ICC ACCUSE BOKO HARAM OF CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY..SAY NO INDICATORS TO SUBSTANTIATE ALLEGATIONS OF STATE-SANCTIONED OUTRAGES BY SECURITY FORCES

Colonel(rtd)Sambo Dasuki, National Security Adviser

Colonel(rtd)Sambo Dasuki, National Security Adviser, son of former Sultan Ibrahim Dasuki

VOA News (26 Nov)

The International Criminal Court’s
prosecutor has accused Boko Haram
militants of committing crimes against
humanity in Nigeria, mainly murder and
persecution.

The office of prosecutor Fatou Bensouda
says there is a “reasonable basis” to
believe Boko Haram has launched a
“widespread and systematic attack” that resulted in the deaths of more than 1,200 Christians and Muslims since mid-2009.

The report, which was leaked to media
outlets, recommends that Nigerian
authorities prosecute those crimes, or the ICC could do it itself.

Regarding accusations that Nigerian
security agencies also committed human rights violations, the report said there is no indication that those alleged acts were part of a “state or organizational policy to attack the civilian population.”

Last month, Human Rights Watch said the conflict between Boko Haram and the Nigerian government has claimed more than 2,800 lives since 2009, with some 1,300 the result of action by Nigerian security forces. The group said the violence escalated this year, with more than 815 killings in the first nine months alone.

Boko Haram says it is fighting to establish an Islamic state in northern Nigeria.

About these ads

About beegeagle

BEEG EAGLE -perspectives of an opinionated Nigerian male with a keen interest in Geopolitics, Defence and Strategic Studies
This entry was posted in ARMED CONFLICT, COUNTERINSURGENCY OPERATIONS, GLOBAL DEFENCE NEWS, NIGERIA, NIGERIAN ARMED FORCES, RISK ANALYSIS, SECURITY ISSUES AND CONCERNS, TERRORISM, Uncategorized, WEST AFRICAN STANDBY FORCE and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

24 Responses to ICC ACCUSE BOKO HARAM OF CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY..SAY NO INDICATORS TO SUBSTANTIATE ALLEGATIONS OF STATE-SANCTIONED OUTRAGES BY SECURITY FORCES

  1. beegeagle says:

    Have the BBC or Guardian UK carried this story? Of course, it cannot have skipped their notice.

    Rewind to November 1st when the Nigerian security forces were indicted in an Amnesty International report and it was already on the BBC website even before it had been launched at Abuja! Two weeks later, they were the first to air the howler by Reuters which had Nigerian troops supposedly executing terror suspects.

    Yesterday and the day before, they were first to put up the news of the attack on the Abuja SARS base and the Jaji church. Even as of 1am today,they were still broadcasting vox populi from Kaduna streets of people bemoaning ‘inskewrity’..like nothing is being done about it. Never mind that an infinitely more trusted, objective and well-regarded REUTERS are today restating the fact that military action by Nigerian forces has thrown Boko Haram into disarray.

    Today, the perfidious media houses of the Isles who are adept at undermining nations and governments while propping up renegades and ‘activists’, have something which holds a contrary view on their skewed reportage and the voluble media organs are feigning ignorance.

    I say this again – the BBC are ANYTHING but impartial. They choose the wars which they fight and the causes which they uphold. In the just-ended Gaza Conflict, they went through painstaking effort to ensure that both sides of the story were heard – obviously not wanting to offend the Israeli Govt. Compare that to Syria where only activists and subversives can hope to get heard on the BBC.

    Who are they fooling – so much double standards yet they never stop the grandstanding about impartiality?

    Today, Yasser Arafat’s remains were exhumed. The BBC, obviously preparing a soft landing for Israel, were surprisingly wondering whether the exhumation and looming forensic investigation would serve any purpose…saying that even if Israel were found to have been culpable in the man’s elimination using radioactive substances, a very close aide of Arafat’s was bound to have been involved. So the pursuit of justice is not unconditional?

