It is universal standard and highly-cherished practice that when a matter is either in a law court or has an ‘Inquiry Panel’ constituted and saddled by a president or any other superior authority, parties affiliated to the ‘contentious or controversial’ issue are expected to maintain the ‘status quo ante’. In explicit terms, they are strongly prohibited from engaging in practices or issuing statements that may ‘prejudice’ the verdict, findings or judgment to be delivered by a ‘learned’ judge or the ‘eminent’ panel.
But the spirit and letters of the ‘referenced’ best global practice perhaps may not have resonated well with the Nigeria Police Force (NPF). Or, maybe, they choose to feign ignorance about it; they threw caution to the dogs and decided to recklessly abuse and bastardise the age-long noble principle.
Otherwise, why should they not only arrest and wait for the Presidential Investigation Panel constituted to probe the incident but ‘forcefully’ compelled the kidnapping warlord, Hamisu Bala Wadume, to ‘pour out’ scripted tales from the pit of hell, that the troops of the Nigerian Army who allegedly killed three of IRT personnel proceeded to release him not minding the fact that he is a must-wanted criminal?
Kaduna to pay new minimum wage from September 1
Now, there are billion-dollar questions ‘desperately’ seeking convincing and logical answers from the police. Why usurp the statutory role of the presidential committee set up by the Defence Headquarters? Will one be right to say there may be a sinister agenda for the hasty release, carried out by a party involved in the ruckus which summarily indicted the other party? Or should Nigerians, like an impartial arbiter, believe hook, line, and sinker the statement of Wadume in the scripted drama he acted and disregard the ‘empirical’ findings to be released by the more credible and unbiased investigation committee?
Is the hurry in pre-empting the verdicts of the committee rational and justifiable even in the court of public opinion? If the Nigerian Army has kept a sealed lip, since its helmsman, Lieutenant-General Tukur Burata, issued a statement of not only condemning the ‘bizarre’ incident, but also condoling with the Inspector-General of Police (IGP) and NPF in general, why should the police resort to unnecessary media trial? Why should they not eschew sponsoring media attacks and campaign of calumny, in a bid to curry public sympathy or perhaps whip up baseless sentiments against the other party?
The mode adopted by the police is diametrically questionable. Why should the police, in a matter that both they and the army are trading blames, alone parade Wadume without inviting officials or representatives of the army or perhaps other sister enforcement agencies for the briefing?
Only unrepentant critics will wholly accept the ‘judgment’ of the press statement the police issued while parading Wadume. Why? Can one draw a line between the stance of the police (that the army killed their personnel and set free Wadume) immediately after the August 6 incident, and the statement they issued just yesterday?
The aforementioned posers may need timely responses from the police force. But as we eagerly await the lucid answers, it is not lot too late for the NPF hierarchy to beat a hasty retreat and retract their one-sided press statement to avoid preempting the investigation committee’s ultimate findings.
Baba Mahmud, Abuja.
and then