OPINION
Interrogating Obaseki’s Epistle to Tinubu
On October 21, 1968, a letter was written by a group which went by the name, Egbe Mekunnu Taku, literally, Association of the Adamant Poor, to the then Military Governor of the Western State, Major General Adeyinka Adebayo.
The letter explains, and succinctly too, the anger of poor and impoverished people all over the world against governments’ punishing policies. Angered by Adebayo’s jerking up of tax, from a flat rate of three, to six pounds, the association, which comprised mostly farmers, the bulk of whom were taxable workers of the time, literally dared the leopard in its den by lighting fire-lamp to catch a glimpse of its scary face.As a result of the increment, cost of living suddenly skyrocketed, even amid the civil war that the Yakubu Gowon government was fighting against the then Eastern State. Tax at this time was like the ubiquitous petrol of today which cuts across all and sundry. The Egbe Mekunnu Taku letter goes thus: “It is quite evident that there is absolutely no sale of cocoa which serve (sic) as the main source from where we the farmers get our yearly income and that we are living at the mercy of the Almighty God. We beg to say that we are at present experiencing a good hardship in regard to our individual mode of living at the farm; our old ones as well as the young ones are crying of hunger (sic) day in and day out whilst many of us go about without food at times for days… this current tax assessment is considered to be too much for the individual to meet…”
But for the dystopia that arose as a result of the Adeyinka Adebayo-led government’s increased tax and the graveyard calm of today, there is hardly any difference between the hardship faced by western state farmers of the late 1960s and the excruciating pains that have been the lots of Nigerians in the last three months under Bola Tinubu. Since May 29, grueling poverty, social discord and spike in rates of crime have been on the increase after the off-the-cuff removal of subsidy by the government. Government’s subsequent responses to the groaning have been more of a staccato than a respite. Nigerians cannot see any coordinated or mapped out outflow from the fuel subsidy removal and unification of Forex. Many marvel that a government whose head had serially mouthed his long-term hunger to be in the driver’s seat of the presidential office could demonstrate such gross unpreparedness and perfunctoriness towards the challenges arising from administering office.
So, last week, the governor of Edo State, Godwin Obaseki, articulated same grouse and sang same song ceaselessly sung on the streets of Nigeria since May 29. While addressing journalists in Benin City, Obaseki lacerated the buttocks of the Tinubu government, expressing shock at its inability to effectively plan a workable response to the fuel subsidy removal. The subsidy removal, the governor said, has seriously impoverished Nigerians, as well as inflicting hardship and suffering on them. Worse still, he said, the palliative policy of the government, due to its peremptory attitude to the plights of the people, has morphed into an unmitigated fraud, with the economy under Tinubu taking a turn for the worse. In all, these can be attributed to Tinubu’s effeminate grasp of the economy.
“I am shocked that people who campaigned around the country, saying that they will remove subsidies, had no clear plans on what to do after subsidy removal. They don’t know what to do and how to support those who will be victims of subsidy removal. I am shocked and scared of what we are passing through today, where the government doesn’t seem to have a plan or solution on how to respond to the consequences of the policy measure put in place by their administration. With the way they have mismanaged our national economy, we have to deal with inflation, between 20 and 25 per cent. It means that the people will feel more pain, especially the weak and vulnerable in the society, particularly our pensioners, as whatever they get as their entitlement will do only little for them,” he said.
Almost immediately after Obaseki said this, Nigerians wondered what the Tinubu government’s response would be. We, for a minute, forgot that this was not a continuation of the Muhammadu Buhari government and Lai Mohammed was not in the saddle, even as he luxuriated in his paradise of lies. Then, we graphically imagined the usual potpourri of governmental playing-God, hogwash and arrogance, the usual broth dished out as Aso Rock’s replies to perceived enemies, would be pelted on Obaseki. It was however gladsome when we realized that a new Sheriff of the Information Ministry had come into the saddle. He even announced that his term of office was not going to be a roller-coaster of lies. At an official reception by the ministry for him, Mohammed Idris Malagi promised that there would be no room for lies and fake news. “For me, I am actually a reporter reporting for duty and I meant it with every sense of the word. The president has asked me to come and tell you that this is a brand new Ministry of Information and National Orientation….We are going to say it as it is. Mr. President is somebody who is truthful, honest, transparent. He has said that when we come, we should own up where there are mistakes, we should own up where we erred, we should not be shy to say, ‘No this is wrong and we are going to correct it.’”
