By Henry ‘Efe Duku
The term ‘genocide’ was probably first coined by Raphael Lemkin in his 1944 work, ‘Axis Rule in Occupied Europe’. It was first recognised as a crime under international law in 1946 by the United Nations General Assembly. It is defined under Article 2 of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, 1948 (‘Genocide Convention”) as well as Article 6 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (‘ICC Statute’) as “acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such: killing members of the group; causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; [and] forcibly transferring children of the group to another group”.
By its legal definition in the Genocide Convention (and the ICC Statute), the crime of genocide has both mental and physical constitutive elements, which must be proved where the crime is alleged. The mental element or ‘dolus specialis’ is a clear and specific intent to wholly or partly destroy a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group. So, alongside acts evidencing genocidal characteristics, there must coexist with such acts, the ‘intent’ to commit genocide by the alleged offenders. On the other hand, the physical or material element is the actual commission of specific acts against the targeted group, including killing, causing serious harm, creating life conditions designed to destroy, prevent births, or forcibly transfer children away from the targeted group.
Victims of a genocide are deliberately, rather than randomly, targeted for elimination just because they belong to or are perceived to belong to the targeted group. It is an incomparable evil. In his work, ‘The Evil in Genocide’, Berel Lang posits that: ‘[o]n any ranking of crimes or atrocities, it would be difficult to name an act or event regarded as more heinous. Genocide arguably appears now as the most serious offense in humanity’s lengthy – and, we recognize, still growing – list of moral or legal violations.’ The prohibition of genocide is a peremptory norm of international law (jus cogens) for which derogation is disallowed.
Given its character, any allegation of the crime of genocide instantly riles human conscience. It provokes global attention and high-level independent investigations to establish the truth of its occurrence or the denial of same. It is not a label that any nation state can conclusively make on another sovereign State without independent institutional verification. To be culpable in genocide, there must be direct or indirect evidential link with the intent to commit the crime or acts of genocide.
It cannot be denied by persons of good conscience that hardened non-state actors often labelled as ‘militants’, ‘bandits’ or ‘religious fundamentalists’ operating mainly with evil religious irredentism are wrecking unimaginable havoc on many communities inhabited by innocent Nigerians, especially in the Northern part of the country. Kidnappers are also on the prowl. These have created contagions in the Southern part of the country, with bloodletting here and there. Traveling by road has gradually become a huge risk, with reports of kidnappers being paid unimaginable ransoms regularly by troubled families of their victims. These are no doubt crimes, but do they rise to ‘genocide’ under the Genocide Convention (and the ICC Statute)? No, but they are serious crimes under Nigerian law. The Nigerian State has a bounden duty to deal convincingly and squarely with these crime to guarantee peace and security of the citizenry.
In all of these, there seems to be no factual or truthful evidence that the ungodly actions of the non-state actors are strictly predicated on some ‘religion tests’ to select their victims. Innocent Christians and Muslims alike are being recklessly killed by the evildoers. Additionally, there seems to be zero evidence that the Nigerian State or its government is, as a matter of policy, encouraging the extra-judicial killing of its citizens, especially as evidence abound of gallant officers and men of the Nigerian Armed Forces being out there fighting these non-state actors to protect the nation. There is however, a growing thinking that the strategists of the Federal Government’s military action against terrorist elements in the country needs to deploy more kinetic resources to hunt down the violent enemies of the State who make life unbearable for many, especially those living in remote areas. As it should be, the ceaseless bloodletting is concerning to all true patriots who believe in this country and want its full stability. Our friends in the international community, including the United State of America, who have strategic investments and diverse legitimate interests in our country may also offer ideas on or support for good and decisive measures to ride the country of the destabilising effects of the non-state actors. Any Libyan, Iraqi or Afghan option will however not work in Nigeria. Nigeria holds the key to peace in the entire Sub-Saharan Africa, and that key must always be kept safe. The Federal Government under President Bola Tinubu’s trusted leadership has an enormous constitutional responsibility to effectively manage our national security challenges. The emerging threats of today cannot be resolved on the altar of threats or fear. Nigeria is all a great many of Nigerians have. We must protect it with utmost wisdom, patriotism and faith. Mr. President may start with a high-level ‘Diplomacy Cabinet’ of respectable eminent statesmen and diplomats with adept communication and negotiation skills. Foremost leaders who are versed in strategic global engagements and able to navigate complex international landscapes and seamlessly inspire global cooperation.
Prince Duku, Special Adviser on Legislative & Plenary Matters to the Deputy President of Nigeria’s 9th Senate, Senator Ovie Omo-Agege, CFR, is an engineer, a lawyer and a law researcher.
