Ben Dunno, Warri
The newly elected national President of the Committee for the Defense of Human Rights (CDHR), Comrade (Dr) Kehinde Taiga, yesterday took a swipe at both the federal and state governments over an alleged non-challant attitude to Implement critical demands made by the EndSARS protesters a year ago.
Reacting to the solidarity protest by youths in some parts of the country to mark the one year anniversary of the EndSARS protest, Taiga noted that government had remained insensitive to the issues raised by the organisers of the protest last year as none of the demands, especially those that bothers of police reform and welfare had been met.
He particularly frowned at what he described as the double standards posture of President Muhammad Buhari who at the peak of the EndSARS protest last year assured of a comprehensive reform of the police force, in addition to the upward review of their salary structure as a matter of urgency, noting that up till now nothing has been done about the promises made by the President.
The CDHR national President also condemned the state governments for the unnecessary delay in implementing the various reports of the panels set up aftermath the EndSARS protest to look into cases of rights abuses by the police and recommend compensation for the victims, as a way of assuaging the protesters to leave the streets.
Describing the delay as another tactics of buying time so as not to pay the victims what the panels recommended before leaving office, Taiga, urged the both the state and federal government to immediately commerce the process of implementing the reports of these panels and stop playing politics with it in the interest of equity, justice and fairness.
According to him; “Take the issue of Delta state for instance, it took the governor, Senator (Dr) Ifeanyi Okowa, two day to the one year anniversary of the EndSARS protest before he decided to constitute and inaugurate the commission to investigate cases of human right abuses and making himself the Chairman.
“Tell me, now effective can such a commission perform objectively when the state governor is the one presiding over its affairs when we are supposed to having neutral individuals who are credible with good track records in upholding the rule of law to head such position”.