First, from where did Malagi get those superfluous superlative adjectives of Mr. President being “truthful, honest, transparent” and all those what-ought-nots? Or perhaps, the Honourable Minister merely wanted to flaunt his English and Literary Studies background by showing off his arsenal of ironies, paradoxes and metonyms? If not, it is a general opinion that those superlatives are misplaced for the subject under reference. As far as Nigerians are concerned, the Honournable Minister should reserve his “truthful, honest, transparent” arsenal of ironies, paradoxes and metonyms about the current managers of our destinies for his next work of fiction.
And then, in his first official reaction on behalf of the federal government, Malagi unmistakably reversed the promises he made to Nigerians. You would imagine that the disputatious ghost of Lai Mohammed had risen in Malagi. Reacting to Obaseki’s national alarm on the whimsical navigation of Nigeria’s economy by Tinubu, Malagi began his intervention from a rather simplistic and ad-hominem plank. Obaseki, he said, had of recent, “shifted focus to the nation’s economic challenges as cannon fodder to divert attention from his poor performance at the state level.” That rhyme sounded kindergarten and a refrain of bad managers of office holders. It is a familiar route always trodden by information managers who forum-shop in hazy attempts to deflect justified arrows shot at their bosses.
Even members of the APC, in their closets, are worried about the policy somersaults and reactive colour of this government. Germane issues critical to people’s lives are left unattended to. For instance, Malagi, in hitting Obaseki, demanded that leaders should align criticism with reality. Here we go, Honourable Minister: What is the reality of Nigeria today? In simple terms, the reality is that Tinubu’s economic policies in the last three months, without debate, have pauperized Nigerian people colossally, more than previous governments’. There does not appear to be any mental rigour birthing those policies as they seem to be unintended governmental reactions. What broader economic picture could a fuel subsidy removal, inflicted at the spur of the moment, have on Nigerians when the president himself confessed that it was a product of a haphazard seizure “by the spirit of courage” without any governmental blueprint? While it is true that virtually everyone – World Bank, IMF and various economic experts – “have consistently advocated for the removal of fuel subsidy because of the fiscal distortions and burden it has placed on the economy,” as Malagi said, none of those bodies reckoned that a leader would be as unconscionable as to remove fuel subsidy without a requisite well-thought-out panacea to ease its resultant excruciating pains.
Malagi then tumbled into cants, sophistries and illogical ad-hominem arguments that made his intervention very watery, self-serving and insincere. In one breath, he accused Obaseki of “benefitting from the fuel subsidy removal, which is evident in the more than doubling of the FAAC allocation” and advising that, “rather than delving into narratives which do not provide the complete picture, the focus should be on how the Edo State Government will be using available resources to drive impactful projects that genuinely uplift the people of Edo State.” In those very disjointed ripostes, Malagi literally “aimed at the man,” and in the process, shifting his focus from the critical issues raised by Obaseki. While doing so, he enveloped himself in a blanket that could not allow him see the larger issues of the parlous state of the economy under Tinubu and the cries of the people. Because he could not see nor perceive the people’s cries, in frustration, Malagi then shot at the man who dared to bring out the log in Tinubu’s eye.
There is no doubt that the overwhelming cries of Nigerian people woke the Tinubu government from its somnambulist first three months in power. When it then woke up, government then rambled to offer N8000 to the “poorest of the poor.” Seeing that this would not work, it again cloned the same discredited Godwin Emefiele borrowing method to shore up the economy. Immediately, the Tinubu government then asked for a loan of $3 billion from JP Morgan, via the NNPC. Yet, the economy is gasping and clutching to straws. Tinubu hasn’t shown that he runs a government that is prepared for the acute challenges of office. Obaseki adequately articulated this effeminacy of control, a view of not only the common man on the streets, but one that is not dissimilar from those of respected economic experts. They all worry at the anti-people thrust of the three-month stay in office of Tinubu, especially the ostensible paucity of thought process that goes into his government’s economic policies.
The N185 billion palliatives is undoubtedly the most outstanding of the government’s policy. Its aim is to mitigate the grueling effect of the economy on Nigerians. Each state was allocated the sum of N5 billion. If you ask me, there is virtually no difference between this palliative and the parlous N8000 it earlier proposed. Only that, this time, the federal government has succeeded in offloading blames from the people to the governors. When Tinubu, last week, told the people to hold their governors responsible for whatever was the outcome of the palliative’s distribution, it was obvious to me that the aim of redesigning the curve of the palliative tokenism had been achieved. It was a masterfully crafted scapegoatism.
