The Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP), has written an open letter to the United Nations Security Council, requesting it to declare the rampaging herdsmen related killings as terrorism, but it’s reasons do not fit the description of terrorism, even as it struggled.
In the letter signed by Deputy Director of SERAP, Timothy Adewale, the group urged the Security Council to intervene in the herdsmen crisis ravaging the Country, adding that President Muhammadu Buhari is failing to uphold his responsibility to protect the citizens of the country from the menace, which, if not urgently addressed, would pose serious threat to regional peace and security and thereby escalate to an international threat.
“The attacks by herdsmen have uprooted families, destroyed communities’ socio-economic activities, and take away their livelihoods and common heritage. These attacks undermine the very purposes and principles of the UN Charter.
“The Security Council and its members should reaffirm that terrorism of all forms and manifestations, such as the growing attacks by herdsmen in Nigeria, are criminal and unjustifiable regardless of their motivations.”
SERAP urged the Council to treat the atrocities by herdsmen as acts of terrorism, in line with the UN Security Council resolution 2349 (2017), which addresses Boko Haram’s presence in the Lake Chad Basin and calls on all states to combat all forms and manifestations of terrorism.
It requested the Council to support collaboration with the African Union Peace and Security Council to combat the threats posed by herdsmen and enable both institutions to support stability and development in Nigeria.
The UN Security Council
The United Nations Security Council (UNSC) is one of the six principal organs of the United Nations charged with the maintenance of international peace and security as well as accepting new members to the United Nations and approving any changes to its United Nations Charter.
Its powers include the establishment of peacekeeping operations, the establishment of international sanctions, and the authorization of military action through Security Council resolutions.
The Security Council has five permanent members: China, France, Russian Federation, the United Kingdom, and the United States, and ten non-permanent members elected for two-year terms by the General Assembly. The non-permanent members are Bolivia; Côte d’Ivoire; Equatorial Guinea; Ethiopia; and Kazakhstan. Others are Kuwait; Netherlands; Peru; Poland; and Sweden.
In February 2015, the Council condemned the continued escalation of attacks perpetrated by Boko Haram terrorists in Nigeria and Chad.
They reaffirmed that terrorism in all its forms and manifestations, including the actions of Boko Haram constitute one of the most serious threats to international peace and security.
The members of the Security Council reiterated their determination to combat all forms of terrorism, in accordance with its responsibilities under the Charter of the UN.
In March 2017, the Security Council iterated its condemnation of Boko Haram attacks and adopted the resolution 2349 (2017).
The resolution was to condemn the attack, protection of lives and civilians affected by the terrorist attacks, bringing to book those who are responsible, enhance regional Military Corporation, cut funding flows to terrorist groups among others.
Terrorism from the horse’s mouth
Terrorism has been given different definitions but with similarities in meaning.
The United Nations Security Council defines terrorism as
“any action that is intended to cause death or serious bodily harm to civilians or non-combatants, when the purpose of such an act, by its nature or context, is to intimidate a population, or to compel a Government or an international organization to do or to abstain from doing any act.”
The US Code of Federal Regulations also defines terrorism as
“the unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.”
North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) defines it as
“The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence against individuals or property in an attempt to coerce or intimidate governments or societies to achieve political, religious or ideological objectives”
The Nigerian Law defines an act of Terrorism to mean it is intended or can reasonably be regarded as having been intended to unduly compel a Government or international organization to perform or abstain from performing any act.
Though there has been no single accepted definition of terrorism, what the various definitions have in common is that the attacks are unlawful use of violence against civilians to either coerce or intimidate the Government or to achieve prescribed objectives.
The herdsmen-famer menace has been going on for some time now yet there have been no declarations by any group, stating their purpose of killings and attacks in the Country.
Unlike Boko Haram that has declared war on the State and can be identified as a group and releases statements of their demands, the herdsmen are without identity and objectives, and thus do not meet the requirements of being labeled a terrorist group.
This would mean that, when there is land for grazing, there will be no attacks or killings by herdsmen. Not even revenge, as discouraged as it is, is classified as terrorism by itself.
An Economic Problem
The herdsmen menace is rather economic than political because the feud between them and farmers has always been with regards to where and when cattle can graze.
It is the many clashes that birthed the Cattle Colony project which is aimed at ensuring cattle are given spacious land so as not to tamper with the crops and plantings of farmers.
According to the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development, Audu Ogbe, the culture of open grazing by the herdsmen is now a threat to lives and properties, thus the need for re-examination.
“A culture must not be left because it is a culture, if it is harmful, we reform it. We are talking of cattle colonies, not ranches. We are talking of massive cattle breed improvement through artificial insemination, we have to start immediately.”
It is the attacks that made some States to establish the Anti-Grazing Bill to prohibit pastorals from moving around with cattle except in ranches.
The one and only problem in the whole Fulani/farmers clashes is LAND and those who say the lands are originally cattle route do not even justify the killings. This makes it even harder to define this crime as terrorism.
SERAP’s concern is that the attacks have mainly claimed lives and properties which is why the herdsmen should be labeled terrorist, but worthy of note is that there have been no attacks in States that have less or no farming benefits. A fact which drives the unfortunate crime to economics, without watering down its hideousness, rather than terrorism.
Most States have recorded no herdsmen and farmers clashes or attacks.
Many have opined that little or nothing would be done if the herdsmen crisis is seen as a political problem rather than economic, as many of the attacks have been on farms, communities, and villages, not seeking political attention or recognition for the establishment of “Herdsmen Republic”. It is also commonplace to find government officials dismissing crimes as the handiwork of their detractors. A scenario that never helps effectiveness in solving the problem.
