By Abimbola Adelakun

Whether Nigerians should be given the right to bear firearms or not is an argument that recurs each time there is an uptick in security issues. It is a solution that has been proffered by ex-Generals like Theophilus Danjuma; politicians such as former House of Representatives majority leader Alhassan Ado-Doguwa and Senator Kabir Marafa, during congressional sessions; former Governor of Benue State, Samuel Ortom; Lagos LP gubernatorial candidate Gbadebo Rhodes-Viviour; leaders at various levels of government, and of course, Nigerians themselves. Even if one disagrees with them, it is not hard to see their point. How many of us, watching videos of bandits pillaging the church in Eruku, Kwara State, did not fantasise heroically barging into the scene and rescuing the worshippers from their assailants? But real life is not a Hollywood action-packed film.

Guns are complicated objects; their ownership changes society in complicated ways that a disorganised country like Nigeria is not fully prepared to manage. There is little to suggest that owning firearms will do much for the communities under constant siege.

Where do we even start from? Will the guns be carried by individuals or kept by community leaders who will coordinate their use? Individuals who are unskilled in firearm use (and even safety practices) cannot efficiently raise weapons against the marauders without harming themselves in the process. You need some coordination. If the community leaders keep the guns until needed, that will still be an inferior arrangement relative to a properly constituted police force. Besides, what of the quality of weaponry? What if you give people dane guns and their assailants come with machine guns? What if they have machine guns and the bandits come with rocket launchers?

None of those who want Nigerians armed to self-defend address whether the individuals would buy the firearms or if the government would be expected to provide them. We cannot expect the poor farmers whose livelihoods have been severely imperiled by the insecurity situation to still set aside funds to buy guns. It is unfair to task those who themselves have not eaten fully to buy a gun and purchase the bullets it will eat. This will be in addition to the burdens people already carry in every aspect of social life where the government has failed.

Where the government has failed to provide proper infrastructure of education, health, transport, security, water/energy, etc., Nigerians have picked up the slack. Now they must still procure weapons privately just to live like ordinary humans. Who did we offend that we must pay so much for our Nigerian lives? Even if the government wants to pay for the firearms, we will still face the problems of endemic corruption and administrative ineptitude that could jeopardize the whole proposal. Nigeria’s defense budget is already bloated.

Then there is the reality of poverty. If you provide guns to poor communities that you have not yet offered public amenities, do not be surprised when they use their own hands to pass them to the bandits and take a “peace deal” that will at least guarantee their lives. Gun ownership will also change their community dynamics in ways that we cannot simply contain. The enemy we are supposed to kill with a gun is not always easily defined, and while we are waiting for the marauding herdsmen to approach, we will manufacture new enemies.

For a society that does not have gun ranges, gun shows, or communal celebrations of the gun—outlets for dissipating the heady feelings of possessing dangerous weapons—we will soon find ourselves turning against each other. Also, and especially in a country like Nigeria where people are quick with their hands—constantly slapping anyone they deem beneath them across the face—having guns is going to create a problem of aggression. Add to all of these the question of the manufacturing and distribution of firearms. By the time these weapons become freely accessible, we will have created a market that will need the insecurity to continue so that firearms factories can be profitable.

Nigeria has never quite had what you might call a “gun culture,” but we have always had to deal with the problems of gun violence. In the 1970s, the issue of insecurity was a consequence of the Nigerian civil war, which led to the proliferation of weapons and armed robbers. The infamous “Bar Beach Show” that led to the public execution of some robbers was part of the attempt to resolve the gun problem of the period. In the late 1980s to the 1990s, it was the civil wars in Liberia and Sierra Leone that were blamed for the same issues of arms proliferation, insecurity, and armed robbery in Nigeria. Today, we finger the disintegration of Libya in the wake of the Arab Spring for the flooding of Nigeria with weapons now being openly wielded by bandits and terrorists. Nigeria’s internal chaos repeatedly makes the country vulnerable to the mayhem that unfolds in other countries. Yet, in the decades we have had to deal with the issue of insecurity and arms proliferation due to the breakdown in our society or elsewhere, we still have not come up with a solution. The idea of self-defense entices us, but the costs of bearing that burden are far too overwhelming.

It must be said that the reason that the Nigerians pining for that solution are doing so is because they have lost faith in the ability of their government to do right by them. We no longer think the state can organize itself to provide the necessary public infrastructure, and we-the-people are so used to stepping in that we feel even this one too must become our responsibility.

The more the government has retracted from its responsibility to the public, the more we have stepped up; and the more we have stepped up, the more we have lost sight of how to maintain the commons for the collective good. While I completely understand the appeal of self-responsibility, we still cannot afford to give up on the possibility of what can be done with public resources when well organized. There is nothing Nigeria needs to do about the current insecurity that a reformed police force cannot adequately address.

We have enough police officers who can adequately secure our communities if they withdraw them from the rich people they have been deployed to guard, as the government has promised, and rightfully deploy them to serve the people. I have previously suggested that the government needs to license private security outfits for the rich people who need to secure themselves and stop using the police for that indulgence. Private security outfits will be far more effective in ensuring security because they can meet the specific needs of those who need it, rather than serving as mere status symbols.

The reason these privileged elites abuse the privilege of having police officers detailed to secure them by making them carry handbags or wash cars is that they come too cheaply. If they pay for private security, they will take them more seriously. The rest of us Nigerians should be served by the police who should be deployed to the communities across the country to secure lives. We do not need any more privatized solutions. The resort to privatization is one of the reasons the country is in a sordid mess. With firearms in individual hands as a form of “private security,” Nigeria will bury itself with its own hand.

