The death sentences passed last Monday on 12 soldiers by a military court have refocused public attention on the manner of the military’s prosecution of the ongoing war against terror. The entire episode, a mutiny and attempted murder of a senior commander, reveals a military in deep crisis. It is so deep that our security forces have come under intense public and global scrutiny; and calls for a complete restructuring are universal.
The court martial that found the 12 guilty of mutiny and attempted murder, and a 13th soldier of a lesser offence, should be part of the process of restoring the efficiency and reputation of the Nigerian armed forces.
The military cannot be faulted on the disciplinary action they took by setting up a General Court Martial to try mutinous troops. No military institution tolerates mutiny and Nigeria’s cannot be an exception. Defined as a criminal conspiracy “to openly oppose, change or overthrow lawful authority”, mutiny at sea or within a military organisation is the apogee of insubordination. It becomes most intolerable when the mutiny occurs in the war front. An army of mutinous soldiers has already lost the battle even before making contact with the enemy. Every enlisted combatant knows the rules and when, on May 14, this year, demoralised soldiers of the 7 Infantry Division of the Nigerian Army heckled and fired gunshots at the division’s General Officer Commanding, they had crossed the red line, next only to the treason of joining the enemy forces.
By refusing orders to disarm and going as far as turning their weapons on their superior, they could expect nothing except lawful retribution. The Armed Forces Act is unambiguous: Section 52 clearly spells out that any person that takes part in a mutiny, or incites any other person to do so, shall be liable “on conviction by a court martial to suffer death”. Globally, militaries take a very dim view of mutiny. Until it abolished the death penalty for all offences in 1998 through its Human Rights Act, mutiny attracted the death penalty in the United Kingdom. The United States still reserves the death penalty for violent mutiny, while China, Russia and Vietnam also execute mutineers on conviction. As recently as 2013, a UK court martial jailed 16 troops of the Royal Yorkshire Regiment for staging a “sit-in”.
But while the military brass and their Commander-in-Chief, President Goodluck Jonathan, may have military tradition and the law on their side, they cannot ignore the peculiar environment and circumstances that provoked the mutiny. Its proximate cause has been well reported. Troops of the division had been ambushed while they were on a special mission against Boko Haram fighters and suffered casualties. Based on the secrecy of the mission, the troops suspected saboteurs must have tipped off the insurgents. As if that was not bad enough, after repelling the insurgents, they were ordered, over their protests, to return that same night, a march that would take the depleted formation through an insurgent-infested territory. As they feared, they were ambushed again and their ranks decimated.
Yet, there should always be room for clemency and forgiveness. No doubt, different sensibilities are always at work during war. It was the sight of their dead comrades being brought into Maimalari Barracks, Maiduguri that inflamed the demoralised soldiers into their ill-advised action against the GOC, Ahmadu Mohammed, who they blamed for sending their colleagues to untimely deaths.
Before then, and since, reports have continued to come in that the troops are poorly equipped, lacking adequate heavy guns and ammunition and back-up. Agency reports cite troops in fierce battles with increasingly well-armed terrorists calling in vain for air strikes. Others speak of lightly manned and inadequately armed outposts that are denied reinforcements in the face of mass attacks by Boko Haram. Though the military rarely give their casualty figures, it is obvious that the army has suffered many dead and wounded.
Add to this demoralising litany the persistent refrain of collusion by some officers and the alleged corruption that denies frontline troops of equipment, weapons, rations and their allowances, the imperative of commuting the death sentences becomes compelling. As France suffered serial battlefield reverses during World War 1 and lost over one million dead amid the glaring failures of its generals, 43 per cent of its 113 infantry divisions witnessed mutinies and, to save the army, the authorities had to adopt a carrot-and-stick approach, instead of all out executions.
The task of restoring the potency of the Nigerian Army as a formidable fighting force should be paramount. While strong measures should be taken to restore discipline among the rank and file, executing the 12 can only further dampen morale, which is already low. More importantly, the issues of under-funding the war effort in real terms, poor or inadequate equipment, corruption and poor welfare should be immediately and openly addressed.
An army is only as good as its commanders; capable commanders that troops are ready to follow into battle should replace the failures. The object of war, George Patton, a celebratedWorld War II United States Army general, said, is not to die for your country but to make the other “bastard” die for his. Nigeria is failing. Quelling the grumblings in the military partly depends on resolving many contradictions, including horrible corruption and criminal sabotage involving superior military officers. Boko Haram now controls 25 towns covered by the Catholic Diocese on Maiduguri, according to its Bishop, Oliver Dash – 10 in Borno, 10 in Yobe and five in Adamawa. We need an efficient, cohesive army to recapture them and destroy the terrorist group.
There is, indeed, nothing wrong with granting clemency; all convicts are entitled to it. The Army Council should respond to the realities on the ground and reverse the death sentences.