    Elsewhere in Africa, they would have been drumming up support for efforts to see that the culpable are “held to account” and “brought to justice”. They would look for the most convenient posts on their Facebook wall to create an impression of unanimity in the calls for culprits to be “brought to justice” while deliberately silencing naysayers.

    Harkback to 2009, the same BBC which love to pretend that they are the conscience of the world and the voice of the voiceless uncharacteristically and against the grain of their posturing, REFUSED to broadcast an appeal for aid for the victims of the Gaza Conflict of 2009, apparently so as not to upset Israel.

    I have no issues with Israel for their militaristic antics but I have just posted the foregoing to show you that the BBC are not as objective as the hollow claims which they make. They feign amnesia when it is imperative that they do so, they prop up who they please, they will do the unconscionable if they have to and certainly, some countries are marked out for a media-led siege characterised by malevolent reportage. NIGERIA ARE THE BBC’S FALL GUYS. It is a fact that is as constant as the northern star.

    BBC Hausa also sound like Boko Haram mouthpieces, showing ‘sensitivity’ when BH get negative coverage but waxing orgasmic when the Nigerian security forces get bad press.

    It does appear that they are more interested in pleasing those Hausa Service listeners and sustaining the lovey-dovey relationship with BH than with impartiality and journalistic balance.

  2. beegeagle says:

    ELSEWHERE on 13-8-2012, BEEGEAGLE WROTE:

    http://beegeagle.wordpress.com/2012/08/13/jstf-troops-kill-2-boko-haram-insurgents-in-damaturu-gun-battle/

    BBC Africa are at it again today. This time it is through a supposed Yobe native, Isa Sanusi, who is supposed to be speaking for the people while showcasing that insidious worldview steeped in blackmail which we have consistently pointed out, namely, that BBC Hausa are tainting the output of BBC Africa with a pro-terrorist feedback.

    It should worry the BBC that when asked if the people he says are fleeing Damaturu are doing so out of fear for the security forces or Boko Haram, Sanusi first feigns objectivitiy by saying that the people are fleeing from both the security forces and Boko Haram. Then, Sanusi does the expected.

    He settles on the security forces, alleging that ‘pfiful in Damaturu’ have been telling him how security forces are searching houses, arresting and wait for it..killing people. Now the BBC are sensitive about their own image but are very comfortable about running down Nigeria and every well-intentioned move by her tenacious security forces. The common thread in Sanusi’s thread is that ‘pfipful are kwampflaining’. We hear him.

    Yesterday, it was Boko Haram which attacked the security forces but it is expectedly Boko Haram which get off lightly because BBC Africa are very light in their criticism of Boko Haram. To my mind, the BBC are more interested in retaining their share of the audience upcountry by keying into pedestrian pro-terrorist sympathies which run through the upcountry media. It is working for them. It is better to nurture their audience even if it means providing friendly coverage of terrorist activities rather than standing for what is right. After all, they did not support the IRA in Britain.

    You might recall that when Boko Haram last threatened to attack media houses, they mentioned the Hausa Services of Radio France International and Voice of America as been lined up for attacks. But they did not mention BBC Hausa which suggested that they are okay with the BBC’s coverage of the insurgency. Well, I leave you to imagine the content of broadcast journalism which Boko Haram find to be agreeable. Only on the BBC.

    Elsewhere, Beegeagle wrote:

    http://beegeagle.wordpress.com/2012/07/26/global-west-specialist-agency-to-supply-20-patrol-vessels-to-nigerian-navy-maritime-guard-commandnimasa-patrols-eight-units-already-delivered/

    excerpts

    “Even if BBC Hausa were as well
    acquainted with these facts and realities, against the backdrop of the poorly disguised gameplan by the upcountry media to thoroughly discredit the FG for no reason other than the fact that President Jonathan is to them “an outsider”, BBC Hausa would pretend not to know better. These are the realities of the times which I was explaining to JHAMILT yesterday.