Questions have been posed severally on the N5billion allocation. One is that, did it occur to government that the poor in, say Kano, are not the same in number with those in Ebonyi? If this is the case, why give them uniform amounts? Second, if the money is a loan to the states as it has been confirmed to be, why is the federal government assuming patrimony over it? Why make it look as if the Federal Government had done the states some good that needed trumpeting to the world? Again, why make this policy look like an Uncle Grisham Comes To Dinner, as if it was the newest intervention ever? The Buhari government did something similar, in what was referred to as the Paris Club payment to states.
Malagi must know by now that Nigerians believe that Godwin Obaseki has earned his epaulettes for his Nostradamus peer into the future. On April 7, 2021, while hosting the transition committee members at Government House in Benin City, just as he did last week, Obaseki raised a similar alarm. Nigeria was in huge financial trouble, the governor shouted. Reason? Buhari had ordered a subterranean printing of Nigerian money to fund shortfalls in allocations shared to states.
Hell was immediately let loose. Megaphones like Malagi were amplified to the limit of their decibels. Zainab Ahmed, minister of finance, budget and national planning, led the army. “The issue that was raised by the Edo State governor, for me, is very, very sad because it is not a fact. What we distribute at FAAC is revenue that is generated…it is not true to say we printed money to distribute at FAAC, it is not true,” she said. Lai Mohammed joined the inglorious orchestra. Ingenuously called Ways and Means, it was later revealed that the government had printed money to the tune of N22.7 trillion.
Rather than waste precious time and space to demonize Obaseki, Malagi should know that Nigerians adjust themselves to listen when Obaseki raises alarm on the economy. He earned his keep by the certitude of his projections. It is old grandmother tale to use political party affiliation as cudgel of censure. Nigerians are interested in logic and facts of issues.
OPINION
NNPCL: Accounting for Fuel Subsidy
By Uddin Ifeanyi
I am not an accountant, so my opinion on the NNPCL’s recently released 2025 annual financial report is a qualified one. It matters, therefore, that PwC, the audit and assurance firm which signed off on the report, has no doubt that it represents a true and fair view of the corporation’s performance under the country’s reporting standards.
Far more comforting was my former colleague’s response to the report’s release: “Wonderful! While I was working in the bank, as the Corporate Banking Group’s relationship manager for the NNPC, the ‘most recent’ financials we had was about 15 years old”.
That was some 15 years ago. In terms of accountability and public disclosure, then, Nigeria’s most important corporation over the last 49 years is making steady progress.That said, significant parts of the picture of a profitable company undergirded by improving production, which the report tries so convincingly to take, are out of focus. It is a fair argument that the report’s headline profit growth figure appears to overstate the improvement in the corporation’s underlying trading performance. Why this blur? The NNPC Group’s net profit rose by about 33 per cent to ₦7.2 trillion last year, despite a 23 per cent drop in revenue from ₦45.1 trillion in 2024, to ₦34.5 trillion last year.
Gross profit was down by equivalent percentage points to ₦9.4 trillion in the same period. While two different lines, a ₦5 trillion rise in other income, and a ₦1 trillion fall in general and administrative expenses, explain this seeming contradiction, the resulting problem is not that the increase in the corporation’s profit last year did not come from increased sales or gross profits. It is instead included in the answer to the question, “How repeatable will the ‘other income’ performance be in future accounting periods?”
The corporation’s balance sheet is a smorgasbord of paints off a similarly nuanced canvas. With a current ratio of about 0.85, the NNPCL’s short-term assets (₦28.1 trillion) do not quite make up for its short-term liabilities (₦33.2 trillion). With the right timing, depending on the nature of its account payables, and the makeup of its receivables, the corporation ought to be able to easily meet its obligations. This balance sheet structure has one other purpose: it helps make sense of the corporation’s cash pressure.
The group’s cash balance was down from ₦10.3 trillion in 2024 to ₦6.4 trillion by financial year end 2025. This, despite an increase in cash generated from operations to ₦12.9 trillion in 2025 from ₦11.0 trillion the previous year. Trade and other receivables fell from the ₦31.4 trillion at which it printed in 2024, but even at ₦19.7 trillion, last year, it remained substantial.
On the upside, there is plentiful evidence of a production recovery. Still the chorus of “Hallelujahs” are pressed in on two sides by the narrative section of the report’s claim of average crude and condensate production of 1.77 million barrels per day – a five-year high, and the financial highlights’ listing of 565.8 million barrels of crude oil production. On the face of it, annualised, the latter number translates into about 1.55 million barrels per day of production.
