A former Provost Marshal of the Nigerian Army, Brig.-Gen. Idada Ikponmwen (rtd) has urged the Federal Government under President Muhammadu Buhari not to take criticisms from former Presidents Olusegun Obasanjo and Ibrahim Babangida and former Defence Minister, Theophilus Danjuma lightly.
He said doing so might seriously damage Buhari’s second term ambition should he have any.
The retired general made this known in an interview with Vanguard published on Monday.
Asked if the former generals’ criticisms could have any effect on Buhari’s second term bid, Ikponmwen said: “They certainly will have effect because this particular one by Danjuma shows the man believes that we have no government to protect us, and if that is the way people see it, it will definitely affect the trend of voting especially among the enlightened and analytical minds. Successive governments have not been able to give us security and it just shows that matters have reached the peak. On the letters from Obasanjo and IBB, some people are quarrelling about the message while some about the messenger but, at the end of the day, if you have to make a choice between the messenger and the message, the effect of the message will prevail over the issue of the messenger.
“The issue will affect voting and political alignments here and there. Danjuma´s comment is a very serious indictment of successive governments of this country, especially since our return to civil democracy (Obasanjo, Yar’Adua, Jonathan and Buhari administrations). It is a big indictment coming from the man who has been Minister of Defence and who, before then, was Chief of Army Staff. His utterance connotes so many things. It brings into question the way we are governed or the way we have been governed over the years. It brings into question our use of the military especially for internal security operations. It raises the question of whether or not we are using the military properly in terms of the provisions of the constitution. It also raises the question of the understanding of the military with regards to their constitutional role.
“It raises the question as to whether we are embarking on internal wars without declaring war as prescribed in the constitution. The reaction of the military, as represented by the Minister of Defence, is only to be expected because the military is a service under the executive arm of government, answerable only to the commander-in-chief whose responsibilities include determining when to bring in the military during civil disturbance in line with the law. Danjuma’s statement represents the concern of a man who feels that the military is not being used in the proper manner. We must say that the problem with a very visible army in the civil democracy, especially when it is seen to be carrying out responsibilities that ordinarily belong to the civil security organizations like the police, is bound to incur the wrath of some people and the applause of others.
“So this is all the more reason that extreme care ought to be exercised in the deployment of military forces for civil crisis. In the past, I was one of the most vocal voices in expressing the requirement for deploying the military only when crisis has reached a level equivalent to domestic war, but government did not listen. And that is why we got to this stage where a very senior member of the society can now come out to denounce the military. It is like him saying this is not the army that I knew. As a senior member of the society, he could have reached the President directly and would have been able to draw his attention to the lapses he observed.
“Therefore, this open declaration would have been better justified if efforts to reach the President did not work. On the whole, I want to reiterate my concern that successive governments of this country since 1999 have been embarking on internal wars without properly declaring war, thereby rendering themselves vulnerable or susceptible to attacks or opposition from different sectors of the society. I think Danjuma´s declaration is food for thought for the present government, to reposition itself in addressing the various problems of this country particularly in the area of security. To avoid the problem of self-help following the perceived misuse of military power, government must follow the law.
“The right of everybody to acquire arms for self-defence will lead to serious security problem. I will rather say that, given the security situation in this country now, government must consider liberalisation of the laws governing acquisition of small arms to mature citizens in the society. If a kidnapper knows that his victim may be armed, he will be more careful in embarking on such journey.”