    * The archconservative power elite and the intelligentsia champion the creation of security threats ala Boko Haram

    * The media contribute vitriolic
    propaganda

    * The people throw up contrived alarmist tales of abuses supposedly committed by security forces. The gameplan is to make the country ungovernable, distract the security forces from pursuing terrorists and to discredit the government. For fear of being exposed by apprehended terrorists, those who are the masterminds of the mayhem are pushing for dialogue.

    Because the Hausa Service are giving tainted feedback to London in the name of homers’ perspectives, BBC Africa appear convinced that dialogue is the only way to transact with terrorists, even as British forces are deployed against terrorists in Afghanistan and Somalia!”

  3. makanaky says:

    In my opinion if BBC or any foreign or local media does not imbibe the simple rule of journalism which is impartial reporting, verification of sources of information and not sensationalize its reporting they should be sent packing from our shores period.

  4. beegeagle says:

    They have shown their hand and it has never been balanced. They are clearly FAR from being uninterested parties and they are too passionate about the Nigeria story to make for sensible and balanced coverage.

    The fact of not having carried this ICC report, even after having trumpeted the HRW and AI tirades, shows that they follow a carefully scripted gameplan on Nigeria. Journalistic balance can therefore be conveniently sacrificed on the altar of that gameplan.

    The FG appear to know their subversive proclivities too well. That is the reason why Nigeria are probably the only country(aside from Zimbabwe) in Africa where the BBC have been denied the right to rebroadcast their programmes through a network of FM relay stations. Unfortunately, Nigeria is the second largest BBC audience after India in the whole wide world.

    Perhaps that denial of rebroadcast rights is what the Nigerian state are paying for – daring to resist the tide of condescending neocolonial reportage which is stuck in stereotypes and bears little correlation to the untainted reality. Unfortunately, BBC Hausa have so thoroughly perforated and diluted the Nigeria story by taking full advantage of the fact that their minders in Europe have a limitless appetite for the scandalous.

    Garbage in, garbage out is it. Just hypocrisy and a desperate urge to be the source of scandalous breaking news. They know what is wrong with every country on earth but do not know what is wrong with their Isles.

    For instance, as the African Nations Cup approaches, expect to hear them say that the Super Eagles have been in the doldrums since 1994 when they last won the Nations Cup. But during the European equivalent of that same tourney, they would never tell you that their own country have NEVER won the European Cup since its inception in 1960…something which small countries such as Denmark, Holland and Greece have managed.

    They are just a trifling motley.

  5. beegeagle says:

    D-E-S says

    BBC and Israel don’t get on either….The israeli’s figure them for been to pro-Palestinian

  6. beegeagle says:

    That was the reason why I said that in last week’s spat between Israel and Hamas, the BBC went to great lengths in trying to strike a balance…getting both sides of the story. They did not want to offend Israeli sensibilities.

    That was also why the refused to broadcast the Gaza Relief appeal in 2009.

    The point is, would they be similarly bothered to get any other side of the story except that which is damaging to the interests of the Nigerian nation?

  7. beegeagle says:

    D-E-S says

    And based firmly on your statement
    and deductions lies the differences in
    ‘interest based propaganda’ between Israel, Palestine and Nigeria (and at large Africa)….

    I have my own objections about how the BBC reports Africa, but then I understand my fair share of (African ) politics and It moves extremely lethargically to counter growing concerns of any national magnitude, it literally takes days after an event for major media houses to get any ‘official’ response from all the affected and mandated ministries and yet they have ‘spokesmen/women’… instead they (media houses) get ‘bounced’ from one office to another, without consideration that the world including their own electorates are is firmly in the 24hr cycle news bulletins, and every delay is a matter of economic loss to them, so we need to pick-up the damn phone and tell our stories….

    Believe me Shekau and Al- Ameriki are sat by their phones right
    now, they can’t wait to narrate their
    insidious fairy tales at this very
    moment as we lampoon the BBC and
    Co.

    Our politicians are way to self-
    serving to accept taking the responsibility to answer a ‘meddling
    western journalist’ in their arrogance they pass on the buck up the ‘chain of ignorance’ and then mourn after alongside the public of ‘western arrogance’…so who’s to blame really?!!!

