Constitutional Rights Projects

PUNCH NEWSPAPER ADVERT:

Nigeria And Commitment To Human Rights MONDAY, 28 JULY 2008

On June 19, 2008, Ambassador Martin Uhomoibhi, Nigeria’s permanent representative to the UN became the President of the UN Human Rights Council. His inaugural address called on UN member states to safeguard the human rights of their citizens. To use his words, “failure to advance the aims and objectives of the Human Rights Council collectively by all nations, all peoples and all institutions will be a colossal failure of humanity to protect its own dignity and rights under the rule of law and agreed norms and practices.” Mr. Michael Aondoakaa

He urged the Council to “continue to direct its gaze and its search light on actions of states to ensure that they abide by all their commitments.”

In February 2009, the Council, through its Universal Periodic Review mechanism, would beam the searchlight on Nigeria’s human rights record. UPR was established by the Council in 2006 to periodically review the fulfillment by UN member states of their human rights obligations. Unlike any other before it, the UPR draws global attention to the human rights situation of the state under review. Already, the review mechanism has proven its ability to effectively spotlight the human rights successes and failures of states.

During its first two sessions, it became abundantly clear that Working Group members ask probing questions to obtain an accurate sense of the subject state’s record.

Specifically, Working Group members ask questions about specific programmes, legislation or enforcement procedures adopted to secure human rights, their successes or failures and plans for improvement. They may also request information about particular human rights abuses, and seriously consider shadow reports by civil society institutions.

Uhomoibhi’s call to advance the HRC’s objectives vividly captures the human rights challenge confronting Nigeria. Nigerian government officials must re-examine their conception of human rights and the role it plays in shaping foreign policy and spurring economic development. Nigerian officials should be aware that government needs to implement efficient human rights reforms to achieve its foreign policy and economic objectives. The global political context is changing and leaders can no longer hold on to old perceptions that domestic human rights abuses can be tolerated in light of other foreign policy achievements. Human rights records of individual states now have tangible political weight and a robust human rights record is now needed to enter the club of influential states.

Given Nigeria’s aspirations for greater regional and global leadership, it is imperative that government officials use this upcoming Universal Periodic Review to portray Nigeria as a state that places human rights at the heart of its work.

Nigeria’s upcoming review gives the government an opportune time to revitalize its commitment to the human rights of its citizens. Once described by a government official as “electronic lynching,” the review has revealed itself as a rigorous and comprehensive process. Consequently, government platitudes about human rights and vague policy objectives will not be enough. Reviewed states that could point to new legislation and concrete statistics to buttress improvements have fared better than those that could not.

Without engaging reforms, the UPR process will reveal Nigeria to be in flagrant abuse of human rights. To be sure, gross violations in Nigeria are so well documented that they will be the subject of debate during the review.

Government’s failure to meet its human rights obligations constitutes a sad reality for millions of Nigerians. While government must reform for the good of its citizens, it must also recognize that it undermines its foreign policy by ignoring human rights and UPR. For example, if Nigeria receives a dismal review, it could jeopardize her chances for a permanent seat with the United Nations Security Council when the council expands. Nigeria is vying for the Africa seat with countries like South Africa, Egypt, Algeria, Kenya, Libya and Senegal. In 2005, former Secretary-General Kofi Annan’s high-level panel on UN reform advised that new members of the UNSC should be selected on the basis of their contribution to the United Nations financially, militarily and diplomatically. Nigeria’s claim to a seat relies almost exclusively on her military contributions.

Legitimate as the claim may be, it is short sighted. The criteria for selecting new Security Council members will also include an evaluation of the prospective state’s human rights record; so, because a central mission of the UN and UNSC is to protect human rights. According to the opening words of the charter, the UN was created in part to “reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights.” Real respect for the human rights of its own nationals is therefore a necessary prerequisite for a state hoping to gain a permanent seat on the UNSC. Any serious contender for the seat must post solid records in peace, justice, good governance and development. Under these criteria, Nigeria comes behind. For example, in the areas of development and good governance, Nigeria is ranked 158th out of 177 countries, the lowest among African nations vying for the seat.

Nigeria has not progressed as quickly as some other African nations in meeting its human rights obligations. Though respected for its contributions to regional peace, the Nigerian government is globally perceived as caring very little for its people. Nigeria must reverse this perception if she hopes to gain a UNSC permanent seat.

Protecting human rights cannot be viewed as a secondary concern for a state with an ambitious foreign policy. To become a serious global actor, Nigeria must have a strong record of protecting her citizen’s human rights. During the pending review, Nigeria has the opportunity to either cement its international image as a nation that supports corruption and gross human rights abuses, or it can offer the world the new vision of a nation with renewed commitment to human rights.

The UN HRC Resolution 5/1 strongly encourages the Nigerian government to prepare her UPR report “through a broad consultation process at the national level with all relevant stakeholders,” a category which includes civil society organizations. A coalition of human rights organizations led by Constitutional Rights Project is already coming together to demand that Nigeria uses this review process to engage in serious, effective, and immediate reforms to justice administration and practices. Government must take hold of this opportunity and begin broad national consultations that will lead to government reforms and an accurate and comprehensive UPR report. The time to act is now. With Nigeria presiding over the HRC and the country’s review just a few months away, the world looks to see how Nigeria will respond?