Date Published: 11/14/09

Al-Mustapha: Yar'Adua, IBB, Abdulsalami behind incarceration

Musa Yar'Adua

For Major Hamza Al-Mustapha, late Gen. Sani Abacha’s Chief Security Officer; as well as former Lagos and Oyo State Commissioner of Police, James Danbaba, former Military Administrator of Zamfara State, Colonel Jubrin Yakubu and former officer in charge of the Mobile Police Force in the Presidency, Mohammed Rabo Lawal, it has been a long time of incarceration, with nearly eleven years now spent in detention. 

Nigerians are increasingly becoming worried over Yar’Adua’s failure to set these detainees them free despite the fact that their alleged offence is that of attempted murder and not withstanding all the noise made about the rule of law. His refusal to release them may not be unconnected with speculations that he is full of resentment against Al-Mustapha over the death of his elder brother, Shehu Musa Yar’Adua. Hence, he doesn’t care about Al-Mustapha and others even though they rot away in jail, a source familiar with the issue alleged.

Apart from Yar’Adua, some other top northerners, such as IBB, Abdusalami Abubakar and many others are also allegedly behind the non-release of Mustapha and others. Abubakar’s grouse with him was that before Al-Mustapha’s arrest he (Abubakar) made many national security agencies to quiz and investigate Al-Mustapha particularly with regards to the seizure of some important national documents in custody of  the Abacha Administration from Al-Mustapha. He has been heaping blames on Abubakar as the main cause of his problems.

Ibrahim Babaginda

The charge leveled against former President Olusegun Obasanajo as an active player in the 1995 coup attempt against the Abacha government is also partly responsible for the unjust incarceration. Obasanjo is believed to be avenging his ordeal in the hands of late Abacha. “And this is why the Obasanjo government in a bid to nail him used Sergeant Rogers, who was not willing to testify against him until he was bought over by the Nigerian government who even promised to grant him release, which they did,” the source claimed.

It would be recalled that he was first arraigned alongside the former Chief of Army Staff, but later he sought for a separate trial from the other four defendants. General Bamayi’s request was granted. He was later discharged and acquitted for lack of diligent prosecution. But funny enough, in his evidence, Sergeant Rogers told the court that he led the team that assassinated the wife of Chief M.K.O. Abiola on 4 June, 1996, while in another contradicting statement, he said that Major Al-Mustapha did not send him on the assignment (to kill Alhaja Kudirat Abiola).

Al-Mustapha was said to be in possession of audio/video tapes and other documents showing, among others, how Abiola was beaten to death. These tapes "are part of the items contained in the eleven Ghana-must-go bags confiscated by the State Security Service" from the house of Brig-Gen. I. Sabo (rtd), the former Director of Military Intelligence (DMI) in whose care he left them.

Abdulsalami Abubakar

Al-Mustapha also claimed to have kept letters written by Chief Olusegun Obasanjo while he was in detention at the Kirikiri Maximum Prisons. He said the letters which were entitled " Abacha has murdered sleep and shall sleep no more" were intercepted by intelligence officers from the warders who were later taken to the Directorate of Military Intelligence, Apapa and disciplined. These letters, he said, were in the Ghana-must-go bag which were in contention before the court.

Al-Mustapha had contended that in order to clear him of the charges preferred against him by the state, the contents of the controversial bags must be made available to him. But the State Security Service (SSS) in their counter-affidavit claimed that the bags were handed over to officials of the DMI, whereupon the trial judge, Justice Muftau Olokoba, granted Al-Mustapha's application to join the DMI in the suit. 

It would also be recalled that in their notice of appeal, Bamaiyi and Al-Mustapha challenged the High Court’s ruling on the following grounds:

* That the trial judge erred in law when in dismissing the application for leave to enforce their fundamental rights, he held that the court ( Federal High Court) lacked the jurisdiction or competence to issue the writ of certiorari and prohibition against a court of co-ordinate jurisdiction conferred on the High Court, contending that under section 46 of the constitution is a special jurisdiction which empowers the Court to do so and this has caused injustice to Bamaiyi and others.

*That the trial judge erred in law, when in dismissing the appellants’ application for leave to enforce their fundamental rights, held that the NJC is merely investigatory and not bound to observe the rules of fair hearing under section 36 of the constitution, whereas the panel was composed and conducted its proceedings in a quasi-judicial manner, and this has led to injustice to Bamaiyi and co.