  8. beegeagle says:

    In this case, D-E-S, the specifics are different. Do not defend the indefensible. They did not need to contact any minister in Nigeria. If anything, they are chummy with Fatou Bensouda of the ICC whose ascension to power they trumpeted. Why did they not ask her? Why did they not use the feed from Reuters and AFP as they have always done since I was a teenager or earlier?

    In most cases where they are not getting stories from their local hackwriters, they take stuff directly from REUTERS and AFP…both of which carried this story but which the BBC glossed over.

    If you ask me, the FG came away looking good on the back of this ICC report and that does not sit well with a famously partisan BBC who report Nigeria stories with made-up minds and predispositions.

    Perhaps it is different with Kenya…not so with Nigeria. Or you do not see footnotes on their online portal which clearly shows that they are LOCKED onto Reuters, AFP and to a lesser extent, AP?

    There is NO EXCUSE for not using this story. Their fall guys came out good while their rights activists, Boko Haram, came away with a bloody nose in the report. That is why they have feigned ignorance.

  9. peccavi says:

    The only reason the ICC will prosecute people is if there is no court within their home countries competent or capable of trying them. Or if a country formally requests it.
    It is good that the ICC has made these pronouncements but if they charge any member of BH then it is an insult to Nigeria.
    Considering the thousands of people detained, how many have been charged, how many tried and how many convicted.
    Hopefully the Nigerian government will take the right message from this and institute and special fast track, Terrorism and Communal Disturbances Court (and hopefully and economic crimes one). With dedicated judges, prosecutors, defenders and investigators cases should be fast tracked through the system.
    The lack of consequences and transparency is corrosive

    • Henry says:

      There is a new anti-terrorism bill which has passed second reading in the senate, hopefully before the year runs out or by early next year it would become law. The bill answers all questions and recommendations you have sighted above, OGA peccavi.

      In addition to the aforementioned, the bill gives the police or SSS the power to hold onto terror suspects even if they’ve been granted bail, amongst others

      Here is the argument of the IGP of police, he said that they are over 500 boko haram suspects in detention, but the laws available to him(police) are not good enough to take away terrorists from our streets. The current anti terror law is lax and those not grant him(police) the manoeuvrability which he(men) need to efficiently carry out his(their) job of policing. suspects can just be granted bail at will, and then they go back to bombing murdering innocent civilians. So he cannot charge the suspects in custody to court at the moment until proper laws are put in place.
      I do however find his argument convincing, we’ve seen over the past year, detainees are charged to court on terror offences and are just granted bail for lack of evidence.

      • peccavi says:

        But that argues towards a weakness in the policing of these cases.
        Thats why there should be prosecutor/ police teams in which the prosecutors advise the police on the strength or weakness of their cases before charges are brought.
        And the police increase their evidence gathering, interrogation and analysis skills and capacity.
        Most detainees are not recirded or released, those fortunate to be released state that interrogation is basically tell us who of your friend sis Boko Haram and we’ll release you.
        For the poor caught up in this thy are detained indefinitely, for the wealthy they get bail and their cases die. The law as it stands is strong enough to hold suspects and if its not the onus is on the police to get more evidence.
        Hopefully the new law will be a precursor to a wholesale change in tactics and practices

  10. beegeagle says:

    http://www.standardmedia.co.ke/?
    articleID=2000071565&story_title=Kenya-Judiciary-crafting-special-court-to-complement-ICC Judicial pre-emption……

    strategiccommunal political reasoning

    http://www.standardmedia.co.ke/?
    articleID=2000071607&story_title=Kenya-KDF-murder-suspect-in-court

  11. beegeagle says:

    D-E-S says

    I agree with Peccavi 101% because his
    deductions are to my opinion what is/
    should be ‘conflicting propaganda
    resolution 101’.

