|
Nationwide strike grips Nigeria, labor
leader arrested
Compiled by Bob Strott
Oct. 13 (AGR) -- People walk by closed shops in an usually busy
market in Lagos. Business has been halted by a nationwide protest, to
which the Nigerian government has responded by arresting a prominent
labor leader.
Two major oil industry labor unions have joined a general strike in
Nigeria to protest rising fuel prices. A court rejected the government’s
lawsuit to halt the strike.
The strike began Oct. 11 in response to the rising fuel prices triggered
by the government’s measures to deregulate the energy market. Prices
have gone up 25 percent since last month, when the government began
implementing the deregulation program.
The government says deregulation will help Nigerians in the long run
by bringing competition into the energy sector and by generating revenues
needed for social services.
But many people in Africa’s largest oil-producing country see low
fuel costs as a national right, and argue that the government should
control gasoline prices.
The strike, launched by Nigeria’s largest labor union, the Nigeria
Labor Congress, entered a third day on Oct. 13.
The Nigerian government petitioned a high court to halt the strike,
but a lawyer for the Labor Congress, Femi Falana, says the judge refused
to hear the case.
Falana says that two oil industry unions, NUPENG and PENGASSAN, have
joined the strike and have threatened to shut down the oil industry
if the government continued to try to prevent the strike action. The
strike has already contributed to the record high worldwide oil prices.
The unions are ignoring a court order issued last month, which banned
them from striking for reasons other than working conditions.
The President of the Nigeria Labor Congress (NLC), Adams Aliyu Oshiomhole,
was arrested on Oct. 9 at gunpoint at the domestic wing of the Nnamdi
Azikiwe Airport, without any warrant.
Oshiomhole was abducted by a team of operatives of the State Security
Services (SSS) numbering over fifteen, who overpowered him, wrestled
him to the ground and bundled him into a standby Peugeot 504 station
wagon, which bore no license plates. In the process, his jacket was
torn and he sustained bruises caused by the rough-handling and the impact
of the several falls he sustained before being half-dragged, half-carried
into the vehicle.
The arrest took place in the full view of the national leadership of
the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), including its Chairman, Chief Audu
Ogbe, and Secretary, Chief Vincent Ogboluafo.
Workers and passengers who were attracted by the noise of the scuffle
were physically prevented from accessing the tarmac area by security
men who had their weapons drawn.
Arrested with Oshiomhole were three others who accompanied him to the
airport: Philip Shuaib, former National Association of Nigerian Students
President; Olaitan Oyerinde, Oshiomhole’s Special Assistant; and
Obadiah Bapven.
They were briefly detained at the Airport office of the SSS, questioned,
and released, but that was after Shuaib and Bapven “were savagely
beaten by the SSS operatives,” according to the NLC leadership.
Disputing the claim of the NLC, SSS stated in Abuja that Oshiomole was
not arrested by its operatives but had an encounter with its field operatives
attached to the local terminal of the Nnamdi Azikiwe Airport, Abuja,
who took him to an SSS sub-office in Asokoro, following some misunderstanding
which was later resolved.
The SSS, in a statement, disclosed that the Director-General of the
SSS, Colonel Kayode Are, personally went to the sub-office on learning
of the incident and resolved the matter leading to the release of the
NLC president. The statement read: “The SSS has received inquiries
on the purported arrest of Mr. Adams Oshiomole, the NLC president. It
is not true that NLC president was arrested.”
Lagos lawyer, Chief Gani Fawehinmi, and the Conference of Nigerian Political
Parties condemned the SSS action against the NLC President.
Gani, in a press statement, described the arrest as “barbaric,
illegal and unconstitutional.”
He said, “the arrest cannot prevent tomorrow’s strike from
going on in a more determined manner. The die is cast. Monday October
11, 2004 is the D-Day when Nigerians will show their revulsion against
failed economic policies of the regime which has brought untold hardship
through its National Economic Enslavement and Dehumanization Strategy
(NEEDS),” the lawyer stated.
CNPP, speaking through its national secretary, Maxi Okwu, deplored the
arrest of Oshiomhole and demanded his immediate release.
“By the arrest, the government has finally declared total war on
the masses. We urge all voices of dissent to be on alert since they
are all on the list of crackdown and containment. The mass action slated
for Oct. 11, must go on,” the CNPP added.
The nation wide mass protest by the Labor Civil Society Coalition (LASCO)
against recent increases in the price of gasoline and petroleum products
began Oct. 11. The sit- at- home protest which lasts for 4 days, initially,
involves workers and working families, students, artisans, professionals,
market men and women, and all segments of the Nigerian populace.
At a press conference on October 10, in Abuja, Oshiomhole stated that
all dialogue so far has not achieved required results because the federal
government was more interested in a military and police solution than
engage in meaningful dialogue.
The NLC President stressed that the four-day protest will be peaceful
and non-violent.
He cautioned the Federal government on the use of the police to terrorize
the people, as the consequences would be very grave. “If the government
decides to use the police and the military as a tool of terrorism against
the people, and one Nigerian is killed, we will be compelled to review
our position and embark on a total and indefinite protest against this
government.”
