Family spokesperson, Nafiu Mohammed addressing the media
The family of the late Ibrahim Mohammed, popularly known as Macho Kaaka, who was assaulted leading to his death, has said the three-member committee did not have the mandate to probe the death of the 40-year-old social media activist.
According to the family, the decision of the committee to make pronouncements in relation to the death of Kaaka was a deviation from its core mandate since the committee had categorically clarified to the wife of the deceased during their public hearings that it was not mandated to look into what had killed Kaaka, but rather they were probing the violence that ensued following the death of the activist.
At a news conference to officially react to the committee’s report, Nafiu Mohammed, a spokesperson of the family said on Monday that “Despite all this, the Committee still went ahead and made 40 per cent of their findings about the murder investigations into the death of Kaaka. They also made statements that even common sense would have told them was improper.”
He called out the committee for holding that Kaaka was probably killed as result of a family feud and that his death had nothing to do with his social media activism, and said it has prejudiced the substantive criminal investigations into the murder.
The family also raised concerns over the conduct of the committee in dealing with witnesses and evidences by saying that the committee ‘cherry-picked’ its evidences, especially on matters that related to the social media activities of the deceased and matters on family feud.
These, they said, manifested in describing the hour-long testimonies of Kaaka’s wife that the husband had told her about threats of his life due to social media activism, as pure speculation without considering the social media activities of the deceased or verifying information of threats in the police docket on Kaaka.
“Had the Committee taken the trouble to independently look into Kaaka’s social media activity, they would have confirmed for themselves, several videos that are still up on Kaaka’s Facebook page; where he himself recorded various individuals and mentioned the names of persons threatening him,” the spokesperson said.
He also expressed worry over the acceptance of testimonies by the committee from questionable witnesses such as one Sadia Mohammed and Muniratu Alhassan, whose testimonies he claims had been inconsistent since the demise of Kaaka.
The spokesperson also highlighted that the committee failed to demonstrate in its fact-finding mission that the family was embroiled in any turmoil or feud and yet, “they relied wholesale on the testimony of one Aminu Mohammed, an individual who they chose to hear behind closed doors, even though this individual had previously repeated some of these discredited statements on Facebook, prior to meeting the Committee.”
“Clearly, this was somebody whose testimony was intended as a wow factor, and so was deliberately shielded from broader public scrutiny. Yet, this was the only evidence the Committee cited as confirming their conclusion that Kaaka was killed because of a family feud,” he added.
By Issah Mohammed