on crucial national issues.
Recently, protests against bad governance took place peacefully in states like Plateau, Taraba, and Lagos. However, in Kano, Jigawa, Kebbi, Borno, and Kaduna, these protests turned violent and destructive, leading to the loss of lives and widespread damage to public and private properties.
The protest in Kano was particularly devastating, causing significant economic and social disruptions. This level of destruction is unprecedented in Kano’s history, a city that has been a vibrant economic hub since the era of trans-Saharan trade. It is hard to believe that any resident of Kano would intentionally inflict such harm on their community, causing loss of lives, bodily harm, or the destruction of businesses and public infrastructure.
Political differences should foster healthy competition, not violence. Democracies thrive on the right to choose leaders every four years, as evidenced by recent elections in the UK and the upcoming US Presidential election.
Senator Rabiu Musa Kwankwaso, a two-term governor of Kano State, had earlier issued a press release urging citizens not to protest but to express their will at the ballot box during the next election season. His caution may have been driven by concerns that protests could escalate into violence, leading to the destruction of state property and harm to law-abiding citizens.
Kano deserves better from its political elite, who should prioritize the city’s long-term prosperity over short-term political gains. The democratic process allows the electorate to choose their leaders every four years, giving them the opportunity to either reaffirm their choices or seek change. Democracy flourishes when it is allowed to grow from infancy to maturity.
Governor Abba Kabir Yusuf of Kano State demonstrated remarkable leadership during the protests. His crisis management skills were evident from the onset of the unrest. The Governor engaged with peaceful demonstrators, assuring them of their constitutional right to protest while emphasizing the need to do so within the law. However, when the protests turned violent, endangering lives and property, he convened an emergency security council meeting and acted swiftly to restore order.
The Governor’s visit to the vandalized Kano Printing Press, an institution with deep roots in the community, was particularly emotional. He vowed to bring the perpetrators to justice and assured the people of Kano that every effort would be made to hold those responsible accountable.
The security agencies played a crucial role in curbing the violence and apprehending the criminals who infiltrated the peaceful protests. The government’s prompt response, including the imposition of a 24-hour curfew, was instrumental in restoring normalcy to the city. The vigilance and hard work of the security forces led to the recovery of some stolen properties and the arrest of those involved in the violence, all with the full support and encouragement of Governor Abba Kabir Yusuf.
One of the most concerning aspects of the protests was the infiltration of unpatriotic individuals who raised the Russian flag during the unrest. Nigeria is a sovereign nation, grappling with its own political challenges therefore, such actions could create unnecessary diplomatic tensions between the two countries.
Governor Abba Kabir Yusuf out rightly condemned these seditious elements who sought to ignite tension and create an atmosphere of mistrust between Nigeria and Russia
Consequently Kano state government distanced itself from the international implications of this unfortunate incident, In a press conference the state’s commissioner of information Alh Baba Halilu Dantiye expressed the sadness and displeasure of the government on the unpatriotic and seditious rising of Russian flag on Nigerian soil as a flagrant abuse of Nigerian sovereignty and independence. He stated that federal government is expected to wade in because it is outside the jurisdiction of the state government because of its international dimension between Nigeria and Russia. It is expected that federal government will find a lasting solution to this unfortunate development
The lessons learned from these protests highlight the need for a harmonious relationship between federal and state security agencies. The symbiotic and synergistic relationship between the two levels of government is essential for maintaining peace and security in the state.
The 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, as amended, grants state governors the responsibility of maintaining peace as the chief security officers of their states, in coordination with federal security agencies. For effective governance, there must be a smooth flow of information and intelligence sharing between security agencies and the government. The state’s security council, chaired by the governor, should exercise operational control over the heads of security agencies within the state, ensuring that they work together to maintain peace and security.
However, anytime there is a security threat that will compromise peaceful coexistence of the people that hast a political undertone and capable of steering unrest the state security council chaired by the governor should deliberate on the impending crisis and take necessary action that will forestall breakdown of law and order in the state.
The on going emir ship tussle in Kano, which falls under the purview of the state government, has become a contentious issue in the judiciary. While the matter is being adjudicated, its political ramifications will continue to be felt in the history of Kano for many years to come till the end of time.
At this juncture It is very important to allow the judiciary to operate independently, interpreting the constitution and applying the law without any political interference cum subterranean influence from any quarter. As a chieftaincy affair the state judiciary headed by the Chief Judge have the judicial powers to entertain the case. However, the involvement of Federal High Court in the case created a lacuna as to which court has jurisdiction to hear the case. However the Federal High Court was approached seeking redress on the violation of the fundamental human right of the litigant by repealing the law that created the new emirates and all those who benefitted from it. In any case the case is now before court appeal for judgement.
To avoid further conflict, there is a need for out-of-court settlements and a common ground be found for benefit of the people and future generations
At any rate respecting the separation of powers between the legislature, the executive, and the judicial branches of government, democracy will flourish, allowing for peaceful coexistence and the rule of law.
Mahmud Shuaibu Ringim
HALIM Consulting Ltd
mahmudshuaibu44@gmail.com