Sources: AP, BBC, Nigeria Labor Congress,
Vanguard
UN unions want workers out of Iraq
By Thalif Deen
United Nations, Oct. 7 (IPS) — Nationwide elections in
Iraq, scheduled to take place before the end of January 2005, are now
jeopardized by two powerful UN staff unions demanding that no UN employees
be sent to the violence-ridden country.
“Just one staff member is one staff member too many in Iraq,”
say the Federation of International Civil Servants’ Association
(FICSA) and the Coordinating Committee of Independent Staff Unions and
Associations of the UN System (CCISUA).
Collectively, the unions represent over 60,000 staffers in the UN system
worldwide, including its humanitarian agencies.
In a joint letter to Secretary-General Kofi Annan on Oct. 6, they say
that not only should no UN staff members be sent to Iraq, but also “those
already deployed [should] be instructed to leave as soon as possible.”
After the bombing of the UN compound in Baghdad in August 2003, which
claimed the lives of 22 UN employees, the United Nations withdrew the
last of its 375 international workers from Iraq.
Now, about 35 international employees, most in the heavily US-fortified
“green zone” in Baghdad, work as part of an advance team to
provide logistics to a proposed larger UN team that was expected to
help Iraqis conduct elections in January.
After the pullout from Baghdad last year, the United Nations relocated
its staff, including those working for humanitarian agencies such as
the UN Children’s Fund (UNICEF), the World Food Program (WFP) and
the refugee agency (UNHCR), to neighboring Jordan.
Over 200 international employees now operate from the capital Amman,
overseeing humanitarian work in Iraq.
UN spokesman Fred Eckhard told reporters Oct. 6, “security in Iraq
is being monitored on a daily basis.”
“That is not enough for the United Nations to do the tasks it needs
to do, but the security situation at present would not permit a raising
of the ceiling,” he added.
Eckhard clarified the UN role in the upcoming vote as “not to monitor
Iraq’s elections but [to] help the Iraqi people to organize them.”
Observers say the world body will be at risk as long as it works with
the United States in Iraq.
“While the staff union concerns are certainly valid, the threats
to the United Nations and its staff in Iraq have to be seen in the context
of the UN decision to work in Iraq under the terms of the US occupation,”
says Phyllis Bennis of the Washington-based Institute for Policy Studies.
The so-called “transition of sovereignty” in June did not
transfer sovereignty to Iraq, she said.
“With 140,000 foreign troops, overwhelmingly American, still occupying
Iraq, with US minders operating behind the scenes in every Iraqi ministry,
with the US still calling the shots on how Iraqi oil funds and frozen
international accounts are being spent, Iraq remains an occupied country,”
Bennis told IPS.
The horrific attack of August 2003 on UN headquarters in Baghdad was
clearly a direct result of the impression – correct, unfortunately
– that the United Nations was operating in Iraq as part of the
US occupation, she added.
“That situation remains today. As long as the US occupation remains,
the United Nations should stay out. Only after the real end of occupation
– meaning the withdrawal of troops – will the United Nations
be able to play a viable and useful role in Iraq,” Bennis said.
The unions’ letter to Annan says that long gone are the days when
UN workers were immune from violent acts. “Instead, the United
Nations regrettably has become a direct target, one that is particularly
prone to attacks by ruthless extremist terrorist factions.”
“This has been widely acknowledged by member states, senior UN
officials and administrators in the UN system and is aptly illustrated
by the unprecedented security arrangements in place for the current
session of the General Assembly [in New York]. In Iraq, the vulnerability
of UN staff to such attacks is even greater.”
On Oct. 4, the United Nations informed UN correspondents it will no
longer put out advance press releases about Annan’s proposed trips
overseas – primarily for security reasons.
The unions admit they are aware of the current ceiling of 35 international
employees in Iraq. “But we are extremely worried that this will
be stretched to allow for a larger number of staff to be deployed.”
Referring to the daily insurgent attacks on US forces in Iraq, the letter
says: “If the world’s most heavily armed and equipped military
cannot guarantee its own safety in such an environment, how can the
safety of UN staff be even remotely ensured?”
“UN staff unions have been expressing concerns about the security
environment in Iraq all along,” Jim Paul, executive director of
the New York-based Global Policy Forum, told IPS.
He added that despite a Security Council resolution, no country has
so far volunteered troops for a proposed military force that was expected
to protect UN employees and humanitarian workers. “In light of
all these things, it is not surprising that the staff unions have taken
this position,” he added.
Paul said Annan will be unable to meet the unions’ demand because
of strong pressure from the United States. “The pressure will increase
after the US presidential elections [in November] – no matter who
wins, George Bush or John Kerry,” he predicted.
If Kerry wins, he will be even keener on seeing a heavy UN presence
in Iraq – “as a front for the United States” – because
he has already criticized Bush for marginalizing the United Nations
in Iraq, added Paul.
“After the [US] elections,” he said, “there is going
to be some sort of a bloodbath in Iraq, with US military forces trying
to assert their power and authority.”
The country will therefore be less safe for the United Nations next
year. The biggest problem for the world body, Paul said, “is that
it has continued to be identified with the occupying force.”
|
