By Ade Martins-
A not-for-profit organization, Egalitarian Mission for Africa (EMA), has urged the ECOWAS Court of Justice in Abuja to stop the planned deployment of military forces against putschists in Niger Republic.
The group have called for an order restraining Mr Tinubu, President of the ECOWAS Commission and other defendants “from any military invasion or any military action in the Republic of Niger that might undermine the Republic of Niger’s sovereignty and territorial integrity
AD: Capeesh Restaurant
It follows the overthrowing of Mohamed Bazoum, Niger’s elected president by his presidential guards after being held hostage.
Court filings seen by The Eye Of Media.Com reveals Mr Ajulo listed ECOWAS, the Authority of Heads of State and Government of ECOWAS, the President of ECOWAS Mission (Mr Tinubu), the Federal Republic of Nigeria and the Republic of Niger, listed as defendants.
Other plaintiffs listed in the suit are Bola Akinterinwa, a professor and former Director General of the Nigerian Institute of International Affairs (NIIA), and Hamza Dantani, a lawyer.
AD: Oysterian Sea Food Restaurant And Bar
The plaintiffs are urging the court to invoke ECOWAS treaties and other international legal instruments to stop Mr Tinubu and the regional body from intervening militarily in Niger.
The plaintiffs argue that the military action planned in Niger would be tantamount to endorsing an aggressive stance against the tenets of ECOWAS treaties and other international laws prohibit. They also highlight the risks of any military intervention exacerbating the crisis and spilling over into Nigeria.
In a high-stakes legal battle that underscores the delicate balance between regional cooperation and sovereign integrity, plaintiffs are vehemently urging the court to invoke ECOWAS (Economic Community of West African States) treaties and international legal instruments to halt the alleged military intervention led by a Nigerian president and the regional body in the neighboring nation of Niger.
This unprecedented legal challenge hinges on fundamental principles of international law, sovereignty, and regional stability, raising intricate questions about the extent to which regional organizations can intervene in the affairs of member states.
ECOWAS and its Treaty Framework
At the heart of the plaintiffs’ legal argument lies the ECOWAS treaty framework, a regional organization that seeks to promote economic integration, political stability, and peace among its member states.
Founded in 1975, ECOWAS aims to foster cooperation in various domains, including political, economic, and security matters. One of the central principles of the organization is non-interference in the internal affairs of member states.
The plaintiffs assert that the alleged military intervention in Niger directly contravenes this key principle of non-interference enshrined in the ECOWAS treaty. Article 52 of the ECOWAS Revised Treaty outlines the commitment of member states to respect the sovereignty, territorial integrity, and political independence of each other. Additionally, Article 58 emphasizes the peaceful settlement of disputes among member states, further reinforcing the principle of non-interference.
International Law and Sovereignty
The legal challenge resonates with the broader principles of international law that safeguard the sovereignty of nations. Sovereignty is a foundational principle in the international legal order, affirming a state’s authority over its territory and internal affairs. The plaintiffs contend that the alleged military intervention constitutes an affront to the sovereignty of Niger, as it involves the use of military force without the consent of the sovereign government.
Nigeria alongside 12 other African countries had given Niger a deadline of Sunday to return the country’s leader to power, following the coup that took the government by storm.
The United Nations Charter, a cornerstone of modern international law, underscores the importance of sovereign equality and non-interference in the affairs of other states. Article 2(4) of the Charter prohibits the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state. The plaintiffs draw upon this principle to bolster their argument that the alleged military intervention violates not only ECOWAS treaties but also fundamental norms of international law.
While the legal challenge presents a compelling argument against the alleged military intervention, the case also navigates complex legal and political terrain. Regional organizations like ECOWAS often grapple with striking a balance between maintaining stability and respecting the sovereignty of member states. In certain situations, regional interventions may be deemed necessary to prevent humanitarian crises, uphold human rights, or restore stability.
In urging the court to grant their reliefs, the defendants cited the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights 1948 and the Declaration on the Right to Development 1986
They could have also drawn upon other international legal instruments to bolster their case like The African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, for instance, emphasizes the rights of individuals and peoples to self-determination and to freely determine their political status. This principle resonates with the concept of sovereignty and the right of states to be free from external interference.
Regional courts or tribunals, such as the ECOWAS Community Court of Justice, play a crucial role in adjudicating disputes involving ECOWAS member states. These courts have the authority to interpret and apply ECOWAS treaties, which could provide a forum for the plaintiffs to seek redress for the alleged breach of non-interference.
One of the plaintiffs, Hamza Dantani, an indigene of Borno State, traced his ancestry to Niger
“He (Mr Dantani) has a strong affinity, social and economic ties with Niger, as his family members live on the other side of the border and he has businesses in both countries. His fundamental rights are presently being breached and are in danger of further breach,” the court document revealed.
The filings further showed that over 300,000 refugees, many Nigerians had fled Niger in the wake of the crisis, adding that any military action would violate their fundamental right to life, right to dignity of human persons and liberty to life.
With a population of 25 million people, the plaintiffs noted that “any military incursion into the country will have severe humanitarian consequences.”
Counter Productive
The plaintiffs contend that military invasion of Niger would be “counter-productive and would ultimately lead to the disintegration of ECOWAS and plunge the sub-region into more violent conflicts to the benefit of foreign powers to sell their arms and further plunder Africa’s vast natural resources.”
EMA as a registered Non-Governmental Organization with the sole aim of promoting social justice, peace, stability, rule of law and accountability in West Africa, recommended that tackling the issue requires “diplomacy to try and find an amicable solution that will benefit all parties.”
It further proposed that ECOWAS could suspend Niger from the sub-regional body, until its return to democracy.
The plaintiffs are praying the court declare that ECOWAS’ “failure to prioritise the fundamental human rights of its citizens in their proposed military intervention into the Republic of Niger amounts to the breach of fundamental human rights as encapsulated in the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights.”
In urging the court to grant their reliefs, the defendants cited the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights 1948 and the Declaration on the Right to Development 1986.
The defendants further asked the court to declare the ECOWAS heads of government “resolution to use military intervention with the aim to resolve the coup by the 5th Defendant (Niger) will amount to the breach of the fundamental human rights to life, right to dignity of human person…” of citizens in the sub-region.”
AD: Heritage And Restaurant Lounge Bar