    Speedy arrest, speedy arraignments and subsequent firm charges, it is the only pre-emption of agitating community politics that keeps the HRW, Amnesty and ICC from mimicking any anti-social sleaze that some media house outfits out there may choose to propagate as a scoop.

    But still our politics and civil services must do their fair share of ‘spokesmanship’ otherwise it’s all for nothing. Case study Baragoi and Garissa
    incidences in Kenya, the glut of
    reportage of all manor and at times
    sheer lunacy has generated a cacophony of half intelligent debate,but debate never the less shifting energies from tribal animosities to nationalistic strategic thinking, the intelligence and security apparatus are busy, the courts are busy and once the culprits start been arraigned in the local courts the agitating communities legitimately feel placated and politically pre-empted.

    The communal talk has shifted from HRW this, ICC that to ‘we will sue’ or ‘we want compensation’….we’ll I agree to, let’s go to court and finish our talking
    there!!!…

    In my opinion the press has a role to play, it’s not important what they always say buts it’s important they pay homage to all opinions provided within the purview of the law and that includes the BBC, and such is my opinion.

  12. beegeagle says:

    D-E-S says in reply to Beegeagle

    http://www.standardmedia.co.ke/?articleID=2000071684&story_title=Kenya-Kenyan-to-head-UN-Mission-in-Liberia

    @Peccavi….you might find this quite
    interesting, we’ll talk about it on a
    later date ….but for now pay attention
    please!!..

  13. beegeagle says:

    D-ES in reply to Peccavi.

    See there lies the problem…The legal
    structure (anti-terror laws) has to be in
    place before the arrests and possible
    prosecutions if at all to protect the
    intelligence sources, this is purely and
    simply the underlying reasons why the US has been squeezing their key
    partners in the fight against terror in
    Africa, that alongside the ‘money
    laundering laws’ to enact with
    expediency….

    In regards to Boko Haram,MRC and et al the police usually really more on ‘Civil-intelligence’ as opposed to Criminal Investigation Departments(CID) or their equivalent and there is a great operational difference in the two
    entities, as we know civil-intelligence
    in simplicity only gathers, collates, analyses, and passes on intelligence,
    they do not worry significantly about
    ‘evidences’ all seek is to know, who,
    where and how.

    But the CID’s are obliged by law to match their assumptions with solid evidence….and therein lies the difficulties without an anti-terror act, that allows the police to follow up on the intel passed on to them by the civil-intelligence agencies

    Peccavi you should know that, the Brits have been trying to up the 48hr custodial hold to 96hrs, I believe they only got 76hrs….but you can correct me!!

    • peccavi says:

      Yes your right. However the existing laws are more than enough to arrest and charge terrorists. Criminal conspiracy laws cover accomplices etc
      Special tribunals should be set up to prevent cases getting tied up in the administrative chaos of the court systme

  14. doziex says:

    Oga beeg, no mind britico- nigerian @ peccavi. I believe, when the chipps are down, he will be # NAIJA all the way (Queens engineer or not)

    As for D-E-S, the kenyan love affair with the brits (BBC by extension) is still going on strong for him to comprehend properly any of our issues/beefs with the BBC.

    But don’t worry the kenyans are getting confident on the african and world stage. They are beginning to spread their wings, and throw some weight about.

    Soon enough, they would run into the BBC we loathe, as they attempt to undercut kenya’s image or shall we say clip it’s wings.

  15. peccavi says:

    Nigeria we hail thee

    Stay there dey face BBC, NTA nko?

    God save the Queen

  16. beegeagle says:

    You have your hand on the button, Doziex.

    D-E-S is probably looking at the world through rose coloured spectacles. Was he listening when on the day that the KDF-SNA-RKB alliance entered Kismayo, the first report from the BBC spoke about sightings of “whitemen” among the advancing forces? That was clearly meant to undermine the efforts of the alliance.

    D-E-S shall yet learn. Experience makes the difference.

