251
By Tracy Moses
The Oduwa People’s Assembly (OPA) has accused Amnesty International (AI) of biased reporting and deliberate attempts to undermine the administration of President Bola Tinubu.
OPA, is a Yoruba socio-political organization sometimes referred to as the Odu’a People’s Assembly, positions itself as a defender of national and regional interests in southwestern Nigeria.
In a statement made available to Pointblanknews.com, the group, led by Rechard Kayode, alleged that AI”s recent reports on killings in Benue and Plateau States lack credible data and objectivity, suggesting that the organization’s operations in Nigeria are influenced by Western funding and geo-political interests.
“In light of the recent claims made by Amnesty International regarding reactions to their reports on the killings in Benue and Plateau, the Oduwa People’s Assembly finds it necessary to address the assertions that their findings are based on credible data, as well as the unfounded allegations that individuals are being paid to discredit their narratives,” Kayode said.
According to the group, Amnesty’s reports have not only lacked transparency in the sourcing of their data but have also consistently ignored significant atrocities in certain parts of the country particularly those attributed to separatist groups in the South-East.
“Notably, the mass killings attributed to the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) and the Eastern Security Network (ESN) remain largely unaddressed. Additionally, the organization has not reported on the tragic deaths of 240 security personnel at the hands of these separatist groups,” Kayode alleged.
OPA expressed dismay that Amnesty International has allegedly refused to clarify whether its statistics are derived from official Nigerian security agencies such as the Police, Department of State Services (DSS), National Bureau of Statistics (NBS), or the Armed Forces.
“Amnesty International’s assertion that certain individuals are compensated to undermine its data lacks substantiation. Notably, the organization has not clarified the origins of its statistics,” the statement read.
The group also criticized Amnesty’s response to allegations surrounding mass grave excavations following the Tudun Biri incident, claiming the international body played a complicit role in spreading “unverified allegations” that painted the Nigerian military in a bad light.
“This assertion raises critical concerns about the integrity of human rights reporting and the potential ramifications of spreading unsubstantiated claims,” Kayode said.
Bringing a global perspective, the OPA cited examples of Amnesty International’s alleged double standards in conflict zones such as Gaza-Israel and Ukraine, accusing the organization of ideological bias.
“We are aware that Amnesty International’s advocacy reflects particular ideological stances… Scholars like Norman Finkelstein have contended that Amnesty’s reports disproportionately emphasize the actions of Palestinian groups while downplaying the Israeli military’s conduct. Recent allegations of war crimes in Ukraine have ignited a storm of backlash, prompting accusations of bias and ideological partiality in its reporting,” the statement noted.
The group warned that similar patterns of narrative distortion have historically contributed to the destabilization of sovereign nations across Africa, Latin America, and parts of Asia.
“The Oduwa People’s Assembly is acutely aware of the patterns that have emerged in global West politics, particularly concerning the destabilization of economically prospective countries of the Global South. These tragic events were facilitated by international human rights groups under the guise of upholding transparency and human rights, yet their actions have contributed to chaos and suffering in these regions,” it said.
OPA therefore called on Nigerians to remain vigilant, stand firmly behind President Tinubu’s government, and reject what it called “external manipulation and orchestrated attempts to sow discord.”
Kayode emphasized that the timing of Amnesty’s latest report was suspicious, coinciding with “a significant shift in President Tinubu’s relationships with Western powers,” which he said was “not a mere coincidence.”
“We believe that the current efforts of Amnesty International in Nigeria are not merely an innocent pursuit of justice but rather a calculated strategy aimed at undermining the credibility of the administration of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu. It is evident that these actions seek to exploit Nigeria’s religious and ethnic fault lines to foster division and ultimately destabilize our great nation,” he stated.
OPA also praised the president’s security policies, noting that the Tinubu-led government has made “noticeable” progress in restoring peace in volatile regions.
“It is important to highlight the successes recorded by the Tinubu administration in ensuring improved security across various regions of Nigeria, including the North-West, North-East, North-Central, and beyond,” Kayode added.
Reacting to the statement, Dr. Seyi Awodiran, a conflict resolution expert and lecturer at the University of Lagos, told Pointblanknews.com that while international watchdogs play an important role in monitoring human rights, their work must be balanced, data-driven, and free from political motivations.
“What we see in some of these reports is a worrying trend of selective outrage. If you’re reporting human rights violations in Nigeria, you cannot ignore crimes committed by separatist elements while highlighting only those allegedly perpetrated by state actors. It creates a distorted picture and undermines trust in international institutions,” Awodiran said.
Also speaking to Pointblanknews.com Mrs. Kemi Aluko, a civil society advocate and founder of the Women for National Stability Initiative, said the OPA’s concerns were “valid and timely,” especially in light of what she described as “increasing attempts to discredit the current government through foreign-backed narratives.”
“Many Nigerians are now more politically aware and can see through these patterns. We should not allow external groups to stoke divisions or erode the progress being made in security and national cohesion. Constructive criticism is welcome, but weaponizing reports for political ends is dangerous,” Aluko noted.