Section 14(a), (b) and (c) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) is clear. Section 14(a) states lucidly that: “Sovereignty belongs to the people of Nigeria from whom government through this Constitution derives all its powers and authority”.
Section 14(b) further states succinctly: “The security and welfare of the people shall be the primary purpose of government.” Section 14(c) states unmistakably that: “the participation by the people in their government shall be ensured in accordance with the provisions of this Constitution”.
The above section of the constitution is in tandem with, and draws huge inspiration, from Article 3 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (“Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person”) and Article 4 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (“…human beings are inviolable. Every human being shall be entitled to respect for his life and the integrity of his person. No one may be arbitrarily deprived of this right…”). These two Articles lay premium on the sanctity of human life and the obligation of the State to protect the precious lives of its citizens.
Arising from these provisions, and cognizant of the heightened insecurity and the resurgence of terrorism, banditry and kidnapping in the past few months, the President, Chief Bola Ahmed Tinubu, vowed to address these evils in his inaugural address. He followed this resolve by appointing service chiefs and a National Security Adviser in the first 30 days of his administration. He also, in a meeting with the service chiefs, charged them to work as a team.
To underscore the fact that the president is focused on the dire security challenges confronting the country, he assured Nigerians, at a recent ceremony of the 2023 Nigerian Army Day Celebration (NADCEL) and the 160th Anniversary of the Nigerian Army in Ibadan, that his government would address all threats and national security challenges within the shortest possible time.
It is heartwarming that this heightened insecurity and the genocidal killings of Nigerians by terrorists have pre-occupied and profoundly concerned the president. For him, insecurity has thus far assumed the status of a refrain and a leitmotif. This is how it should be because the first and most vitally important obligation of the State, and those who superintend over it, is to protect the citizens.
A State, in classical literature, is deemed to have failed or abdicated its responsibilities if it manifests the following tendencies: rise in political and criminal violence; loss of control of borders; rising ethnic, religious and cultural hostilities; a civil war raging against its citizens; weak institutions; food shortages; high level of unemployment; high level of inflation; a falling Gross Domestic Product (GDP); infant mortality, etc.
From the aforementioned, we are on the brink of State failure. Suddenly, and especially under his predecessor’s unsung watch, we ranked in the league of such squalid backwaters as Sudan, Somalia and Afghanistan. Not less 60,000 Nigerians were needlessly slaughtered under the sad and lamentable watch of his predecessor. More than 20 million Nigerian youths were and are without jobs. Inflation has since surpassed the 20 per cent mark.
With the insurgency now afflicting swathes of the North West and North Central, hunger and food insecurity will soon pervade these geopolitical zones and the entire country. After all, these two zones had always been the food basket of the country. Apart from hunger and starvation, which loom large, precious lives continue to be lost. After the recent genocidal killings, particularly in Plateau, Niger, Zamfara and Kaduna states, scores are being recklessly and malevolently killed by these terrorists without let or hindrance every day. The long and short of it is that this country faces a clear and existential danger posed by terrorists, bandits and kidnappers.
This horrid state of affairs portrays the government as inept and suffering from dereliction of its duty. It presents it as callous and setting little or no store in human lives. The upshot of these is that we come across to decent folks and members of the international community as savages, to be kept at a distance or serve as the butt of cruel jokes. In this kind of unflattering context, no serious investor will put his hard-earned money in an unsafe haven. Our quest for Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) will thus be a wasted and quixotic effort.
Which is why the president must focus on the issue of terrorism, banditry and criminality like the laser beam. The newly appointed Service Chiefs and the National Security Adviser have told us of their determination to secure the country. But we have heard of similar glib refrains and rhetoric in the past.
The security agencies, however, proved their mettle upon being given permission to take out the terrorists. They need to be given another clear, loud and unmistakable order by the president. For good measure, they should be given a deadline as to when this should be done. This is how the president can walk his talk. This is how he can save his compatriots who are being cut down in their numbers every day. This is how he can rise to the challenge performing his constitutional duty. And this is how he can invest in, and earn the trust and confidence of an embattled people.
In accomplishing this task and meeting this deadline, our security agencies must bring to bear their individual talents and resources. The intelligence services must provide correct information as to the location and disposition of the terrorists. The Air Force should strafe their positions with precision, thereby minimising collateral damage. The Army can then come in, using their artillery, armour and deploying boots on the ground, to mop them up. There should be muscular co-operation and synergy among the services. There should be exquisite co-ordination and no inter-service/agency rivalry.
When this mission is accomplished, our armed forces can then address the long-term issues of professionalism, training and schedule. The police should be empowered to surveil the country while the armed forces are limited to their traditional tasks of protecting the country’s territorial integrity. A situation where the army is involved in squelching violence all over the country stretches its resources thinly and compromises its professionalism. It also diminishes the police, which remit it is to play that role.
It is when security agencies adhere strictly and rigorously to professionalism and their areas of speciality that their tasks are carried out expertly and effectively. When that happens, their duties cannot be outsourced to Soldiers of Fortune (SoF) of dubious pedigree or have those SoFs disparaging them at the hallowed portal of power.
Nick Dazang is a former Director at the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC)