My guess is that these two figures address different scopes — i.e. national production as against the NNPCL’s own or equity production. Any which way, the report could have helped make this reconciliation easier. Equal levels of clarity could have been facilitated by tying natural gas production directly to segment revenue, investment returns, and cash generation.
Overall, the NNPCL report indicates considerable operating progress. Operating cash generation is especially impressive. Nonetheless, the dip in revenue and gross profit, the facts that profit growth is almost entirely the result of large other income performance, and that current liabilities swamp current assets, make the headline profit an incomplete gauge of the organisation’s financial strength.
For more than a decade now, the dominant presence in the room when the NNPC’s accounts are discussed is the extent of outgoings on the subsidy for the pump-gate price of petrol. And this is the main reason I paid this much attention to the corporation’s annual report for last year – to see how far the corporation’s numbers corroborate the federal government’s insistence that it has removed the subsidy completely.
How do the numbers stack up? The corporation’s financial statements continue to use categories such as “energy security” and “under-recovery.” These are not exactly identical terms. Energy security expenses may include more than petrol price support.
Interestingly, the NNPCL’s financial statement for 2024 reports ₦8.67 trillion as an “under-recovery” balance. Other coverage in the 2025 statement describes ₦8.67 trillion as a “federation receivable.” Both labels and reporting periods are not interchangeable, but if either means that the corporation continues to cover a gap between petrol’s supply cost and a managed selling price, and records the amount as recoverable from the federation, the economic burden from the fuel subsidy has not disappeared. It has simply been absorbed by the NNPCL or the federation, rather than fully passed on to consumers.
Uddin Ifeanyi, a journalist manqué and retired civil servant, can be reached @IfeanyiUddin.
OPINION
Can ECOWAS Parliament Turn Climate Commitments into Regional Action?
By Mark Longyen
West Africa’s climate crisis is becoming harder to separate from the region’s familiar struggles with poverty, displacement, food insecurity, resource competition and violent conflict.
That convergence framed the ECOWAS Parliament’s Second 2026 Extraordinary Session and Second Parliamentary Seminar in Accra, Ghana.
It was themed “Climate Change as a Driver of Environmental Degradation, Population Displacement and Growing Insecurity in the ECOWAS Region.
”Beyond the speeches and warnings, the week-long meeting posed a harder question: can ECOWAS convert long standing climate commitments into funded, coordinated and measurable action?
The Parliament’s adopted resolutions offered one answer, urging ECOWAS leaders to consider establishing a regional fund dedicated to climate resilience and human security.
The lawmakers also called for climate resilience to be integrated into national budgets, development plans, land-use policies, conflict-prevention mechanisms and disaster-risk reduction strategies.
They further called for the ECOWAS Commission to develop a five-year implementation roadmap for translating the recommendations into practical measures.
These proposals attempt to move the regional climate conversation from declarations towards institutional mechanisms capable of producing measurable results.
Yet, the Parliament’s own assessment exposed the obstacles.
Speaker Hadja Mémounatou Ibrahima was blunt in her closing address.
“Our region doesn’t lack strategies nor instruments.
“What West Africa lacks are the financing and political will required to implement existing frameworks and transform them into visible and tangible assets for citizens,” she said.
That diagnosis goes to the heart of the region’s climate dilemma, where policies exist, but implementation frequently falls behind ambition.
Earlier, in her opening address, Ibrahima urged lawmakers to view climate disruption through its consequences for ordinary people rather than through statistics alone.
“Climate disruption can no longer be measured only in degrees, statistics or projections,” she said, citing declining land productivity, retreating coastlines, flooded neighbourhoods and displaced families.
For her, the fundamental question was how governments could protect citizens when environmental change was occurring faster than their capacity to adapt.
Ghana’s Vice-President, Prof. Jane Opoku-Agyemang, reinforced that perspective, saying climate change and environmental degradation were compounding pressures on livelihoods and food security.
“Climate change is both a development and a security challenge,” she said, urging ECOWAS states to move from reactive crisis management towards proactive resilience-building.
Her prescription included stronger early-warning systems, resilient agriculture, water management, coastal protection and clean-energy investment.
She also linked climate resilience to youth opportunities, arguing that education, skills and economic empowerment could help prevent environmental pressures from becoming drivers of insecurity.
The financial dimension emerged starkly in a presentation by Dr Derek Sarfo-Yiadom of Ghana’s Environmental Protection Authority.