The views expressed by contributors are strictly personal and not of Law & Society Magazine.

By Chinelo Audrey Ofoegbunam

Introduction

Every legal system speaks passionately about justice, fairness, and the pursuit of truth. But very few ever pause to ask a quieter, more uncomfortable question: What is the cost of delivering justice to those who administer it?

In Nigeria, the lawyer is often imagined as an unshakable pillar—calm in turbulence, brilliant under pressure, and courageous in the face of conflict. Yet beneath the robe and rhetoric lies a human being navigating the same anxieties, economic hardships, emotional storms, and survival pressures that afflict the society they are sworn to serve.

The legal profession demands moral clarity, intellectual discipline, and ethical fortitude. But what happens when the lawyer’s welfare becomes a battlefield? When financial instability, emotional exhaustion, or systemic neglect begins to eat into the very values the profession upholds?

This is where the conversation about ethics becomes inseparable from welfare. Not as parallel interests, but as intertwined realities. A lawyer who is underpaid, overworked, unsupported, or emotionally strained does not merely suffer personally—justice itself becomes compromised.

This article explores the unspoken terrain between justice and survival—the complex, delicate space where the demands of the law intersect with the needs of the human being who practices it. Here, the ethical dilemmas of modern legal work emerge not from dramatic scandals, but from everyday struggles: the struggle to remain objective while exhausted, to uphold fairness while financially unstable, to maintain integrity while fighting to survive.

When welfare is overlooked, ethics becomes fragile. And when ethics bends, justice trembles.

This is the real story: what it truly means to practice law in a world where the pursuit of justice often collides with the burden of survival.

1. The Ethical Weight of Economic Survival – When Duty Meets Desperation

Every lawyer knows that the legal profession is built on high ethical expectations. Yet, these expectations rest on an assumption rarely spoken aloud—that the lawyer is stable enough to uphold them. What happens when that stability begins to shake?

Unlike professions with predictable salaries or corporate safety nets, legal practice—especially in Nigeria—can feel like walking on shifting sands. Income is irregular. Cases delay. Clients disappear after receiving advice. Some promise to pay “after the judgment,” others ask for “professional favours,” and many assume lawyers do not need to be paid promptly because “you people are already rich.”

In such an unpredictable landscape, ethical dilemmas grow quietly, almost naturally:

• Should a lawyer take every case—even those outside their competence—just to survive?
• Should they undercharge, overcharge, or accept unstable payment methods?
• Should they juggle too many cases, knowing that quality may suffer?
  
  Most lawyers do not intend to bend ethics; survival simply begins to whisper louder than discipline. Economic instability becomes an invisible hand tugging at professional judgment. And the tragedy is that the system rarely acknowledges this struggle.

For many lawyers, the real ethical fight does not happen in the courtroom—it happens in the wallet.

2. The Burden of Emotional Fatigue – When a Tired Mind Makes Tougher Choices

The legal profession demands clear judgment, emotional distance, and intellectual sharpness. But what happens when the lawyer is emotionally drained long before they enter a courtroom?

The pressure to perform, the expectation of stoic perfection, and the constant exposure to conflict create emotional weariness that the public never sees. Lawyers absorb the anger, trauma, and desperation of clients. They carry the stress of deadlines, adjournments, and judicial unpredictability. They battle self-doubt, insomnia, and a constant fear of error.

Emotional fatigue does more than exhaust the spirit—it distorts ethical clarity.

A weary mind:

• becomes irritable with clients,
• rushes through preparation,
• loses patience in negotiation,
• overlooks details,
• struggles to maintain objectivity.
  
  

These are not ethical failures—they are symptoms of a system that forgets the lawyer is human.

A profession that depends on clear thinking must also protect the emotional welfare of its practitioners. Without this, ethics becomes a luxury reserved for the well-rested, the well-supported, and the fortunate few.

3. Dignity as a Moral Imperative – Why Welfare Is an Ethical Right, Not a Privilege

There is an unspoken truth in the legal profession: dignity fuels integrity.

When a lawyer works in conditions that erode their dignity—poor infrastructure, unsafe environments, delayed remuneration, disrespect from institutions—their ethical foundation begins to weaken. Not out of malice, but out of erosion.

Dignity is more than pride; it is the emotional scaffolding that allows a lawyer to stand firmly by their values. A lawyer who feels respected, supported, and acknowledged can practice ethically with courage. A lawyer who feels invisible, dismissed, or exploited must fight twice as hard to maintain professional integrity.

Here lies the moral paradox:
The legal system demands the highest standards of ethics from lawyers while offering the lowest standards of welfare in return.

Welfare is not softness. It is not an entitlement. Welfare is the oxygen that keeps ethical practice alive. When a lawyer’s dignity is protected, justice breathes easier.

4. When Institutions Fail – The Ethical Burden of a Broken System

A lawyer’s integrity is closely tied to the system they operate within. But what happens when the system itself becomes an obstacle?

In many parts of Nigeria, the infrastructure of justice is worn down—missing files, malfunctioning courtrooms, endless adjournments, insufficient staffing, and digital gaps. These are not mere inconveniences; they create daily ethical dilemmas for lawyers trying to do honest work.

