With recent and multidimensional security happenings across the country, new security thinking and ideas are urgently needed to curb the situation. Our security agencies must move away from tradition and tradional approach to security to better and more realistic ways of achieving result. The continous old ways are not productive neither are they producing results to satisfaction. They must think outside the box and be more in the offensive rather than been on the defensive.
The alarming, worrisome and escalating wave of insecurity in the country calls for urgent action from governments at all levels. States should not wait for the federal government but must adopt their unique and respective mechanisms to addressing and resolving the issues.
The state of insecurity is strange and abnormal to existing national norms and therefore, its difficult to place between the rule of law, due process, legality and survival in a heavily militarised nation.The rules of security exist side by side with the sacred need for survival and the two are expected to be circumspect of one another, at least in a developed society where the rule should prevail against impunity. But just like a common adage says,” in a state of anarchy, it is unlawful to be law abiding’. That means that where some people within a nation does not respect laws, it becomes an impossible for others to try to obey them. Who can even enforce the law when the content itself has melted and the rules do not serve any purpose nor have any meaning?The precarious security situation we found ourselves today in Nigeria calls for serious retrospect and reflections. We are a nation with one of the highest number of well trained and strong security agencies in the world, each with robust objectives and mandates. Before now, each of these security organisations and their agents have been doing well and maintaining the code of conduct of their various callings. They do it with skill, tact and passion anchored on the rule of law as provided for in their constitutional obligations and responsibilities.Before now also, anybody who speaks contrary to the law and its provisions is quickly called to order, arrested or rebuked for seeking to create a line of impunity. The security agencies would immediately invite or arrest anyone who speaks any foul language or a language that is not understood by the mind of the law. It was such that even public commentators and analysts were careful with their dictions and the use of words to describe or explain situations.But the whole scenario has changed to the point where we have a new normal, a highly militarised society where anybody can say or do anything and get away with it.From Katsina, to Borno, to Benue ,to Plateau, to Taraba has been statements of woes and deep lamentations. Former Katsina State governor Aminu Masari had asked his people to defend themselves against bandits and insurgents who have overwhelmed his state. Out of frustration and near depression, Masari had called his people to carry arms and any form of weapons to fight and defend themselves against criminal elements or be killed. Even his successor seems to be toying the same line.Before Masari’s lamentations were the strong words of an elder statesman and former Minister of defence, one time Chief of army staff, General Theophilus Danjuma, who made similar call in very clear terms. In his own submission, Danjuma had accused the armed forces of colluding with criminals to kill people and therefore should not be trusted. Former Governor Ortom of Benue State was also on the que shouting self defence for long. The 9th Plateau State House of Assembly in strong worded resolution, asked the people to rise and defend themselves.
But what does it take to defend oneself? Against what ?It means everyone getting any form of protection be it spiritual, physical etc to deter and prevent any harm directed at you and to unleash offensive capability to destroy an established threat coming your way.The only way to defend oneself is to arm oneself with ingredients of defensive capabilities such as juju, stones, knife, gun, bombs, sticks, cutlasses, skills of war, etc.It is on record that countless number of people have been killed by unknown gunmen across all the six geopolitical zones of the country with different magnitudes. The more the people are killed, the more the sophistication and resolve of the bandits to kill more. It graduated to kidappings for ransom where not only individuals, but government and security agencies themselves give such ransoms to rescue their personel or family relation. It is out of this concern and the inability to be protected by the security agencies that calls have emerged stoutly for self defence. What then happens to the law of security? If an individual or individuals carry prohibited weapons to defend themselves what happens to the society? It will be heavily militarised and the society will be at the mercy of those who can load it over others and promote the principle of the survival of the fittest. The carrying of arms is controlled by law and if our situation will warrant people moving around with them without restrictions, then we are in a serious crisis and trouble as a nation. A situation where security agencies and agents themselves are overwhelmed and cannot say a word on such situations is already a disaster that deserves the declaration of an emergency. Urgent external help is desperately needed. On the other hand, since the security agencies cannot provide security for the people, they cannot argue against the concept of self defence because they cannot provide protection for the people. They cannot also stop people from defending themselves anyhow while allowing bandits carry the same arms around snuffing innocent lives, maiming and destroying national assets.Where then is the balance? Should government keep keeping quite because they cannot help the situation? Should arms become public items that can be bought from the shelves? Should everyone do as he or she wants? Should the law be suspended until government finds its feat of control? Which way out for the Nigerian nation?Until something is done drastically and quickly, Nigeria may lose definition and shape and life will be nasty and brutish. Our security agencies must collectively absolve themselves by rising up to the occasion to advice the Presidency to seek external help to protect the people and ensure control over arms.Everyone has been sleepless in Nigeria today and there is no state or location that is safe. The security agencies are more fearful because they have been overstretched and overwhelmed. The new task before the new president is to explore options that have not been tested before. As a versatile leader who thinks outside the box on issues,President Tinubu should consider gradual withdrawal of the military from the conflict zones and returned them to the barracks. The military is trying irs best to help the police and the other agencies, but its best is not too good enough considering some many ugly experiences that are better imagined than described. Alot of communities will tell you their experiences having the military around and even sister security agencies will tell their bitter stories. It is no longer news the open accusations against the military in most conflict areas. They seem to have blocked access of other security agencies and dominating in an exercise they are less trained and informed to work. This option should be explored by Mr President and be critically analysed for the security of the nation and safety of the people.