He disclosed that Ghana would require an estimated 22.6 billion dollars by 2030 to implement its climate actions and strengthen resilience.
“When we put our climate reports together, we found out that we needed 22.6 billion dollars to accomplish our climate actions by the year 2030,” he said.
Sarfo-Yiadom argued that vulnerability assessments must identify not merely climate hazards, but the people exposed, barriers to recovery, responsible institutions, available budgets and measurable outcomes.
He called for stronger early-warning systems, improved drainage, resilient infrastructure and measures supporting rural livelihoods through climate services, crop diversity and better soil-water management.
At the regional level, ECOWAS climate expert Raoul Kouamé highlighted the challenge of translating commitments into implementation, especially where institutional capacities and financing remain uneven.
His argument reinforced a central lesson from the Accra conference; climate governance cannot succeed through isolated national interventions when rivers, ecosystems, migration routes and environmental risks cross borders.
Guinean parliamentarian Bademba Baldé said lawmakers identified effective implementation, financing and national ownership among the principal obstacles confronting regional climate action.
The Parliament consequently connected climate vulnerability with displacement, competition over land and water, pastoral mobility and resource-related conflicts.
That connection is especially important for West Africa, where environmental stress can amplify existing economic, social and security vulnerabilities.
The recommendations therefore went beyond environmental protection, seeking to embed climate resilience within development planning, conflict prevention and disaster-risk management.
For Nigeria and other vulnerable member states, the implications are substantial, given recurring floods, droughts, land degradation, food insecurity and competition over natural resources.
The Accra resolutions also raise an institutional question; how effectively can the ECOWAS Parliament drive implementation when its role remains principally consultative?
Nigerian lawmakers, including Sen. Ali Ndume and Awaji Abiante, argued that strengthening the Parliament’s legislative powers would enhance its ability to scrutinise regional and national responses.
That debate gives the climate question a governance dimension: ambitious recommendations require institutions with sufficient authority to monitor compliance, demand accountability and sustain political attention.
The Parliament itself recognised this when it stressed that its credibility would depend on decisions producing concrete and measurable improvements in citizens’ lives.
Its closing position was both ambitious and cautionary, noting that resolutions must not become another archive of unimplemented regional commitments.
The adoption of the seminar’s outcome document gave the climate agenda an institutional pathway.
The proposed regional resilience fund offers a potential financing mechanism, and the five-year roadmap, if effectively developed and monitored, could provide the continuity often missing from regional climate initiatives.
Stakeholders insist, however, that money alone will not resolve the crisis.
They say political ownership, institutional coordination, national legislation, community participation and credible monitoring will be equally decisive in translating commitments into action.
The Accra deliberations therefore shifted the focus from whether West Africa understands its climate crisis to whether governments and regional institutions are prepared to govern against it.
The real test now lies in whether governments, ECOWAS institutions and national parliaments will finance, implement and monitor the commitments reached.
For West Africa, the climate crisis is no longer waiting for another declaration. It is demanding decisions, resources and action.
Accra has provided the diagnosis and a framework.
The credibility of the ECOWAS Parliament’s climate push will ultimately be measured by what follows after the conference. (NAN)
OPINION
From Accusation to Execution: Nigeria’s Mob Justice Crisis
By Mukhtar Dambatta
In Nigeria, an accusation of theft can turn a calm crowd into a dangerous mob within minutes.
Someone shouts, “Ole!” “Barawo!” “Onyeoshi!” or “Thief!” and people begin to gather.
Before anyone asks what happened or whether the allegation is true, sticks, stones, and other objects may become weapons.By the time the police arrive, the accused person may already be badly injured or dead.
Jungle justice, or mob violence, is an illegal act where a crowd bypasses the legal system to punish a suspect without a fair trial or formal proof of guilt
The practice has continued in spite of the existence of courts, police and other institutions established to investigate crimes and administer justice.
One of the cases that brought the issue sharply into national focus was the killing of the “Aluu Four”.
In October 2012, four students of the University of Port Harcourt, Chiadika Biringa, Ugonna Obuzor, Lloyd Toku and Tekena Elkanah were attacked and killed in Aluu community, Rivers, after they were accused of stealing.
They were beaten and set ablaze by a mob. Images of the incident circulated widely, prompting public outrage and renewed calls for an end to mob justice.
But similar incidents have continued.
In March 2025, 16 travellers were killed by a mob in Uromi, Edo, after being accused of being kidnappers.
