By Abdallah el-Kurebe

The victim, Umar Mamman

In October 31, 2006,the world suddenly went blank for little Master Umar Mamman. His two eyes were forcibly plucked off by some ritualists in a sugar cane farm in Sokoto State. In fact, the 7-year-old boy was enticed by his assailants into the farm where they plucked off his two eyes preparatory to using him for rituals. . Mother luck was however, on his side for he was later rescued by security agents who also arrested some suspects(names withheld) The suspects were subsequently charged before a magistrate court VI in Sokoto for causing grievous hurt (of a minor) punishable under Section 247 of the Penal Code.

The magistrate court heard the case and later transferred it to a High court where the three suspects were tried and convicted. The accused persons were later sentenced to 5 years imprisonment each, without order for compensation to the victim. This development led to protests by some human rights activists in the state who saw the judgment as a miscarriage of justice. One of the activists, Dr. Husaini Mango of the Department of Educational Foundations, Faculty of Education and Extension Services, Usman Danfodiyo University, Sokoto, who is also the Chairman of the Association of Masses for Prisoners and Less Privileged (a Sokoto-based NGO), took up the gauntlet by deciding to pursue the case. He told Crime Alert, “That was the beginning of foul play in the case. In the first place, despite the gravity of the offence, the Police arraigned them before a magistrate’s court that has limited jurisdiction. Initially, the court abandoned the issue of abduction and tried the accused persons only in respect of the offence of conspiracy and causing of grievous hurt upon which it’s judgement was based thereby disregarding the aspect of compensation, which was not part of Police report to the Court”.

It was gathered that Dr. Mango was dissatisfied with the judgement and wrote an application to Sokoto State Attorney-General and Commissioner of Justice on July 9 2007, requesting permission to appeal against the judgement, which he observed, was only in favour of the convicts. Unfortunately, the Attorney-General thought otherwise and stated that the State was satisfied with the judgement.

Again, dissatisfied with Attorney-General’s reply, Mango, on August 30, wrote to the Governor of Sokoto State and copied the Sultan of Sokoto, the Speaker, Sokoto State House of Assembly and the Secretary_General, WRAPA. When replies to these were not forth -coming, he wrote a reminder on October 4 to the Governor and the Sultan for which there was no response. At this stage, Dr. Mango resorted to Islamic justice and sponsored a civil suit at a Sharia Court in Wamakko in which jurisdiction the dastardly act was committed. This was on October 3 2007.

Revelation at the Sharia Court

Crime Alert learnt that during the course of trial at the Sharia Court in November 8, 2007, the principal convict confessed in the open court that he committed the offense. He shocked the court when he revealed that he was contracted to pluck the eyes of little Umar Mamman, by a renowned politician in the area.

The Human Rights Activist, Dr. Mango further revealed that this revelation elicited reactions which had hitherto been kept under the chest of so many in the area. He alleged that he received a letter of threat from the renowned politician on November 13 2007 against which he felt constrained, not only by the letter but also by the revelation, to write on November 26 to the Attorney-General and Commissioner of Justice to intervene. The Attorney-General wrote to the Inspector-General of Police, who ordered that an investigation be conducted in the matter.

Suspecting that the matter was scuttled because of the personality involved, Mango wrote, on February 25 2008, to the Country Representative of UNICEF, UN House, Abuja and copied the Executive Secretary of National Human Rights Commission; Honorable Minister, Federal Ministry of Women Affairs and Child Development. He also sent copies to Chairman, Senate Committee on Women Affairs and Child Development; Chairman, House Committee on Women Affairs and Child Development; the President, Nigerian Children’s Parliament; Special Adviser to His Excellency on Human Rights; NGOs and Donor Agencies in Sokoto state. Unfortunately, Dr. Mango said he was yet to receive responses from them.

Seeing the delay on the part of the Attorney-General of Sokoto state to start prosecution, Dr. Mango instituted a suit with number SS/M.95/08 for an Order of Mandamus to compel him to begin the prosecution. He followed up with appeals against the Attorney-General to National Human Rights Commission, Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice and the Chairman, House Committee, Public Petitions, which finally prompted Sokoto state government to file a suit no. SS/8C/2010 against the renowned Politician.

The case dragged on until February 8, 2011 when the court quashed it on the bases of weak evidence. The court held that: no witness was invited to be heard and verify his evidence; the IG/police report was full of “addition and subtraction” of the evidence given by the witnesses during the investigation. It also ruled that the IG/police report was partial because one of the witnesses, who was the eyewitness and a witness during the police investigation, complained that he was denied some of his facts on the matter.

But Dr. Mango still feels otherwise. He claimed that he read the interim report by the Police and he immediately reported that there were some defects in it. According to him, he wrote additional information with regards to the defects identified in the interim report. “The boy has lost his eyes and his future ruined. The case has been quashed, thereby granting him no respite, no compensation. In Nigeria, the child of the poor has no protection or so do many now feel”, he lamented.