When a case is adjourned five times because a court lacks electricity, who carries the ethical blame? When a lawyer cannot file a process because the registry is closed, who bears responsibility for the client’s dismay? When delays harm justice, the lawyer is often blamed first, even though they are fighting the same broken machinery.

Systemic failure becomes an ethical trap: lawyers must compensate for institutional weaknesses while still upholding professional standards. It is an exhausting, invisible battle—one where the lawyer must protect clients from the very system meant to protect them.

In such a landscape, the ethical burden should not fall solely on the practitioner. A legal system that expects excellence from lawyers must offer structural support in return.

5. The Client’s Welfare vs. the Lawyer’s Welfare – A Delicate Balancing Act

Every lawyer enters the profession with the instinct to protect clients. It is part of the oath, part of the culture, part of the heart of legal practice. But this noble calling often becomes a source of ethical tension when the lawyer’s own welfare is at stake.

Clients come with urgent needs, emotional stories, and high expectations. They want prompt responses, long consultations, and vigorous representation—even when lawyers are exhausted or overwhelmed. Some expect discounted fees. Others expect free legal services entirely.

The internal dilemma follows:

• Do I stretch myself to meet this client’s needs at the expense of my health?
• Do I lower my fees to help them—even if it means I can’t meet my own financial obligations?
• Do I continue representing them even when the emotional toll becomes unbearable?

The lawyer becomes a caretaker, sometimes to their own detriment.

Balancing client welfare with personal welfare is not selfishness—it is ethical preservation. A lawyer who sacrifices themselves completely eventually has nothing left to give. And a depleted lawyer cannot offer sound, ethical representation. True ethics require boundaries. The law may require diligence, but it does not demand self-destruction.

6. Ethical Boundaries Under Pressure – Surviving Without Compromise

The legal profession is one of constant moral negotiation. But the negotiation becomes harder when survival is involved. In times of financial strain or emotional distress, the temptation to cut corners grows quietly:

• taking cases far outside one’s competence,
• rushing preparation to manage workload,
• accepting undervalued or exploitative client terms,
• avoiding difficult conversations with clients,
• stretching beyond ethical limits just to retain business.

These are not acts of corruption—they are symptoms of pressure.

Most lawyers do not want to compromise; they simply fear losing clients, losing income, or losing relevance. The profession often praises resilience but seldom acknowledges that resilience without support becomes desperation.

Ethical boundaries are like fences—they protect the lawyer as much as they protect the client. But fences weaken when the ground beneath them is unstable.

To survive without compromising values, the lawyer must learn to:

• say no without guilt,
• choose quality over quantity,
• prioritize competence over desperation,
• recognize early signs of ethical stress,
• seek support rather than silence.

In a demanding environment, ethics require conscious, continuous reinforcement.

7. A Collective Moral Duty – Why the Legal Community Must Protect Its Own

Ethics is not an individual sport; it is a collective responsibility. A lawyer’s welfare should not depend on luck, privilege, or personal networks. The legal community—senior lawyers, colleagues, law firms, bar associations, and even judicial institutions—has an ethical duty to safeguard the wellbeing of those who serve justice.

This duty is more than mentorship or professional guidance. It is moral solidarity.
 It means creating an environment where:

• young lawyers are not exploited under the guise of “training,”
• struggling lawyers are not shamed but supported,
• welfare conversations are not seen as weakness but wisdom,
• dignity is protected as fiercely as professional standards.

A thriving justice system is built not only on strong laws, but on the wellbeing of the people who interpret and apply them. When lawyers uplift one another, the entire community benefits.

The legal profession is a family—complex, traditional, and sometimes difficult—but still a family. And in any family, care is not optional; it is an ethical obligation.

8. Welfare as Professional Ethics – A New Lens for a New Era

For decades, welfare in legal practice has been treated as a personal concern, something individual lawyers must manage on their own. But in reality, welfare is not a side issue—it is an ethical pillar. A lawyer whose physical, emotional, or financial wellbeing is compromised cannot consistently uphold the standards the profession demands.

Today’s legal landscape requires a shift in mindset:

• Welfare is not an indulgence; it is a professional necessity.
• A lawyer’s wellbeing is not separate from their ethical duties; it shapes them.
• A broken system cannot demand unbroken lawyers.

If a surgeon must be well-rested to operate safely, then surely a lawyer must also be supported to think clearly, advise responsibly, and advocate ethically. Welfare becomes not only a matter of compassion but a matter of professional integrity.

When we view welfare through the lens of ethics, it transforms from a personal struggle into a collective mandate.

9. The Human Duty Behind the Legal Duty – Why Empathy Must Inform Ethics

In the world of law, empathy often hides in the background. The profession is structured around logic, precedent, and objectivity—qualities that ensure fairness. Yet, a lawyer without empathy can easily lose sight of the human condition, including their own.

Empathy is not softness; it is awareness. It is the understanding that behind every legal problem is a human being—and behind every lawyer is one too.

When lawyers embrace empathy:

• They listen better.
• They negotiate more wisely.
• They manage conflicts with less aggression.
• They recognize when their own wellbeing needs attention.

Empathy also encourages a more humane legal ecosystem. A senior lawyer who remembers their struggles is more likely to treat juniors with dignity. A colleague who sees signs of burnout is more likely to intervene. A judge who recognizes systemic pressures may show more patience.

Ethics without empathy becomes cold; empathy without ethics becomes unstable. The two are intertwined—each strengthens the other.