*That the trial judge erred in law in holding that the proceeding of the panel set up by NJC did not involve the determination of the civil rights and obligations of the appellants and consequently, the locus standi to complain of the breach of their rights as envisaged by section 36 of the constitution; whereas the appellants have the civil right to call for the exercise of the disciplinary powers of the NJC over judicial officers who must observe the rules of fair hearing in the process of so doing, and this had caused a miscarriage of justice to Bamaiyi and co.

*That the trial judge erred in law, when in dismissing the suit held that the relief sought by the appellants against NJC are not justifiable on the ground that by virtue of section 158 of the constitution, any decision taken by NJC in the exercise of its disciplinary powers over judicial officers shall not be subject to the direction or control of any other authority, which in the opinion of the trial court, include all courts, whereas section 158 of the constitution merely seeks to protect the bodies mentioned therein from executive interference.

According to reports, some northern emirs had sometimes this year also visited the president to persuade him to release Al-Mustapha and co. The emirs reportedly urged Yar’Adua to temper justice with mercy and release Al-Mustapha based on the fact that he has stayed for a long time in jail. Even if convicted, the alleged offence of the former CSO will not attract more than five years in prison, according to some lawyers.

The emirs were said to have reminded the president about the Islamic teaching which states that “whatever happens in this world is the will of Allah and that Allah admonishes us to forgive each other.”

According to a source, two former heads of state from the north, apparently worried about the royal fathers’ intervention, have been allegedly working round the clock to forestall it. These two ex-heads of state are said to be doing this for many reasons. On several occasions, these former heads of state have been persuaded by some powers that be in the north, especially the families of the accused, to move for their release but they have often been foot-dragging, a fact that points to their position that Al-Mustapha should continue to be in jail probably for the rest of his life. Even when they agreed in principle that they would persuade Aso Rock in this regard, they ended up reneging on such promises.  

Findings revealed that the issue of Al-Mustapha was one of the principal reasons why Obasanjo, who was a victim of Abacha's despotic rule, decided to opt for Umaru Musa Yar'Adua as his successor, when his third term bid failed. Obasanjo did this to ensure Al-Mustapha is perpetually kept behind bars. “The reason why Obasanjo picked Yar'Adua as his successor is traceable to the feud between the Abachas and Obasanjo. After looking at the polity, there is no one who would muster enough hatred to keep the former CSO behind bars like Yar'Adua. This is because the Yar'Adua’s family believes Abacha and Al-Mustapha were responsible for the death of their patriarch, Shehu Yar'Adua.  That apart, Shehu Yar'Adua's mother is said to be highly irritable by the mere mention of the Abachas. Up till now, she is still annoyed, and blames the activities of Al-Mustapha for the death of her beloved son,” an informed source said. The same sentiments are allegedly being shared by President Umaru Yar'Adua hence the continued incarceration of Al-Mustapha even though the president has the powers to make the families of Al-Mustapha and co. to smile again in the spirit of forgiveness or presidential amnesty as you may call it.

The worst part of Yar’Adua role in the sordid drama is that he has reportedly refused to listen to any group of persons seeking for the release of Al-Mustapha thereby making nonsense of his rule of law mantra. The Arewa Consultative Forum (ACF) has continued to make similar appeals to the government. The northern leaders led by Sultan of Sokoto, Alhaji Saad Abubakar have made representations to the government to free them. The Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN), northern chapter, in a statement, also pleaded with the President Umaru Musa Yar'Adua administration to pardon Al-Mustapha and others in the spirit of national reconciliation. But analysts believe that the nation, particularly the northern leadership, did not do enough to secure the freedom of one of their own.  “Al-Mustapha certainly has his positive side. If it were not for him, we will not be enjoying democracy and relative freedom today. He got the opportunity to be in charge of this country but gave it away in preference of national growth,” said one of the analysts. He added that: “As such, it is saddening that members of the civil society as well as the media have been silent over this callous violation of human rights. Could it be because Al-Mustapha served a man we all like to hate? Otherwise, why hasn't the civil society groups demanded for the arrests and trials of all those that participated in the infamous regime of Abacha, including Abdusalami Abubakar? Why hasn't the civil society insisted on the trials of Anenih for allegedly plotting to assassinate Kalu and Obasanjo for the Odi and Zaki Biam massacre?”

Another analyst persisted that: “Since in the dispensation of justice all suspects should be treated equally, it is now pertinent that Mr. President tempers justice with mercy by facilitating the release of Al-Mustapha. He has done it before. He did it to Asari Dokubo, Henry Okah and Tampolo. He also did it for Ralph Uwazuruike. He can also do it for Al-Mustapha and co. without losing anything. Our president should remember that even the God that created us do forgive us if not none of us will be fit to enter His  kingdom.”