Justice System and Wadume’s Pat in the Back

 IN THE ARENA

The seven-year light sentence handed down by Justice Binta Nyako to kidnap kingpin, Hamisu Bala (Wadume), has destroyed closure for affected families, fuelled speculations that the prosecution deliberately bungled the case to achieve a predetermined outcome and also questioned the sincerity of the Nigerian state in the war against violent crimes, Ejiofor Alike and Louis Achi write

After a three-year trial characterised by several twists and turns, Justice Binta Nyako of a Federal High Court in Abuja, on July 22, 2022 convicted and sentenced Taraba-based kidnap kingpin, Hamisu Bala (Wadume) to seven years imprisonment. The court specifically convicted the kidnapper for unlawfully escaping from lawful custody and unlawfully dealing in prohibited firearms.

It was curious that the judgment was handed down on July 22, 2022 but details of the court papers only emerged on Sunday, August 14. Justice Nyako convicted Wadume on counts two and 10 of the 13-count charge brought against him and six others by the office of the Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Mr. Abubakar Malami (SAN).

The judge had on the same date delivered judgment on other defendants in the charge marked: FHC/ABJ/CR/30/2020. Other defendants are: Aliyu Dadje (a police inspector); Auwalu Bala (aka omo razor); Uba Bala (aka Uba Delu); Bashir Waziri (aka baba runs); Zubairu Abdullahi (aka Basho) and Rayyanu Abdul.

Ten military officers earlier charged with the convicts, whose names were curiously deleted from the charge sheet for “departmental reasons” are: Captain Tijjani Balarabe; Staff Sgt. David Isaiah; Sgt. Ibrahim Mohammed; Corporal Bartholomew Obanye; Private Mohammed Nura; Lance Corporal Okorozie Gideon; Corporal Marcus Michael; Lance Corporal Nvenaweimoeimi Akpagra; Staff Sgt, Abdulahi Adamu and Private Ebele Emmanuel.

Wadume’s journey to the prison started on August 6, 2019 when a special police operations team dispatched from Abuja, successfully captured him in Taraba State. He was handcuffed and was being transported to Jalingo, the Taraba State capital when the police team from the Intelligence Response Team (IRT) came under intense fire from soldiers who gave them a hot chase.

Four persons were subsequently killed on the spot with several others sustaining serious injury. The dead included Inspector Mark Ediale, Sergeant Usman Danzumi and Sergeant Dahiru Musa. Jubril, a civilian was also killed in the one-sided shootout.

The soldiers then freed the cuffed Wadume, according to a statement by CP Frank Mba, the then police spokesperson who also provided public updates on the matter.

But the then Army spokesperson, Col. Sagir Musa said that soldiers from 93 Battalion received a distress call that kidnappers had come to operate in their community, leading to the hot pursuit that culminated in the unfortunate killings. 

Musa, who accused the police operatives of refusing to stop at the military checkpoint, described them as “suspected kidnappers who turned out to be an Intelligence Response Team…on a covert assignment from Abuja.”

In a relentless effort to bring Wadume to justice for the heinous crimes, the police rearrested him in Kano on August 20, 2019. They subsequently released the video of his confessional statement that corroborated their allegation that the soldiers who killed their men were working in concert with kidnappers.

Charges were filed against Wadume and his accomplices at the Federal High Court in Abuja. As the common saying goes, the court cannot grant prayers that were not sought. So Justice Nyako merely delivered the judgment based on the charges and the evidence before her. This brings to the fore the recurring question of whether the prosecution deliberately bungled the case to achieve a predetermined end.

Strong suspicion of official complicity in the efforts to free the suspects had emerged when the indicted soldiers who were charged along with Wadume were never brought by the military authorities to court to face trial.

This suspicion was further fuelled when the military officers shockingly had their names removed from the charge sheet by the Office of the Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Malami in June 2020.

This was after series of adjournment as a result of their refusal to appear in court.

Malami’s action was widely condemned by many Nigerians, including human rights lawyer, Mr. Femi Falana (SAN).

But Malami defended his decision to withdraw the charges against the soldiers indicted for the killing of police officers, insisting that it was not true that his office was shielding the indicted soldiers.

Briefing State House correspondents after his presentation to the virtual meeting of Federal Executive Council (FEC) presided over by President Muhammadu Buhari in Abuja on July 1, 2020, Malami had stated that he withdrew the charges against the soldiers to allow the army to court-martial them and conclude its internal process.

“It is important for you to note that within the context of the Nigerian law, there are certain provisions that are exclusive to the military within the context of law on court martial and then, the internal discipline associated with the military.

“The soldiers can now be charged before court martial. Ordinarily, there are in-house processes and procedures that are to be consummated. So, those that are handy for the purpose of prosecution cannot be held in custody for unduly longer period of time on the account of the absence of the military.

“So that is how the idea of severing the charge to allow those that are handy to stand their trial arose.

“That does not mean that by any means that the military are shielded and cannot be prosecuted. But if they have to be prosecuted, they have to be prosecuted within the context of the law. What is the law here? They are military personnel, first they are to go through the in-house processes.

“There are two options, either to charge them before the court-martial which is a special court established by law for the trial of soldiers or in the alternative for the military after consummation of the in-house processes should consider handing them over for trial.”

But many were not convinced by the minister’s explanation given the fact that the military authorities never demonstrated any willingness to sanction the soldiers or release them to the police for prosecution.

Till today, Captain Balarabe and his gang are believed to be freely discharging their military duties without any trial by any court martial hanging on their necks.

The fear expressed in some quarters that Wadume and his gang of military personnel were untouchable was further confirmed when Wadume’s charges were allegedly watered down to attract lighter sentence on conviction.

It was not surprising to many that Justice Nyako slammed light sentence on the accused persons.

 Wadume’s pat in the back by the Nigerian justice system puts the system on the spot, destroys closure for affected families and questions the sincerity of the Nigerian state in the fight against violent crimes.

The judgment can weaken the moral of the gallant police officers and men who have put their lives on the line to fight terrorism, kidnapping, and cult-related killings that have portrayed Nigeria as a failed state.

 United States’ Arizona’s Senator, Barry Goldwater counsels national leaders: “Extremism in the defence of liberty is not a vice, and moderation in the pursuit of justice is not a virtue.”

Often, people grieve before they could achieve a sense of closure. But ultimately, justice is the best facilitator of closure. The cuddly seven-year conviction handed down on Wadume mirrors a sad human chapter in the troubling evolution of the Nigeria state. 

The families of the slain policemen need closure beyond the seemingly choreographed tokenist slap-on-the-wrist meted to Wadume. And this has to be grounded in genuine justice.