“Die Religion … ist das Opium des Volkes” (“Religion is … the opium of the people”) – Karl Marx
Anguish. Pain. Intolerance. Misunderstanding. It’s been a rough year for the Shi’ites especially those associated with the Islamic Movement of Nigeria (IMN) headed by Sheikh Ibrahim Zakzaky, as it seems like the group is rowing against high tides in a leaky boat.
It would be recalled that late 2015, IMN was in the news. The group had held a march in Zaria, Kaduna State, to mark the birthday of Prophet Mohammed. The celebrations had led to a blockade, denying access to the Chief of Army Staff, Lieutenant General, Yusuf Tukur Buratai on his way to Zaria, who according to witnesses, also had his convoy stoned.
An army spokesman labelled the stoning an “attempt to assassinate”. The sect maintains that its members did not attack the convoy.
The retaliation was absolutely shocking! News reports splayed headlines on their front pages. The international community was outraged, groups called for the Nigerian government to check the Army for cases of human rights abuse, while some others applauded the action taken by the Army.
The latest altercation between the Nigerian government and Shi’ites culminated in the arrest of Sheikh Zakzaky. The cleric has been held in detention without trial for over a year, despite calls and even a court order for his release.
The latest development following his unlawful detainment is that the government of Kaduna state has decided that the cleric should be tried for alleged “lawlessness” of his group, IMN, for the past 30 years.
Meanwhile, the Kaduna state government has left the trial of the Nigerian Army to the federal government.
In December 2015, the Nigerian army confirmed the raid on Shi’ite Muslims as well as the arrest of Zakzaky, adding that he was in safe and protective custody.
However a spokesman for the Islamic Movement of Nigeria, Ibrahim Musa, gave a different account of the situation, saying the group’s leader was injured in the army’s attack when they indiscriminately opened fire on his house and his followers who tried to protect it.
Stranger things
In October, authorities in Kaduna declared the Shi’ites as illegal, as part of the state crackdown against the Muslim community. On Monday, December 5, 2016, the Kaduna government accused the group of “allegiance to a foreign power.”
Well, it is no news that the Islamic Movement of Nigeria, has been a pro-Palestine supporter for decades and has held peaceful protests in that regard. As such, an “allegiance to a foreign power” has always existed.
Furthermore, Nigeria constitutionally allows its citizens to practice any kind of religion or ascribe any faith; according to Chapter IV of the constitution, section 38, subsection 1:
“Every person shall be entitled to freedom of thought, conscience and religion, including freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom (either alone or in community with others, and in public or in private) to manifest and propagate his religion or belief in worship, teaching, practice and observance.”
So, the recent announcement by the El-Rufai led government in Kaduna state labelling the IMN as an insurgent group, comes as a total shock. How can a state government, in a country that is divided along ethno-political lines, determine that a particular religious association is “insurgent”? Would it make a difference if the governor were a Shi’ite? Or is it a case of too much political power in the hands of a public office holder, hence they are seeking to victimise Zakzaky in an effort to disband the IMN through harassment and intimidation that past Nigerian regimes had become infamous for.
The news comes few days after the federal high court of Nigeria ruled that Sheikh Zakzaky and his wife, Zeenat, should be released unconditionally. Justice Gabriel Kolawole who presided over the ruling had given 45 days for authorities to provide new accommodation for the Zakzaky family. He also said the state security service would pay Zakzaky and his wife $78,984 (N38,307,240) each in compensation for violation of their rights in being held in unlawful custody for nearly a year.
The leader of the IMN and his wife were taken into custody on December 14, 2015, after deadly clashes between the supporters of the IMN movement and Nigerian troops. The announcement by Kaduna state could threaten the release of Zakzaky as charges could be brought against him.
The Good Lie
The Nigerian government has a bad track record with the Islamic Movement of Nigeria and Shi’ites, riddled with violence. In 2014, there was the Zaria Quds massacres, when the Nigerian Army opened fire on the members of IMN taking part in Quds day rallies, and killed 35 people, including three sons of Zakzaky. Just last month, nearly 100 IMN supporters were killed when Nigerian forces fired live rounds and tear gas at mourners during a peaceful march ahead of the Arba’een mourning rituals. This occurred when fierce clashes broke out when police tried to disperse thousands of people, including women and children, who were marching from Kano to Kaduna for the mourning rituals.
The Nigerian government has stepped up its crackdown on the IMN since the December 2015 deadly incident. The IMN and Islamic Human rights groups have claimed that the Nigerian government’s close ties with Israel has been responsible for the attacks.
As we still come to terms with the latest announcement of Shi’ites as an insurgent group, one has to wonder then, why Governor Nasir El-Rufai has decided to pay herdsmen with federal allocation to “stop killing” in southern Kaduna.
Many debates have surrounded the recent activities of herdsmen in Nigeria. Conflicts between the herdsmen and farmers have even made some term them as insurgents, so why has the Kaduna state government decided to treat this particular group differently by paying them off?
Giving a religious association a negative connotation in Nigeria’s current state of instability, looking at the activities of persons in the North-East and South-South, makes a strong case for similar groups to feel like they aren’t part of the dream called Nigeria. It could lead many of these small groups to feel segregated and maybe take arms in the fight for a recognition of their ideals and beliefs. And we wouldn’t want that, now, would we?