10. Reimagining the Future – A Profession Where Justice and Welfare Coexist

The time has come to reimagine what legal practice should look like—a profession where justice is not built on the suffering of its practitioners. A future where welfare is not a privilege granted to the fortunate, but a right accessible to all lawyers, regardless of region, rank, or resources.

This future rests on three pillars:

1. Cultural Change – A shift away from glorifying struggle and toward normalizing balance, boundaries, and wellbeing.

2. Structural Reform – Pushing for institutional improvements—better court conditions, digital access, safer environments, fair compensation models.

3. Ethical Evolution – Embedding welfare considerations into ethical rules, mentorship frameworks, and professional expectations. In such a future, lawyers would practice not from a place of depletion, but from a place of power—ethical power, emotional power, intellectual power. A legal profession that protects its practitioners will create a justice system that protects the society.

Conclusion

In the heart of legal practice lies an unspoken truth: the pursuit of justice is only as strong as the wellbeing of the people who fight for it. When lawyers struggle silently—financially, emotionally, or structurally—their ability to serve justice becomes strained. And when justice suffers, society suffers with it.

Welfare is not an afterthought. It is not a luxury. It is not a favour.

Welfare is a moral imperative—one that upholds ethics, strengthens professionalism, and preserves the dignity of the legal practitioner.

The journey between justice and survival is a delicate one. But when the profession begins to value the humanity of the lawyer as much as the sanctity of the law, a new balance emerges—one where justice thrives because the people who deliver it are supported, respected, and empowered.

In the end, the lawyer’s greatest strength is not perfection, but humanity. And a profession that honours that humanity will stand taller, last longer, and serve justice more faithfully than ever before.

Connect with me on Social Media:

X: CIAO Legal

LinkedIn: Chinelo Audrey Ofoegbunam

Instagram: CIAO Legal

Facebook: Chinelo Ofoegbunam

Maintaining public order and safety, detecting and preventing criminal activities and enforcing the law are among the primary responsibilities of the Police. But, as I have consistently argued, the Nigeria Police Force (NPF) cannot effectively carry out these duties if most of their personnel are running errands, including for people without any visible means of livelihood. It therefore came as no surprise that following a national security meeting last Sunday, President Bola Tinubu directed the withdrawal of police officers currently providing security for Very Important Persons (VIPs) in the country. But I am almost certain that the president will NOT be obeyed! For ‘evidence’, I will list a few of the many similar directives that have been issued in the past and rehash my own interventions. 
 
On 20 August 2015, after a meeting with officials of the Ministry of Police Affairs and the Police Service Commission (PSC), just three months after assuming office, the late President Muhammadu Buhari directed the then Inspector General of Police (IGP), Sunday Arase (who died recently), to withdraw most of the policemen attached to VIPs. It is not that the presidential directive was ignored that riles but rather that practically all IGPs have themselves made a song and dance about this same order. At a meeting with commissioners of police (CPs) and other senior police officers in Abuja on 19 March 2018, Arase’s successor, Ibrahim Idris, said the police would “streamline the deployment of its personnel attached to political and public office holders, aimed at enhancing effective and efficient policing in the country.” He therefore told his officers that a “directive for withdrawal of all police officers deployed to VIPs, political and public office holders, with immediate effect, is hereby given.”
 
Two and a half years later, on 22 October 2020, Idris’ successor, Mohammed Adamu also “ordered the withdrawal of all police officers attached to Very Important Persons across the country, with immediate effect.” If anything happened, there would have been no basis for another directive eight months later in June 2021 by IGP Usman Baba Alkali for the “immediate withdrawal of officers attached to private citizens.” I can go on and on to cite the many IGPs who have publicly announced this directive without implementing it. What makes the latest directive interesting is that Tinubu is merely asking Kayode Egbetokun to enforce his own order of June 2023, then as acting IGP.
 
I am sure the president is responding to a recent indicting report from the European Union Agency for Asylum that estimates one-third of the operational police strength in Nigeria is deployed to “the protection of politicians and VIPs, rather than to tasks serving the general population.” The report stated further that a shortage in manpower, “as well as corruption and insufficient resources, has resulted in delayed responses to crimes and numerous communities being left without protection.” We can see the consequences in how criminal gangs are now playing a dangerous hide-and-seek game with authorities both at the federal and in the states by abducting innocent school children and rural dwellers, taking them into forests and releasing them days later after ‘non-kinetic’ negotiations with government officials.
 
As the principal custodian of peace, order and security in a constitutional democracy, no institution is arguably more important than the police. But so abused is this institution in Nigeria that most of their personnel have been reduced to playing guard duty for members of the business and political elite. Even foreigners go about with contingents of policemen in Toyota Hilux vehicles that have become part of the convoy of every VIP. To worsen matters, the number of policemen deployed to serve political office holders is mind boggling. In April 2017, following a public altercation between the then Rivers State Governor (now FCT Minister), Nyesom Wike and then IGP, Ibrahim Idris, the Force Headquarters released a statement, apparently oblivious of its implication.
 
To debunk the allegation of not protecting the governor, then police spokesman, Moshood Jimoh (now the Lagos State Police Commissioner), gave the number of police personnel attached to Wike as 221. The same number was posted to each of the other 35 governors at the time, according to Jimoh. The highlights he provided were beyond scandalous and I am quoting him verbatim: “The breakdown is as follows: One ADC (SPO); one CSO (SPO); one Unit Commander (Special Protection Unit) SPO; one Escort Commander (SPO); one Camp Commander (Counter Terrorism Unit) SPO; one Admin officer (SPO) to administer the Police Personnel, 54 Inspectors of Police; 136 Police Sergeants and 24 police corporals.” He then concluded the statement with this self-indicting line: “Obviously, the total number of 221 police personnel attached to His Excellency, Mr Nyesom Wike, the Governor of Rivers State, is more than the strength of some Police Area Command formations in some states of Nigeria.”
 
