By PAMELA EBOH, Awka

The Coalition for the Protection of Democracy (COPDEM) has described protest as a right of expression for people as recognized under international law.

COPDEM stated this during an International Conference held in the Maitama area of the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja on Tuesday.

The group called on the Army and other security forces to understand that the right to protest is a constitutional right of citizens to hold the government accountable to ensure the progress and development of the country for the benefit of all citizens

COPDEM noted that under international and Nigerian law, the right to protest is sacrosanct, reminding the Nigerian government that sovereignty belongs to the people while government exists to protect the people’s lives and property, as well as uphold and defend the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, to which they swore in their Oath of Office.

Speaking on behalf of the group, Prince Rwang Pam Jnr., representative of the COPDEM Media Team, said: “The Army and other security forces should understand that the right to protest is a constitutional right of citizens to hold the government accountable to ensure the progress and development of the country for the benefit of all citizens.

“The security agencies are strongly advised to be patriotic in the discharge of their duties and must always protect the lives, rights, and well-being of the Nigerian people.

“The unmitigated zeal to harm fellow citizens who are patriotic enough to demand a better Nigeria is unpatriotic and despicable, imprudent, and unacceptable. They should learn from their colleagues all around the world. For instance, the Malawian army played a crucial role during the time of political and social turbulence in March 2019 by standing with the people and ensuring that their country became a better place.”

The group recalled that it had on Saturday, August 26, 2023 raised concern over continuous intimidation and suppression of peaceful rally in the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) despite constitutional provision for peaceful Mega rally in the country.

According to the group, after issuing a police permit to COPDEM for a rally in Abuja earlier that day, the security agents later warned against the rally due to perceived security threat posed by possible confrontation with Asari Dokubo, adding that for that reason, the rally venue was never publicized. It said that the warning raised suspicion of information leakage.

The group added: “The alarm raised yesterday, September 4, 2023, by Nigeria’s Spy Police, DSS, over “plans by some persons or groups to stage violent protest regarding the long-awaited judgment of the 2023 Presidential Election Petitions Tribunal,” scheduled for Wednesday, September 6, 2023, appears to confirm information leakage and the possibility of a verdict of dismissal based on technicality rather than justice based on constitutional merit.

“By raising this alarm, the security agents appear to confirm having prior knowledge of the verdict yet to be delivered to Nigerians. Plausibly, a member of the Judiciary may have leaked the PEPT Panel’s verdict to the Executive Arm of the current Government of Nigeria.

“In this case, the government, along with its internal and external security agents, have proven themselves illiterate in the handling of this privileged information by using it to inflict further psychological damage to the psyche of the already broken populace. We believe, therefore, that the DSS alarm is ill-conceived and politically motivated thereby raising doubts about the integrity and independence of the Five Tribunal Justices and the credibility of their long-awaited Judgment.

“As the international community is aware, the social contract theory underscores the undisputed facts that government exists for the people and derives its authority from the people to act on their behalf primarily for their security and wellbeing. Nigerians’ rights to protest are safeguarded under sections 38, 39, 40, and 41 of the Constitution. “It is a fundamental human right of the people to voice out their displeasures, disappointments, and frustrations,” COPDEM said as it cited that in accordance with international standards and best practices as recognized under International Law, the international community must hold the current government of Nigeria accountable for the killing or brutalisation of peaceful protesters.

“Security agencies should not prevent citizens from exercising their right to protest.

“Articles 18, 19 and 20 of the Universal Declaration of Human Right, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Right and the UN Human Rights Council’s Resolution at its 38th Session on Promotion and Protection of Human Rights in the context of Peaceful Protests are quite apposite.

“Principle 1 of the Resolution on Promotion and Protection of Human Right in the context of Protest recognizes that a protest can engage in actions targeting any audience, including public authorities, private entities, or individuals, or the public and may annoy or give offence to people who are opposed to the ideas. It also recognizes that protest may temporarily hinder or obstruct the activities of third parties.

“Principle 2 then imposes obligations on States/countries to respect the right to protest. States should not prevent, hinder, or restrict the right to protest; States should protect the right to protest and should undertake reasonable steps to protect protesters by adopting measures necessary to prevent violations by third parties.

“Principle 4 makes provision for the protection of internationally guaranteed human rights during all protests even where restrictions or exceptions might be applicable.

“Principle 5 permits States to derogate from international human rights commitments only in cases of public emergency situations that threaten the life of the nation however such derogation must be officially and lawfully proclaimed in accordance with both national and international law.

“Principle 8 enables everyone the freedom to choose the location of a protest, and the location chosen should be considered integral to its expressive purpose. States should ensure that protests are allowed in all public places, including places that are privately owned, but are functionally public and must equally ensure that protests can take place within sight and sound of their object or targeted audience.

“Principle 9 provides that everyone should have the freedom to choose the form and manner of a protest, including its duration. It also recognizes a non-violent direct action or civic disobedience actions as a legitimate form of protest. President Buhari or any public officer is not in a position to determine the duration of protest or to adjudge whether or not protest demands have been met or not. It is the right of protesters themselves to do so.”

While stating that Principle 12 imposes duties on States to adopt a human rights approach to policing protests, COPDEM maintained that Policing of protests by law enforcement agencies should be guided by the human rights principles of legality, necessity, proportionality, and non-discrimination and should always comply with international human rights law and standards on policing, in particular the UN Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials.

According to the group, Principle 13 imposes duties on States to adopt and implement a domestic legal and policy framework for the use of force by law enforcement, and ensure that all law enforcement agencies fully comply with international human rights law and standards on policing, in particular the UN Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials, as well as best practices in this area, such as Amnesty International’s Use of Force: Guidelines for Implementation of the UN Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials.

Other Principles read: “16 imposes duties on State to ensure that participation in a protest must never by itself be the basis of a criminal charge or for suspicion of involvement in criminal activity. Liability must always be personal, so that neither the organisers nor the protesters are subjected to sanctions of any kind based on acts committed by others. Organisers and protesters must never be held liable or responsible for covering the costs of the provision of adequate security and safety measures, policing and first-aid services, and the costs of cleaning up after protests.

“Principle 17 imposes duty of accountability and transparency on States to ensure that all decision-making processes by public authorities relating to protests are transparent, accessible and comply with international due process standards. States should investigate, prosecute, and ensure accountability for human rights violations committed in the context of protests.

“Principle 18 mandates States to enable the free flow of information relating to protests, including through all types of media, so that everyone can freely impart and receive information about protests before, during and after them.

“Principle 19 mandates States to allow and actively facilitate reporting on, and the independent monitoring of protests by all media and independent observers, without imposing undue limitations on their activities and without official hindrance, as far as is possible.

“Principle 20 permits organisers of protests where possible and without any coercion, to establish relationships of cooperation and partnership with relevant authorities and with law enforcement officials in planning the course of the protests. In cases where public space needs to be booked or where large numbers are expected, organisers should comply with voluntary notifications procedures.”

COPDEM further said: “Protests play an important part in the civil, political, economic, social, and cultural life of all societies. Historically, protests have often inspired positive social change and improved protection of human rights, and they continue to help define and protect civic space in all parts of the world.

“Protests encourage the development of an engaged and informed citizenry and strengthen representative democracy by enabling direct participation in public affairs. They enable individuals and groups to express dissent and grievances, to share views and opinions, to expose flaws in governance and to publicly demand that the authorities and other powerful entities rectify problems and are accountable for their actions.

“This is especially important for those whose interests are otherwise poorly represented or marginalized.

“Notably, a careful review of, and due diligence on the purported Freeze Order revealed that the mandate upon which the police placed a Post No Debit order on the organisation’s bank account was not prayed for by the Police and was not ordered by the Court.

“In the Motion before the Magistrate Court, the Police never prayed for placing a Post No Debit on our client's account and none was granted. Certified True Copy of the Order prayed for, and granted by the Court was obtained.

“There is a manifest difference between the Order Court made on 4th April 2023 and what was purportedly procured on 5th April 2023 and used to freeze the bank account.

“In other words, the Police used a fraudulent magistrate court order to freeze the bank account. Though a Magistrate Court has no vires to place a perpetual "No Debit" on an account holder’s account, yet all efforts to date to lift the freezing order on the account have been unsuccessful.

“On Sunday, August 20, 2023, the Coalition for the Protection of Democracy (COPDEM) condemned the arrest of seven people including Mr Chigozie Ifeanyichukwu, the Convener of “UpNorth Ambassadors for Peter Obi' and the brutalization of five others by security agents in Abuja.”

COPDEM said Chigozie and Bulus were arrested and brutalised on that Sunday afternoon by a combined team of Police and Army at Area 1 Round About, Garki

It criticised the security agencies for unlawfully arresting and brutalizing peaceful protesters who were simply expressing their democratic rights to freedom of expression and association.