The raging issue now is whether the Boko Haram sect at any time ever nominated former president Muhammadu Buhari to negotiate with the federal government on its behalf.
This is stemming from the comments made yesterday by former president Goodluck Jonathan at a book launch in Abuja saying while he was in office, the sect nominated Buhari who was later to succeed him in office to mediate on their behalf.
Jonathan made the point to emphasize how he thought that with the election of Buhari, the sect would fizzle out since he is someone they seem to trust.
Former spokesman to Buhari, Malam Garba Shehu, in a swift reaction however refuted the statement saying Boko Haram never nominated Buhari to represent them in negotiating with the government of Jonathan.
Shehu drew his conclusion from what I can understand of his statement, from the fact that Buhari was not nominated by any of the recognised leaders of the Boko Haram sect.
Said Shehu: “Muhammed Yusuf or Abubakar Shekau, the deceased leaders of the Boko Haram terrorist group, never nominated Muhammadu Buhari for any such role. In fact, Shekau routinely denounced and threatened Buhari, and their ideologies were in direct opposition.”
He added that the sect members even attacked Buhari at a time in Kaduna.
He added what Jonathan and others are relying on was a statement made by one
Sheik Abu Mohammed Ibn Abdulaziz, whom Shehu said claimed to be the Boko Haram commander in charge of Southern and Northern Borno at a press conference in Maiduguri.
To Shehu, these are enough evidences to show that the sect never liked, never trusted hence did not nominate Buhari who later became the president of Nigeria to be one of their negotiators.
But from all available facts a certain ‘leader’ of the sect actually made such a call.
Jonathan using all the instruments of investigation at his disposal as president should have been able to tell if Abdulaziz was a leader of the sect or not.
But there is no indication that the security agencies then did their homework in that regard.
It is also worthy to point out that during the administration of Jonathan, many individuals and groups have stepped out claiming to represent the group because of the money involved but at the end turn out to be false.
But it is not also true that only Yussuf or Shekau were speaking for the sect as we have seen many including those with fanciful aliases like Abu Qaqa, Abu Dada etc speaking on its behalf.
We have also seen that the sect had many arms and commanders who control certain territories hence it was possible for them to delegate responsibilities.
If Abu Mohammed Ibn Abdulaziz was not speaking on behalf of the sect, the best to denounce his claim would have been the recognised Boko Haram leaders like they have done at various times.
When Yusuf’s brother in-law, Babakura Fugu met with former president Obasanjo on behalf of the family in Maiduguri, the Boko Haram sect killed him immediately to repudiate the claim that he was negotiating on behalf of the group.
It should be expected that the group which was notorious for correcting any claim not sanctioned by it would have reacted if the Abdulaziz claim was false.
It is on record that the sect did just that when its leader, Abubakar Shekau, denounced the claim almost immediately saying Abdulaziz did not have the mandate to speak for the sect.
In a video distributed to journalists in Maiduguri at that time, Shekau, who spoke in Hausa disowned Sheik Abu Mohammed Ibn Abdulaziz.
He said, “Abdulaziz has not been speaking on my behalf and I disassociate myself from him completely.”
Shekau continued: “I swear by Allah that Abdulaziz or whatever he calls himself did not get any authority from me to represent me in any capacity. I do not know him.
He added the expected threat: “If we per adventure encounter Abdulaziz and his group, I swear by Allah we are going to mete them with the grave judgment that Allah has prescribed for their likes in the holy book.”
So, I think Garba Shehu was right to draw such conclusions as the sect’s recognised leader disowned both the messenger and the message.
@AgbeseAndrew