I found it quite shocking at the time that the police would publicly admit allocating 221 of their personnel to protect one man in a nation so challenged by insecurity. When you multiply that number for 36 governors and add those allocated to other elected and appointed political office holders at federal and state levels, you can understand why Nigeria is now in a state of anomie. As an aside, while going about with a retinue of policemen has become a status symbol in Nigeria, I am delighted that we still have decent public officials. Arriving Abuja airport on Sunday from Lagos, I noticed the EFCC Chairman, Olanipekun Olukoyode, carrying his own bag and walking the tarmac unaided by any policeman. Under this administration, I know special assistants with no specific functions and All Progressives Congress (APC) operatives who throw themselves around in Abuja with several policemen in tow.
 
Unfortunately, the glaring misuse of the police comes with diminished dignity and professionalism for their personnel who are subjected to demeaning chores. From holding plates of food at public functions for those who consider themselves too big to dish their own meals, to carrying umbrellas for their spouses and concubines, it is as if many of these law enforcement agents have been deployed to run domestic errands rather than provide protection. Some orderlies even shine shoes for their principals at public events.
 
Apparently embarrassed by this ugly trend, the PSC in September 2022 called for a review of the operational guidelines for police orderlies. “The commission frowns at the abuse of police orderlies by Nigerians who now use them as status symbols or convert them to house helps who clean, cook or do menial jobs”, said the PSC in a statement by their spokesman, Ikechukwu Ani, who condemned the attack of a police orderly attached to a female ‘professor’ at the time, following a sensational case that has been swept under the carpet. “With the security problems ravaging the nation, there is an urgent need to free many police officers loitering in private houses and following big men around,” the PSC added.
 
Let me make something clear here. I have interacted enough with the police to know that the NPF has many brilliant professional officers. Some are my personal friends. In any case, it is not for nothing that whenever Nigerian police personnel are deployed for international duties they return with accolades. For instance, the Nigeria Police Force National Cybercrime Center (NPF-NCCC) was named the Best Cybercrime Unit in Africa for 2024 by the INTERPOL Cybercrime Directorate, based in Singapore. Many of their contingents that served with the United Nations missions in other countries have also, at different times, won medals for their courage and professionalism. The question that begs an answer is: How have we degraded the personnel of such a potent force to that of handbag carriers for fat cats?
 
Beyond the jurisdiction fog in a security architecture where the military that should ordinarily channel its energy and resources towards protecting our territorial integrity has had to deploy troops for internal security in all the 36 states, the real issue is that with the kind of security challenges Nigeria faces today, we cannot afford to rely solely on the military for public safety while we turn police personnel into bodyguards and glorified errand boys/girls for political office holders and influential private citizens.

Since there is now a global spotlight on our country, it is no surprise that the Financial Times of London yesterday wrote an editorial titled, ‘Nigeria’s Problem is bigger than Trump thinks’. The challenge of our country, according to the British paper, “is not that it fails to protect its Christians. It is that it fails to protect anyone of whatever faith — from criminal gangs, bandits and organised terror.” With swathes of ungoverned territories, growing population of idle young people and leadership ineptitude at all levels, the paper further argued, the “security forces that have proved so ineffective at providing law and order are merely a reflection of other parts of government: they are riddled with corruption and ill prepared.”

The editorial, however, ended on an optimistic note. The newspaper believes that “after years of disastrous drift, the ship of Nigeria’s economy may at last be turning around, providing the faintest glimmer of hope,” before it added: “Tinubu must now urgently set about building a competent state with security control over all its territory.” That cannot be done without the police. Incidentally, as I write this, I just received a statement on a presidential declaration of security emergency by Tinubu. Part of the new measures include an upgrade of police training facilities and what to do with their personnel that are to be withdrawn from guard duties.
 
To relieve the police of menial duties, the president had earlier directed that the Nigeria Security and Civil Defence Corps (NSCDC) should henceforth provide personnel for VIP protection. But as lofty as the idea may be, I am not holding my breath. There is a very big racket in VIP protection within the police hierarchy at many levels that would render the presidential directive ineffectual. On his X (formerly Twitter) handle on Monday, Senator Shehu Sani, who must be very much familiar with this game, wrote: “Withdrawal of Police from VIPs is a good idea and good policy statement in view of the nation’s urgent security needs, but it will only begin and end up as a statement.”
 
Beyond the fact that the VIPs would not want to let go of these orderlies who have become embedded in their political/family structures, the ‘ogas at the top’ who assigned them will also find a way around this presidential directive. They always do!
 
 

You can follow me on my X (formerly Twitter) handle, @Olusegunverdict and on www.olusegunadeniyi.com

The views expressed by contributors are strictly personal and not of Law & Society Magazine.

