Pantami: What does the law say on acts of terrorism?

advert area

call to place your advert banner here +2348100526724 0r +2348112034599
Pantami: What does the law say on acts of terrorism?

Minister of Communications and Digital Economy, Isa Pantami

Dr Isa Pantami is the Minister of Communications and Digital Economy. He is also known as Sheikh Pantami. He was born on October 20, 1972, in Pantami Ward, Gombe State.

Many Nigerians (including my humble self) have since called for Pantami’s resignation or his removal as a minister by the President, (Major General)  Muhammadu Buhari (retd), based on some of his incendiary religious statements made sometime between 2000 and 2006, as an Islamic scholar. In the highly inflammatory speeches, he expressed allegiance to and support for (including sympathy with) the Taliban, Al-Qaeda and Boko Haram terrorist groups. These are three of the world’s deadliest terrorist groups. Pantami on the other hand, has since acknowledged that he made those statements.

Do Pantami’s statements constitute terrorist acts? Terrorism is commonly understood to refer to acts of violence that target civilians in the pursuit of political or ideological aims. The crucial aspect of the offence of terrorism is the creation of intense fear and anxiety, both physical and psychological, in the minds of members of the public, which have the effect of coercing, forcing or intimidating them to do, or abstain from doing, any act, or to adopt or abandon a particular view, policy or position to act according to certain principles (Abdulmumini v FRN (2017) LPELR-43726(SC) 29.

In 2011, the Terrorism (Prevention) Act No.10, 2011, came into force to deal with offences relating to conducts carried out or purposes connected with terrorism. The Act was subsequently amended in 2013 by the Terrorism (Prevention Amendment) Act 2013. By virtue of Section 4(1) (b) of the Amendment Act, a person who knowingly, in any manner, solicits or renders support for a proscribed organisation or an internationally suspected terrorist group, an offence under this Act and shall on conviction be liable to imprisonment for a maximum term of 20 years. Though, Buhari has unsurprisingly refused to formally proscribe Boko Haram, the terrorist group has, with its sisters, Al-Qaeda and Taliban, been proscribed internationally.

Pantami, as stated above, is not denying making those statements. It is not in doubt that he made those dangerous statements when he was already an adult (about 33 years and 11 months old). He was not a minor. So, his mind was not impressionable. His lame defence is that he has since renounced those views and does not rule out the fact that he had committed a crime by supporting or sympathising with terrorist organisations. However, under what law should he be tried?

There are two Acts mentioned above. The first is the EFCC Act, 2004. The second is the Terrorism Act, 2013 (as amended). Section 46 of the EFCC Act made reference to the Penal Code and the Criminal Code. These Acts shall now be considered.

The statements made by Pantami, pledging allegiance to Al-Qaeda, Taliban and Boko Haram, were made sometime in 2000-2006, while the Terrorism Act came into force on June 3, 2011. It is enshrined in Section 36(8) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended), that: “No person shall be held to be guilty of a criminal offence on account of any act or omission that did not, at the time it took place, constitute such an offence, and no penalty shall be imposed for any criminal offence heavier than the penalty in force at the time the offence was committed.”

Pantami cannot therefore be prosecuted under the Terrorism Act, because his alleged terrorist acts occurred prior to the enactment of the Terrorism Act. The Terrorism Act does not have a retroactive or retrospective Act. The definition of terrorism under the EFCC Act, is however broad. It includes any act that is intended to intimidate, force, coerce, or induce any government, body, institution, the general public or any segment thereof, to do or abstain from doing any act or to adopt or abandon a particular standpoint, or to act according to certain principles, or disrupt any public service, the delivery of any essential service to the public or to create a public emergency, or create general insurrection in a state and any promotion, sponsorship of, contribution to, command, aid incitement, encouragement, attempt threat, conspiracy, organisation or procurement of any person.

The combustible and inflammable comments of Pantami no doubt were intended to cause fear or make any government or bodies abandon a standpoint, induce fear in the public or government, etc. He can be charged under the EFCC Act.

The Penal Code Act and the Criminal Code Act did not provide for the offence of terrorism. The Criminal Code provides for the offence of unlawful profession and unlawful society. There is no similar provision in the Penal Code. Since the alleged act took place in the northern part of Nigeria, Pantami cannot be charged with unlawful society or unlawful profession. But, he can be surely charged for terrorism under the EFCC Act.

Be the first to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.