  17. beegeagle says:

    D-E-S in reply to Beegeagle

    Earnestly!! You can patronise Kenya all
    you want, reality/history remains
    constant…but for the sake of senility
    we know…..it’s not about the size of
    the dog, but the fight in him, but then
    allow me to stretch the metaphor for the sake of Mr Doziex, this dog don’t
    bark in the shadows anymore, you see
    it truly as it geopolitically inches and
    growls at you…that is the strategic
    shift…that you haven’t been paying
    attention to…but let’s leave and bless it at that!!!
    I regards to the BBC even though I’d
    said my peace in regards….I feel
    obliged to inform you that, your
    assumptions of it are perhaps not
    shared by your government. Think of it, the BBC is not a UK governmental
    organisation rather a public entity, it
    has on occasion received ‘direct’
    decease orders from its government in
    various legitimate guises….which
    simply means that it does perform within law. I hear you asking me
    whose law?!!…the answer is everyone’s
    law the anti-terror law…Nigeria has
    that? Nigeria has the right to
    ‘diplomatically’ exert her will via her
    counterpart the UK foreign and Commonwealth office to keep the BBC
    under check. Why waste time when
    Nigeria understands they are part and
    parcel of the commonwealth and
    subject to legitimate internal scrutiny
    from all fronts, come to think of it, what country would bare more brunt
    from Nigeria’s demise or success than
    the UK in consideration to its localised
    Nigerian representation?!!…let’s
    perhaps ask Peccavi?!!

  18. beegeagle says:

    Patronise Kenya, D-E-S? The BBC report on the day that SNA-KDF did not allude to ‘whitemen’ being seen in Kismayo? So where does ‘patronise Kenya’ come into it?

    Anyway, since all is sweet about BBC reportage, was that allusion to ‘whitemen’ supposed to be ‘kudos’ to the KDF or you do not know that it was their own way of stealing the thunder of the Africans as always?

    Well, you still do not get it and that is why I said ‘experience makes the difference’. We have had it from them since the ECOMOG years and are still facing it from them now. It might yet take more unsavoury reports about Kenya coming from the BBC to fully understand what we have endured at their hands.

    I dunno what you are thinking but as you can see that is what I mean by ‘experience makes the difference’ and that is the hand which Doziex has on the button.

    And what manner of scrutiny by inscrutable folk are you on about? The same British media who are on the cusp of getting reined in on account of their recklessness? The other day, you thought the Army PRO was trying to cover allegations of rights abuses levelled against troops by Reuters? Was that not scrutiny? Well, Reuters recanted. Such scrutiny.

  19. beegeagle says:

    D-E-S, if you think that seeking to post KDF aviation photos or videos in a thread which clearly states ‘Nigerian Army Special Forces’ amounts to censorship, I can live with that. It would be different if it were a video related to the subject matter but no, it was not.

    I do not know you as being incapable of reading or writing so which part of the caption did you not understand? Yet I post a thread related to the KDF and you consistently leave it lying fallow, preferring to post unrelated content where it does not belong – what is that ‘weeping at weddings and singing at funerals’ or just plain unhealthy measuring whistles thingie even when it is not necessary?

  20. beegeagle says:

    D-E-S, if you think that seeking to post KDF aviation photos or videos in a thread which clearly states ‘Nigerian Army Special Forces’ amounts to censorship, I can live with that. It would be different if it were a video related to the subject matter but no, it was not.

    I do not know you as being incapable of reading or writing so which part of the caption did you not understand? Yet I post a thread related to the KDF and you consistently leave it lying fallow, preferring to post unrelated content where it does not belong – what is that ‘weeping at weddings and singing at funerals?’

    Why would you see people trying to start up a conversation about ‘Nigerian Army Special Forces’ and you clearly attempt to derail same by introducing outrightly unrelated content to it? Is that an attempt at wilfull distraction or what? Is it forbidden for you to aid the progress of the thread by sourcing a Nigerian Army Special Forces video and posting same if only to retain a semblance of order? Or is it that I who have posted hundreds of Kenya-related threads here do not know how to squarely focus on my own native Nigeria?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s