By Reuben Abati

Clearly, the most compelling, and confusing development in Nigeria in recent times is the recurring spate of abductions, the reign of impunity and the apparent failure of the Nigerian state to fulfil its obligations to the people, the most primary of this being the declaration in Section 14(2) of the 1999 Constitution that the primary duty of government is to ensure the welfare and security of the people.  President Bola Ahmed Tinubu pointedly acknowledged this over the weekend when after a meeting with security chiefs and his communications team, he declared that he is determined to make Nigeria safe for everybody.  That in actual fact, is his main assignment, not the chest-beating context of his declaration. In the past few weeks, there has been a worsening of the security situation in the country: 24 students were abducted from Government Girls Comprehensive Senior Secondary School, in Maga, Kebbi state, their Vice Principal, Mr. Hassan Makuku was killed; in Eruku, Kwara State, Christian worshippers in a Christ Apostolic Church were attacked on November 18, and 38 of them were abducted by kidnappers who had been lying in wait in the bush. 

The kidnappers eventually asked for a ransom of N100 million per person, a total of N3.8 billion. While Nigerians, the authorities and the security agencies were still dealing with this, over 303 students were abducted from the St. Marys Catholic School in Niger State. What Nigerians experience today is worse than whatever they had ever seen previously. In 2014, the abduction of Chibok girls came in at a figure of 276.  On February 19, 2018, an additional 110 school girls were abducted by the Boko Haram from the Government Girls Science and Technical College, Dapchi, in Yobe State.  Nearly all of them were freed, five died but Leah Sharibu remains in captivity till today. She was the only Christian among them. Over 80 Chibok girls are also still in captivity. The situation has worsened. The over 303 children kidnapped in Niger state constitute the highest number recorded so far. 

President Tinubu was quick to say that all the 38 kidnapped Christ Apostolic Church members of Eruku have now been rescued. How? Was ransom paid? Did the Federal Government, the Kwara state government or the affected families negotiate with the kidnappers? If so, where are the kidnappers?  Were they arrested or did the Nigerian state enter into a deal with them in order to put a red lipstick on an already sticky matter? The Nigerian people should not be denied their right to know, no matter how happy it was to secure the return of the abducted persons, and the spectacle of seeing the church members showing up for service and sermon, on Sunday, November 23, in a courageous re-affirmation of the eschatological principle that the whole enterprise of Christianity is to give hope in this life and the life after, the Lord Jesus Christ having washed away all the sins of the faithful in an act of eternal salvation and redemption. 

President Tinubu also boasted that 50 or 51 of the abducted Niger State children have been rescued. In other accounts, it is said that the children escaped on their own; about 253 of them and 12 of their teachers are still in difficult circumstances. There have been similar reports of abductions in Borno and parts of the North West. There is an escalation and it looks ugly. President Bola Ahmed Tinubu did not create the problem. He inherited it. We have been grappling with insecurity in Nigeria since 2009, and even before then, creating a pattern that throws up the ineffectuality of the Nigerian state, and the utter devaluation, degradation, and the meaninglessness of Nigerian lives. Successive administrations have claimed to be working on the problem, but the tragedy festers.

The trigger as it were for the current frenzy is the redesignation of Nigeria as a Country of Particular Concern by the Trump administration in the United States, on October 31. President Trump says the United States will storm Nigeria with guns a-blazing. Twice, he has called Nigeria a disgraced country. Once, he has said that Nigerians see everything as a joke. He has also asked the House of Representatives to look into the matter, and the Committee on African Affairs has held a well-advertised Congressional hearing. To bring guns a-blazing to Nigeria, to withdraw aid and impose sanctions, the end-game implications of Nigerias redesignation as a country of particular concern, Trump would need the approval of Congress. The main grouse is that there is Christian genocide in Nigeria. Trump and his team, die-hard Conservatives and Christian evangelicals, have turned themselves into defenders of the Christian faith. They want to save Christians in Nigeria. The insult got so bad that even rap artiste, Nicki Minaj, a Trinidadian bimbo was given a platform at a United Nations event to speak about Nigeria. She condemned us, Anaconda-style. It is instructive that the US Congress is split on the matter, and that the Nigerian government is asking for co-operation and collaboration to address a problem that is at best global. 

Besides, there is much hypocrisy in President Trumps exertions. Christians are being persecuted in other parts of the world: North Korea, Somalia, Yemen, Libya, China, Sudan, Iran, Syria, and Pakistan. Why Nigeria? There has been a number of conspiracy theories in this regard, but much light was thrown up in the presentation at the US Congress, by Ms. Oge Onubogu who sounded a note of warning about the danger of the single story, a narrow narrative, the complexity of the Nigerian situation and its oversimplification. Ms. Onubogu was not necessarily speaking as a Nigerian, but as a subject area expert.  She is a senior Fellow and Director of the Africa Programme at the Centre for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS). Previously, she worked in a related capacity at the United States Institute for Peace (USIP) and at the Wilson Centre, with practical, field experience of security and conflict issues across African states. Rep. Pramila Jayapal asked: Can you tell me under what authority the US military strikes inside of Nigeria? Congresswoman Sara Jacobs concluded that Trump is reckless.

But when at the same time you listen to Bishop Wilfred Anagbe of the Catholic Diocese of Makurdi, the Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN) and the Evangelist Rev. Ezekiel Dachomo of the Church of Christ Nations in Nigeria (COCIN), the complexity of the Nigerian situation is presented in more graphic terms.  Meanwhile, Sheik Gumi says terrorists must be protected, and that Christians in the Middle Belt are burying empty coffins for propaganda purposes. What exactly does he mean by that?  Closer to the truth is the observation that all persons of faith, Christians, Muslims and animists are under threat in Nigeria. There is conflict and disaffection because the Nigerian government has failed its own people. It is not outsiders who will solve Nigerias problems, but Nigerians themselves. Outsiders may help, but to rebuild this country will require the commitment of everyone on the basis of unity, equity and justice. Those who are beating the drums of war do not realise that no country easily survives a religious war without deadly atrocities. 

