EVALUATING THE HOUSE OF JUSTICE IMPACT AT IBA 

 

The Aircraft glided its descent into Toronto Pearson International Airport at 20:02hrs – twelve minutes behind the estimated arrival time. The temperature outside was 9°C , the sun had set. Gloria Mabeiam Ballason Esq, Founder and Chief Executive Officer of the House of Justice set foot on the Great White North for the 2025 International Bar Association Conference which held at the Metro Toronto Convention Centre.

For the House of Justice, the purpose was beyond attending a conference to keep up with global legal trends or networking; it was for a mission much nobler: consolidating the public’s access to justice and finding effective methods of accountability against mass atrocities. The starting point for the intervention is Nigeria, her home country where political operations frequently affect terror crimes victims’ access to justice.

Building it Better Through Magnitsky Proceedings.

For a society that continues to evolve, it is imperative that accountability measures keep pace – and what better way than to explore the Magnitsky procedure.

After the death of Sergei Magnitsky, Sir Bill Browder, KCMG, curated the Global Magnitsky Justice Campaign.

Browder’s lawyer, Sergei Magnitsky, had uncovered a massive tax fraud of $230million by the Russian government. The innovative legal procedure which is named in honour of Browder’s lawyer, Sergei Magnitsky, enables accountability measures like asset freezes, disruption of access to western financial systems, restrictions on travel, banking, or ability to conduct businesses globally. The procedure creates significant personal and financial consequences and deterrence for sanctioned individuals.

The Global Magnitsky Act (2016) expanded its reach to target abusers worldwide with similar laws enacted by the EU, UK, Canada, and Australia. Time for the House of Justice to pitch in: ‘What is the legal framework and success rate of the Magnitsky procedure?’

Browder in reply said the Global Magnitsky Act had since sanctioned individuals from various countries including former Gambian president, Yahya Jammeh who was convicted for corruption and human rights abuses, Dan Gertler, an Israeli businessman, for corrupt mining deals in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Abdulaziz al-Hasawi who was implicated in the 2018 assassination of journalist Jamal Khashoggi,

Chen Quanguo and other Chinese officials sanctioned in 2020 for human rights abuses against Uyghurs in Xinjiang, China and

Filipos Woldeyohannes, the Eritrean military leader, sanctioned in 2021 for war crimes in Tigray.

If Eritrea’s Filipos Woldeyohannes could be sanctioned under the Global Magnitsky Human Rights Accountability Act for leading an entity accused of “despicable acts” then surely, there could be individual accountability for terrorism and Mass Atrocities in the Sahelian states.

Ballason raised the stakes higher: In a private conversation with Sir Browder, she proposed an extension of Magnitsky accountability alongside International Criminal Law justice to terrorism and Mass Atrocities in Africa’s Sahelian countries. ‘Oh, brilliant! pleased to work on that; Browder replied, handing his contact card to Ballason for the continuation of engagement to actualize the idea.

In the course of the conference, the War Crimes Committee of the International Bar Association also explored the question of accountability.

Terrorism and war crimes continue in the 21st century despite a plethora of alternatives for war prevention and war crimes accountability. Ballason, whose life story is shaped by religious crisis that marred her childhood and terrorist attacks that have shaped much of her work as advocate, consultant and regional justice and peace worker, was fully engaged in the brainstorming:

‘The ultimate goal is to ensure war and terrorism do not take root as accountability cannot match the irreparable damage on humanity or resources; ‘ said Ballason. In the session which had in attendance Nigeria’s Dr. Babatunde Ajibade, SAN, Chair of the International Bar Association’s Section on Public and Professional Interest,

Ballason explained that the House of Justice position requires that governments unable to prevent war or terrorism have a duty to frame conflicts and crises for what they are: ‘ Call it ‘terrorism’ not ‘Farmer-Herder, Religious or Communal clashes’ if there is unlawful use of violence or threats that create widespread fear and intimidates government or civilian populations for the achievement of political, religious, or ideological goals; and by all means, call it ‘Genocide’ when there are killings and serious harm that inflict life conditions, prevents births, destroys in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial, or religious group. No government should sugar coat it. If it smells, feels, tastes, looks or is perceived as it, then it is it;’ Ballason said, her voice searing the room.

House of Justice: Rejecting Justice Rollback on Terrorism.

Why is House of Justice moving for justice for victims of Terrorism and Mass Atrocities?

Nigeria and the Sahelian countries fit Maximilien de Robespierre, the French revolutionary leader and political philosopher’s, description when he said: ‘when a person is killed, it is termed murder; when tens are killed, the killers are seen as lunatics and when thousands are killed, the killers are invited to the negotiation table.’

The psychic numbing illustrates how state accountability does not scale proportionally instead it often decreases with the scale of atrocities floating over politically transcendent or conventional laws.

The House of Justice galvanises the public to elevate their anger at injustice beyond their fears, to be uncomfortable with despots and to hold to criminal sanctions officials who through commission or negligence, are responsible for mass casualties.

The Only Way is Justice.

Since 2014, The House of Justice has continued to work on accountability measures against terrorism and Mass Atrocities through litigation, stripping corrupt leaders off public engagement and submitting petitions to ensure enablers and sponsors of terrorism are not appointed to political offices. One of such high ranking officials is Mallam Nasir Ahmad El-Rufai whose tenure as Governor of Kaduna state, Nigeria’s third largest state, was characterized by numerous murders, enforced disappearances, wilful destruction of cultural heritages, brutal persecution of critics and journalists and mass illegal destruction of houses and means of livelihood. President Muhammadu Buhari who led Nigeria, Africa’s largest country between 2015-2023 was egregiously negligent as Nigeriacontinued to feature in the rating of the top most terrorized countries in the world accounting for two top terrorist groups: Boko Haram and Herdsmen Terrorists – two groups the President was reluctant to declare as terrorists until the global community affirmed them as such.

The House of Justice continues to call for global collaboration in addressing root causes, provision of alternative narratives, terror and war financing disruption, actionable intelligence and multi-sector collaboration in preventing terror and where there are war and terror victims, that victims’ justice and resettlement should be prioritized by the state while those in the ecosystem of wars such as financiers, instigators, collaborators or executors of terrorism are held to account.

For the House of Justice, the mission is more than Law and Justice. The end point is the supremacy of the Rule of Law so there can be just societies and a safe world.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *