IN what appeared to be a major breakthrough in Nigeria’s war against terror, a former leader of the Movement for the Emancipation of the Niger Delta, Henry Okah, was on Tuesday sent to 24 years in prison by a South African court sitting in Johannesburg.
The judge, Neels Claassen, found Okah guilty of 13 offences, including the setting off of two bombs in Abuja and Warri, Delta State, on October 1, 2010. He was also sentenced for threatening the South African government after his arrest.
Back home, the MEND over which Okah presided, said it was shocked by the sentence, saying it was a planned punishment by both the Nigerian and South African governments.
The two major bomb attacks in Nigeria for which Henry Okah was convicted in Nigeria were carried out to embarrass President Goodluck Jonathan, Claaseen said on Tuesday while sentencing the accused.
Curiously, the Federal Government did not react to the development on Tuesday.
Efforts by The PUNCH to obtain the reaction of the government failed as Jonathan’s spokesman, Reuben Abati; and the President’s aide on public affairs, Doyin Okupe refused to pick the calls made to their mobile phones up till 11.10pm.
Okah had been found guilty in January by Claassen of South Gauteng High Court in Johannesburg where he had been facing trial since 2010.
Delivering his judgment on Tuesday in Johannesburg, the judge said, “Having found the accused guilty in the 13-count charge of acts of terrorism, it’s now the duty of the court to sentence him, taking into account the position of the victim, the convict and the world community.”
He said that the struggle of the MEND “is politically motivated and as a result a maximum sentence for Okah will be inappropriate.”
The judge said South Africa being a signatory to the UN Treaty on Terrorism Acts allowed the convict to be tried in South Africa though the events took place in Nigeria.
“As a signatory, South Africa is duty bound to adopt the treaty and incorporate it into the laws of South Africa, in other words domicile the treaty,” Claaseen said.
He said it was the responsibility of the court in sentencing the convict to take into account the feelings of the world community and to make South Africa unpalatable for terrorists to operate within the jurisdiction as member of the community of nations.
The judge said all the 13-counts Mr. Okah was convicted of were related to three events:
“The first event is the March 15, 2010 bomb attack, where two car bombs occurred at the venue of a political gathering which was being attended by the Delta State Governor in Warri, Delta state, where one person died and several others were injured.
“The second event occurred on October 1, 2010, in Abuja, Nigeria’s capital city, where two car bombs exploded killing eight people with several others injured.
“Third event is the threat to the Nigerian government. All these three events were targeted at embarrassing President Goodluck Jonathan.”
He said these acts were very serious crimes which must be punished in accordance to the terrorism laws.
He said, “The convict during the trial had never accepted any responsibility nor shown any remorse in spite of the fact that overwhelming evidence linked him with MEND which claimed responsibilities for the bombings.
It would, therefore, be wrong for the court to turn a blind eye to the fact that the struggle in the Niger Delta which led to the events it is a political one.
“The group’s agitation for improved environmental situation and provision of infrastructure in the area is aimed at attracting the Federal Government attention to the plight of the people in the area.
Though a good cause, but it does not justify any act of violence and terrorism.’’
He said the court was obliged to impose life imprisonment which is the maximum sentence due to the political nature of the struggle, adding that the suspended sentence sought by the defence was inappropriate due to the nature of the crime.
“Having considered that the convict does not have any criminal record both in South Africa and in Nigeria before the struggle in the Niger Delta, I am of the considered view that his clean record both in South Africa and Nigeria should add to his sentence mitigation. Also, the fact that his children will suffer emotionally for his absence if maximum sentence is given is considered in mitigation of his sentence,” Claaseen said.
He said it was difficult to determine what the appropriate sentence should be.
He said, “This is not an easy matter to deal with in sentencing. The sentence of the convict to life imprisonment is not appropriate and to give him suspended sentence is equally not appropriate. To strike a balance, the convict is hereby sentenced to 12 years in prison for accounts 1,3,5,7, 9 and 11 for the Warri bombings.
“The accused is sentenced to 12 years for counts 2,4,6,8 and 10 for the Abuja bombings. The accused is sentenced to 10 years for the threat to the government of Nigeria.
“However, the sentence for counts 2,4,6,8,10 and 13 will run concurrently. In all the accused is hereby sentenced to 24 years in prison.”
MEND, in a statement by its spokesman, Jomo Gbomo, described Okah’s trial in South Africa as a sham.
The group’s statement issued on Tuesday reads, “The Movement for the Emancipation of the Niger Delta received with incredulity the 24 years sentence planned on Henry Okah after a sham trial in a South African kangaroo court.
“We are disappointed but not surprised that the South African judiciary has allowed itself to be compromised by the highly corrupt Nigerian government.
“The governments of South Africa and Nigerian should realise that this planned sentencing of Henry Okah would not in any way, shape or form change our struggle as we will remain dedicated to our cause until we achieve full justice and emancipation for the Niger Delta and its people.”
In January, during judgment, Claassen said the state had proved Okah’s guilt beyond reasonable doubt, and that his failure to testify meant the evidence against him remained uncontested.
Okah had denied any involvement, claiming the charges against him were politically motivated.
Meanwhile, Ijaw youths on the platform of the Ijaw Youths Council and the Ijaw Monitoring Group on Tuesday reacted to the jailing of Okah, saying he would not be abandoned by his people.
The President of the IYC, Mr. Abiye Kuromiema; and the President of the IMG, Mr. Joseph Evah, separately said they would uphold the ideals that Okah stood for.
Kuromiema said Ijaws would not abandon Okah no matter where his current travail might lead him.
He said, “Our position is that Ijaw people do not abandon our people. As a people, we did all we could to prevent Okah from going the way he did. It happened with Asari Dokubo, Ateke Tom, and others through the Amnesty programme but he chose to go this way.
“Ijaw people are not going to abandon him in his travails. He is carrying a big cross and we don’t know where this will lead him, but we won’t abandon him.”
Evah said that he was sad about the sentenceing, describing the outcome of the trial as unfortunate.
He wondered why trials of those arrested for terrorism in Nigeria were delayed by adjournments and other methods while those involving the Ijaws were speedily done.
“We are sad about it because he is our brother. It is unfortunate the type of terror trial in South Africa and what we have in Nigeria.
“We are not seeing the type of speedy trials of terror suspects here in Nigeria; we are only seeing adjournments and delays here.”
But a Lagos-based lawyer Jiti Ogunye, said Nigeria had a lot of lessons to learn from the trial of Okah by the South African court.
Ogunye said, “Henry Okah has had his day in court. He has been convicted and sentenced and he has the right to appeal the judgment if he is dissatisfied. One thing that is noteworthy, however, is the speed of justice delivery in the South African court.
“One cannot but recognise the speed and this has not been the case in two Nigerian judicial system where justice is almost forever delayed.
“I think by today’s verdict we have learnt another lesson from South Africa, that a political trial or a trial that involves a high personality can indeed be wrapped up in record time and thereafter, a dissatisfied party can then exercise his constitutional right of appeal.”
No comments:
Post a Comment