Nigeria needs to be set on a different path of renewal, reform and survival. The latest that we have heard is the promise by President Tinubu that Nigeria will become a place of safety under his watch. This is not the time for rhetoric. This is the time for visible, measurable action, not propaganda. As part of new things to come, the President has now directed that about 30,000 more policemen should be recruited. We need more than that. Nigeria does not meet the UN ratio of one policeman per 450. The existing number of about 371, 000 policemen does not meet the national need. Besides, having more policemen is not enough. There has to be a complete overhaul of the present system in terms of attitude, ethics and orientation. The President directed that policemen should be withdrawn from VIP protection duties. About a third of Nigerian policemen are actively on duty serving so-called important personalities.

This is an aspect of police duty that has been thoroughly abused. In the midst of the collapse of everything important, Nigerian policemen have been reduced to bag-carriers for the wives of rich persons, escorts for persons parading dubious wealth, houseboys for side chicks spotting Brazilian bums, and yes men to the privileged class.  It is easy to hire a policeman in Nigeria once the pay is right. President Tinubu is the first sitting Head of State and Head of Government to issue a directive that this must stop and the police must return to their core duty of protecting lives and property. The average Nigerian police man is not going to like this. It won’t be so easy to change the houseboy orientation of the Nigerian policeman. Carrying bags and running errands for rich wives and husbands, and the nouveaux riche, is a far more profitable and established police engagement. It is far better than being asked to stand at hotspots to look out for criminals. 

The Nigerian Security and Civil Defence Corps has now been tasked with the assignment of VIP protection. The Civil Defence is a para-military institution. Its men and women would require training and re-training. The entire civil defence system has to be reformed and upgraded, and the welfare of the officials must be prioritized. There would have been no need for VIP protection by the way, if Nigeria had been made a true place of safety. No Nigerian life should be more important than the other. In an attempt to be seen to be doing something, President Tinubu has taken some steps to give us the impression that he is actually doing something, but these measures do not go far enough. What Nigeria needs is not ad hoc, temporary responses but a far more comprehensive response to the security threats in the land, and a proper articulation and understating of governments responsibility.

Trumps constant heckling, irritating as it may seem, should be seen as a wake-up call and a call to action. He is looking for a Nobel Peace Prize, and he thinks he can add Nigeria to his credentials. We have a problem to solve. The extant practice of allowing military officers and policemen to retire after 35 years of service or upon the attainment of 60 years of age should be reviewed. Those who are already in retirement but are still strong enough to serve, and there must be many of them, should be recalled to service. They have the experience, the know-how, and the institutional memory that can help at a time of crisis. Nigeria is one of the few countries that I know that deliberately throws away its people of knowledge. We have adopted the same approach to tackle insecurity for decades: things only get worse. Over three years ago, the United States, the United Arab Emirates (UAE), and our own Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) provided names of terrorism sponsors in Nigeria. We did nothing. We reported nothing.   It is time to think out of the box. Policemen may be distracted, but our soldiers who have been mobilised in civil aid, to do police work, are overburdened and over-stretched.  

Political will is missing. The politics of expediency frustrates the attempt to make Nigeria a safe place either for children or adults. The Tinubu administration must resolve to fight criminality. Nigerian bandits are too bold. They challenge the Nigerian state. They act with impunity. They are emboldened by the payment of ransom and the sad spectacle of members of the legislature and government, arranging meetings with them and making deals. These are criminals who do not deserve the attention we give to them, the deals that communities strike with them, and the adoration that they receive. Any politician or government official who sits with terrorists to discuss any deal, should be treated as a terrorist, and brought to book along with his accomplices under the laws of the land. It is the Nigerian government that should go guns-blazing not Trump, not the US, not anyone else!

The views expressed by contributors are strictly personal and not of Law & Society Magazine.

Nigeria, right now, is like an impotent man whose wife is being raped in his presence. He cannot cry out because that would show his helplessness. He cannot rescue his wife from the rampaging fingers of the intruder. His hut is no longer his hut. His wife is no longer his wife. Apart from his third leg that is withering and cringing, his pride and self-esteem are both in the mud. And because of all of those combined curses, when his warrior friend offered to help him kill the intruder in his compound, he was reluctant to accept the offer.

How will he look in the eyes of the whole village if he admits that he could not defend his homestead?

How will he look his warrior friend in the eye after he retrieves his wife for him?

Will anybody ever respect him after the rescue mission?

Will anybody ever see him as a man, a real man after the dust has settled?

What if his ‘warrior’ friend starts blackmailing him or even decides he also wants a taste of his wife? What would he do if his ‘friend’ refuses to leave or decides to annex his compound under the guise of keeping the enemy away?

Seriously, this impotent man’s fears are genuine. The warrior can actually develop a special taste for the woman in question. We cannot rule out the possibility of the soldier getting a glimpse of the fair thighs and full ‘chestal area’ of the wife being ravaged. Whatever is happening or has happened, the impotent man is still the husband of his wife and his ‘manhood’ is still at stake.