Reports identified the victims as hunters travelling from the South to the North.
President Bola Tinubu condemned the killings and directed security agencies to investigate the incident and prosecute those responsible.
The Uromi killings again raised concerns about what can happen when suspicion and fear replace investigation.
On July 26, 25-year-old Ibrahim Mbaya, popularly known as “Ibee”, was allegedly attacked by a mob in Jos, Plateau, after being accused of stealing an iPhone 12.
He was later taken to the Jos University Teaching Hospital, where he was confirmed dead.
The Police Command in Plateau announced the arrest of suspects in connection with the incident.
Recently, the Inspector-General of Police (I-G), Mr Olatunji Disu, gave a directive that jungle justice would be treated as homicide.
A security advocacy group, the Security Situation Room (SSR) backed the group described mob action as an invitation to anarchy.
The President of SSR, Mr Douglas Ogbankwa, said perpetrators of extra-judicial killings must be held accountable for their actions.
He said that the directive was timely, considering the spate of mob attacks and extra-judicial killings in the country.
“Of course, this directive is timely. Allowing people to resort to strong-arm tactics in solving criminal activities is an invitation to anarchy.
“It is like taking the country to the Hobbesian state of nature, where life was nasty, brutish and short.”
Ogbankwa said the existence of government could be traced to the social contract theory, under which citizens surrendered certain liberties to enable constituted authorities to govern and protect them.
He said allowing individuals to take the law into their hands would undermine the purpose of government and the rule of law.
“The reason we have a government is traceable to the social contract theory, where the people agree to have people who will govern, protect them and take care of their welfare.
“So, if individuals are allowed to have the liberty of taking the law into their hands, then that is simply taking us to the Stone Age without laws,” he said.
The convener noted that every society was governed by laws, adding that the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended) provided lawful avenues for resolving grievances.
He said the Police Act 2020 empowered the police to detect and investigate crimes and arrest those suspected of committing offences within their jurisdiction.
Ogbankwa consequently called for strict adherence to the I-G’s directive, adding that individuals must learn to be personally accountable for their actions or inactions.
On a similar note, a security analyst, Ahmed Umar, said the response to suspected crime should begin with reporting and investigation rather than punishment by a crowd.
“Allowing people to take the law into their own hands could result in the killing of innocent people who might later be found not to have committed any offence,’’ he said.
More so, a legal practitioner, Yusuf Aliyu Yusuf, said an accusation was not the same as proof of guilt.He said the responsibility of determining whether a person had committed a crime belonged to the appropriate institutions established by law.
In his submission, Barau Kawu, a community leader, said communities also had a role to play in preventing mob attacks by discouraging rumours and immediately reporting suspected criminal activities to security agencies.
“Community members should avoid taking action based solely on allegations or information received from others,’’ he said.
Getting an accurate national figure for deaths resulting from jungle justice is difficult.
Human rights organisations and other researchers have documented hundreds of cases over the years, but the actual number is difficult to establish.
Many incidents, particularly in communities far from major towns, may never reach the police, courts or mainstream media.
Analysts say a major factor behind the practice is public distrust of law enforcement institutions.
Where citizens believe that suspects may escape justice or that criminal cases will not be handled effectively, some may become tempted to punish accused persons themselves.
The country’s worsening insecurity has also made people more suspicious of strangers and unfamiliar situations.
Kidnapping, banditry and other violent crimes have affected communities across the country. In such an environment, suspicion can spread quickly.
Section 33 of the 1999 Constitution protects the right to life, subject to the exceptions stated in the Constitution.
The law provides for allegations to be investigated and suspects to be tried in court.
That process cannot be replaced by a crowd.
The danger is that the person being attacked may not even be responsible for the alleged offence.
“A stolen phone may have been misplaced; a misunderstanding may have been mistaken for criminal behaviour; a person may have been wrongly identified.
“Once a mob attack begins, however, there is often little opportunity for the truth to emerge; ending jungle justice will require more than condemning each incident after it happens.
“It will require proper investigations, prosecution of those responsible and greater confidences in the justice system.
“Citizens also need to understand that reporting a suspected crime is different from punishing a suspect.
“The police and courts have the responsibility to investigate allegations and determine guilt according to the law,’’ a social commentator said.
For communities, the challenge is to resist acting on rumours and accusations before the facts are known.
Experts agree that criminal accusations must be legally investigated and tried in court. When justice is taken into the streets, a mere accusation can instantly become an irreversible death sentence.(NAN)


