THE amnesty programme, since its introduction, has proved to be the panacea for peace in the hitherto restive oil-rich Niger Delta region of the country. The programme, introduced by the late President Umaru Yar'Adua, may not have stopped agitations in the region but has ended the appalling bloodbath and militancy. This has paved the way for oil companies to resume normal business activities and provided the necessary boost to the oil-reliant Nigerian economy. Now, oil output has increased from slightly less than one million barrels per day in 2008 to between 2.4 and 2.6m bpd. To that extent, it will be safe to term the programme a success.
But three years down the line, what was introduced as an ad hoc measure to tackle a dire security and economic situation has since raised concern by those who feel it is fast becoming a programme in clear danger of being abused. The concern has been spurred by a recent announcement by the Chairman of the Presidential Amnesty Programme, Kingsley Kuku, of an approval for a third batch of 3,642 amnesty beneficiaries. Kuku said that 26,328 ex-militants had been fully disarmed and were undergoing various forms of entrepreneurial training. The latest figure would, therefore, bring the total to close to 30,000 persons.
The question however arises as to the direction that the programme is headed and when it is likely to be brought to an end. Or, has it become a permanent instrument for assuaging the rage of jobless Niger Delta youths? In fact, questions are also being raised about the huge cost of running what is becoming an amorphous programme by the Federal Government.
These concerns are largely sensible. Last year's budget for the amnesty programme was put in the region of N74 billion and well over N160 billion has been spent since the programme started. Even if some may say that it is not too much a price to pay for peace, it is nevertheless substantial. Only the annual budgets of the super rich oil producing states are higher than that.
When Yar'Adua proposed an offer of amnesty for the Niger Delta militants on June 15, 2009, he did so by "setting out terms, procedures, and processes for the grant of an amnesty." According to the terms of the amnesty, the militants had just 60 days, starting from August 6 and to end on October 4, to renounce violence, surrender their weapons and accept the offer. They were to comply with the terms within the stipulated time or risk being hunted and crushed like common criminals.
Quite surprisingly, many militants, upon receiving the assurances of the government's sincerity, turned out in high numbers to turn in their weapons. The surrender of armaments became a carnival of sorts, during which known warlords emerged from their hideouts in the creeks with scores of their lieutenants to ensure compliance.
As it turned out, most of the militants were jobless youths who were driven by their conditions into living dangerously in the creeks; they needed rehabilitation. They were thus placed on monthly stipends. While some of them were made to learn trades, others secured admissions to train in Nigerian universities and abroad. Interestingly, those who had initially rejected amnesty are now agitating to be enlisted into the programme contrary to the terms of the amnesty which specified exclusion for not meeting the deadline. While some of the youths have occasionally gone on the rampage to protest their non-inclusion, others signed on the programme have also had cause to protest not being given the attention they claim to deserve.
But even as the foot soldiers are undergoing rehabilitation, the key militant leaders have similarly been pacified in a different manner. Many of them have won mouth-watering contracts, worth billions of naira, to watch over oil installations and prevent other disgruntled elements from disrupting oil flow or engaging in other forms of criminality capable of disrupting the fragile peace in the region.
Before the amnesty, the militants had successfully wrestled the security forces to a standstill. They were not only sabotaging oil installations, they were also engaging in kidnapping for ransom, piracy and oil bunkering and carrying out guerrilla attacks on the security agents. At the height of militancy, Nigeria's oil production at a time dropped from 2.3 million barrels per day to as low as about 900,000 barrels per day, costing the nation about N8.7 billion daily. This was critical to the economy for a country that has the capacity to produce more than 2.5 million barrels per day. This was why the then President Yar'Adua was constrained to make that desperate survival move of offering amnesty to the militants. It was meant to usher in a new phase of peace and progress in the Niger Delta in particular and Nigeria as a whole.
Having achieved that now, it is time to wind down the programme and face other developmental issues in the region. The government must not continue to create the impression that it is rewarding those who take up arms against their country by continuing to prolong the amnesty programme beyond its five-year period. The youths must be encouraged to take responsibility for their own lives. Training and keeping the ex-militants on an equivalent of $400 monthly payment will not guarantee sustainable peace in the region. The challenge is how to transform the backwater region to a land of opportunities. But, given the amount so far expended on the programme, there is also the need for proper accountability to be given before the chapter closes for good. Many believe the programme has become a conduit to siphon public funds. That is why all the records must be clean as a definite timeline is set to draw the curtain on amnesty.
