Taye Obateru
10 January 2009
Crisis, wherever it occurs should be a thing of concern to well meaning people. That the recent crisis in Jos has attracted a lot of attention is therefore expected.
The monumental loss of lives and properties cannot yet be quantified. Government at various levels therefore should be seen to be making genuine efforts not only to restore normalcy to the area but also to prevent re-occurrence.
This is the expectation of Nigerians and the outside world. But the seeming disagreement between the Federal Government and the Plateau State Government over the matter is drawing the ire of many residents and concerned groups.
The recent suit filed by the state government challenging the powers of the Federal Government to set up an administrative panel to investigate the crisis brought a new dimension to the entire saga. There appears to be mutual suspicion between the two levels of government and this will not augur well in the search for an end to the sectarian crisis in Plateau State.
As it is, the Federal Government is being seen as biased and in favour of the Hausa Moslems against the indigenous groups of Plateau State while the Hausa Moslems are accusing the state government of not only bias, but of being a party in the recent crisis.
The Hausa Moslems have accused Governor Jonah Jang of having a hand in what they call the "genocide" against them in the crisis.
On the other hand, President Umar Yar'Adua is being accused of being sympathetic to the cause of the Hausa and has allegedly made up his mind based on the briefing he allegedly got from the Hausa on the matter.
These sentiments have re-echoed in statements by different groups within the state.
So strong are the sentiments that the Hausa community has declared that it would not appear before the Bola Ajibola-led commission of enquiry set up by the state government to investigate the crisis just as the indigenous groups are expressing reservations about the panel set up by the Federal Government without consultation with the state government.
Addressing a press conference recently, the Youth Wing of the Jama'atu Nasril Islam, Jos North Branch took the state government to the cleaners, saying the governor lacked the moral right to constitute a commission to investigate the crisis.
Their spokesman, Barrister Ahmed Garba said they were holding the governor responsible for the killing of over 500 Hausa moslems in the crisis.
According to him, the shoot-at-sight order given by the governor during the crisis led to the massive killing of their people. He alleged that the police killed many innocent people following the order.
Reminded that the order was not targeted at any group, he alleged that areas inhabited by the Hausa were specifically targeted by the police where they shot and killed many. He blamed the governor for this, citing the governor's suit against the Federal Government challenging its powers to constitute a panel as a vindication of their position.
"By going to court to stop this panel from doing its work, the Governor has not only confirmed our belief of his involvement, but has equally shown the world that he has more skeletons to hide than we knew of. Ironically, Governor Jang has now constituted his own judicial commission of enquiry before which he expects other persons and groups to appear.
"To us, Governor Jang does not have the moral authority to constitute such a commission which at the end of its assignment will hand over its report to his government for action.
It is an equitable fact that a person cannot be a judge in his own cause and a judge must also be free from bias. Since the crisis, Governor Jang has exhibited a high degree of partisanship and hatred. He is biased against the Hausa Muslims.
He had already jumped into the conclusion that the Hausa/Muslims started the crisis. Hence the setting up of a commission by him is only a diversion and an exercise in futility," the group alleged.
On the other hand, various indigenous groups especially of Berom extraction have also taken on the president whom they accused of exhibiting bias in favour of the Hausa
. Two examples will suffice. A group known as Confederation of Plateau State Youth Movements alleged that, "As it relates to the Presidency, its pretentious interest in Plateau and its people is not in doubt. The President and his wife have shown some degree of lack of neutrality in handling the crises in Jos, hence their inability to give prompt support at stopping the hostilities.
These were also manifested when all representatives from the presidency chose not to see Governor Jonah Jang nor visit refugee camps of non-Hausas while on visits to Jos. We can only be worried by such overbearing acts as the constitution of a Presidential Committee on the Jos crisis."
Similarly, the Berom Elders Council at another press conference addressed by Da Yohanna Dang described some actions of the Presidency or her agents as suspicious.
"There are some inexplicable coincidences in the behaviour of officers of the Federal Government that render their impartiality and objectivity in viewing the crisis suspect. Immediately after the 2001 crisis, the President at the time, General Olusegun Obasanjo, personally came to see the destruction and condole with the people of Plateau State.
"President Umaru Yar'Adua is yet to visit personally. Two top public officers came to Jos immediately after the crisis, whom we have to assume were emissaries of the President, namely, Dr. Hassan Lawal, the Honourable Minister of Labour and there was also the Chief of Army Staff, Lt. Gen. Danbazzau.
Both came to Jos and visited only the Central Mosque and such places that harboured Muslims without the courtesy of a visit to the Chief Security Officer of the State, the Governor, David Jonah Jang nor His Majesty, the Gbong Gwom Jos, Da Victor Dung Pam. This deserves an explanation."
Utterances like these have generated concern among many people who are wondering whether such perceived bias against organs that have the constitutional responsibility to resolve the matter augurs well for the much needed healing of wounds.
To some, animosities would appear to have deepened since the crisis with the dangerous implication of preparing grounds for another crisis at the slightest opportunity.
While the constitutionality or otherwise of the Federal Government setting up a panel on the crisis remains for the Supreme Court to decide, observers wonder how this altercation between the two tiers of government would help the quest for a solution to the crisis. Whichever way the matter goes, won't one side see the decisions taken as biased against it and making it more bitter when actions are eventually taken?
Yes, the decision of the Supreme Court would be beneficial for better understanding of the powers of the various tiers of government, but what about its effects on peaceful co-existence which is what is badly needed in Plateau State and other parts of the country?
Be the first to Write a Comment!
Copyright © 2009 Vanguard. All rights reserved. Distributed by AllAfrica Global Media (allAfrica.com). To contact the copyright holder directly for corrections — or for permission to republish or make other authorized use of this material, click here.
AllAfrica aggregates and indexes content from over 125 African news organizations, plus more than 200 other sources, who are responsible for their own reporting and views. Articles and commentaries that identify allAfrica.com as the publisher are produced or commissioned by AllAfrica.