Well, our friend has kept silent for far too long. He has listened to the guffaw and grunts of a stranger licking his pot of soup. With reckless disregard. If he continues to do what he has always done, the rapist will eventually father children in his compound. Can you feel the distaste and disgust in your mouth? That is why Nigeria cannot continue to sit on his hands and expect a miracle or a different outcome. The killers that infiltrated our national compound must go, whatever it is going to cost. They have laughed to their dark hearts’ content each time we blamed Gaddafi’s men, politicians, thugs and even opposition and corruption for the nonsense they are doing. That is why they just steal more cows and kill more pregnant women. They know Nigeria won’t do anything but tell her citizens and the international community that the dastardly acts will stop because we are hot on the tail and trail of the killers and their sponsors. They just kill some more and watch us squirm impotently in one corner of the compound we built with our sweat.

I arrived in Abuja on Monday excited to see my granddaughter. I had not seen her since August. I knew she would go to school everyday and our gist sessions would only be squeezed in in-between homework and an early dinner. Then her mother announced that Abuja schools were closing the term one week earlier. Katsina, Kebbi, Yobe, Niger, Bauchi, Taraba and Kwara states have all shut down schools because they could not guarantee the safety of students and staff. Proactive measures, they called it.

Now, Abuja schools are closing the term one week earlier than scheduled. Because of insecurity. This is Nigeria’s seat of government, the Federal Capital Territory and fear is palpable in the air.  Some men in the forest, aided and abetted by some men on the corridors of power have over time established an empire of blood, pain and horror. They started in the North East and have steadily expanded their borders of fear all the way to Kwara State. As I was rounding off this piece, the bandits, according to reports, struck again in Kwara, this time in Isapa, near Eruku where they had just released those they abducted. And I am afraid, very afraid. See, Eruku is to me, not a town in Middle Belt Nigeria. To me and people of Osun State, Eruku is probably three hours from Osogbo, the Osun State capital. Osogbo is 90 minutes to Ibadan, the Capital of Osun State and Ibadan is one-hour drive from Lagos, yes, the same Lagos. Are you following my map? Do you now see why Eruku is too close for comfort at a time like this? Do you see why Eruku is not some far northern countryside? Trouble is finally here, at our doorstep. Whatever gets this close will hurt Lagos, affect ‘dirty December’, establish the bad name America just gave us.

Seriously, it is as exasperating as it is confusing. I particularly do not want to believe criminals have finally won. We have threatened them, blown grammar in hot puff of angry air, yet these thieves of lives and property have continued to carry on as if they own us, all of us. They have continued to expand and enlarge their territories defiantly, as if to tell us to go jump in River Niger if we don’t like their maiming business. It is beyond embarrassing.

All because Nigeria and its leaders have shown that they lack, through the years, the political will to do what needs to be done. Because we failed to trim the branches of this iroko tree, that is why it is now threatening all the houses in its vicinity.

Dear President Bola Tinubu, sadly, the lot has fallen on you to chase out this rapist in our bedchamber. You must do it. You can do it. You are not an impotent leader. We were all here when the PDP storm swept through the South West states but you held your ground in Lagos. We all saw you quietly, steadily, stealthily build a political empire, an influential war chest long before they contrived the battle. They did not see you coming but you arrived and frontally confronted and mowed down the strongholds. You did not fight fair, they screamed, but all is fair in war. Your opponents also brought cudgels to a friendly match. Sinking your teeth into the flesh of your opponent is an acceptable strategy in wrestling. Ara ija ‘eyin wa, is how the Yoruba put it.

When they withdrew cash from circulation, you kept a steady stream flowing, somehow. You showed that you were prepared, that you were many steps ahead. Even your closest allies were afraid for your victory, but you netted it, took your catch home, all the way to the Presidential Villa, l’oju elegan, l’oju amoniseni.

In spite of the conspiracies of the enemies and booby traps of those you had helped and trusted, you got what you wanted. Why am I reminding you of what you already know? You are all Nigeria has at this moment. You navigated your way through thorns of poison.It is time to bring out that old energy and save your country, one way or the other, decisively, with surgical precision. Like Dr Festus Adedayo wrote two three weeks ago, ‘without firing a shot’, are all the governors not in APC, many physically, some spiritually?

Mr President, I do not envy you. You must be having sleepless nights back-to-back. Still, you have to do what you have to do.

The terrorists said they don’t want Western education. They unleashed terror on our schools, carting away our virgin daughters and innocent sons into the forest of pain and indoctrination.

They attack at dawn and noon and dusk.

And what do we do?

We beg them, we pay them.

They buy more guns, we issue reassuring press statements.

They are using our ransom money to buy more guns to steal more of our children.

Does that make Nigeria the sponsor of terrorism?

Why are the terrorists more organised than the Nigerian state? They said they don’t want schools and we are shutting down schools, even in Abuja! They have a way of recalling security men that Nigeria pays from security posts that Nigeria built so they can get free pass to steal Nigeria’s children. Nobody catches them. We just count the bodies and our losses, give them more money for more AK-47. How are they able the expand their operations from North West to the whole North, the Middle Belt and now to the borders of the South West? And let nobody respond with nonsense geography, I come from a town in Osun where we trek into Kwara State almost every day. So, I am the one who knows the depth of my fear. President Tinubu, this thing is on its way to Lagos where it will swallow everything. Those who want to say ‘ntoor ’ are gathering, sir. Let them not have the last word, e dakun.

The views expressed by contributors are strictly personal and not of Law & Society Magazine.