₦airaland Forum

By Nwaogu chimereze

As it was recorded in the bible, in every 12, there must be a Judas.

The recent exposé by Sahara reporters online media platform owned by a social activist and gad fly; omoloye sowore, about the mode of promotion of eligible officers in the state security service SSS and the alleged death of eight 8 officers recorded among the secret service officers among other state secrets regarding the economy and government of the federal republic of Nigeria is worrisome.

The moles and enemy controlled double agents amongst the rank and file of the sss, are simply in an unfortunate suicide mission.

This evil role embarked upon by this group of misfits in the SSS and their collaborators will certainly be contained and the culprits fished out in no time and expelled to face the law and its consequences as laid out in official secret act of 1961 and applicable portions of the 1999 constitution as amended and other relevant laws and legislative pronouncements.

The ugly situation of leakage of official secret is not peculiar to the SSS only, in the USA pentagon, in recent history, there was one Edward Snowdon a military personnel working in the pentagon who leaked quite a good number of official secrets and documents to the outside world which unfortunately harmed USA government and citizens interest... just like the case of sowore, the founder of Sahara reporters.

Also in the same USA, there once existed another official secret leaks founder named Julian assange who was hunted and haunted until he was eventually prosecuted and jailed.

The good thing about all these dangerous developments in the SSS today is that the service is very resilient to the extent that whenever there is a leak and wherever it is leaked there is always a remedy.

Meantime the state security service has already filed a suit in the federal high court of justice, for the criminal prosecution of omoloye sowore and his collaborators no matter how connected or highly placed in the society they may be, for cyber crimes offences(leakage of official secrets) , and the general public is hereby urged to be patient and understand that the official secret act of 1961 is thoroughly encapsulated in the cyber crime act of 2022 as amended and the laws will apply.

This clarification has become necessary so that the general public should know that omoloye sowore has become an enemy of the Nigeria state having committed series of criminal offences particularly the leakage of official secrets pertaining to the SSS which is punishable by 21 years in prison without the option of fine on conviction.

The general public is hereby notified that the state security service SSS is not witch hunting any Nigerian irrespective of your tongue, tribe or religion , but working for the best interests of the government and people of the federal republic of Nigeria.

Thats why governmentis doing everythingpossible to conclude his trial.

smileyoo:
falsehood and propaganda, because MNK never jumped bail, he only escaped threats to his life when the military invaded his home, and you know it .
why the falsehood ?
for years now, the man has been in detention by the government, if he is guilty why not jail him, instead of this long illegal detention ?

The desperate propaganda that Nnamdi Kanu’s health is “deteriorating” is nothing but a tired tactic. This is the same strategy he used in 2017 when he was granted bail to Senator Abaribe, and instead of facing trial, he vanished. Nigerians must not be fooled again.

Dr. Nasir Mohammed and other DSS medical staff have given Kanu consistent, professional care. Even his doctors have been allowed to see him. If there was truly a plot to harm him, he would not be alive and well today. The so-called “overdose” claims and accusations of attempted murder are reckless lies, manufactured to discredit professionals who are simply doing their jobs.

The truth is clear: Kanu has never been denied medical attention in custody. The sudden noise about failing health is just another ploy to escape justice, nothing new. The court date is close, and rather than face the charges, his camp is trying to create excuses. Nigerians cannot afford a repeat of 2017; this time, there will be no disappearing act.

Amnesty International and the Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) have begged President Bola Tinubu to “direct the Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice Mr Lateef Fagbemi, SAN” to withdraw the charges against activist Omoyele Sowore, X [formerly Twitter], over Mr Sowore’s posts on social media platforms calling the President a “criminal.”

SERAP and AI also begged the President to “direct” the Department of State Services DSS) to “immediately stop misusing the judicial processes to silence public criticism and violate Nigerians’ fundamental rights through the use of Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPPs) or similar forms of harassment.”
However, some groups have faulted AI and SERAP, saying it is wrong for groups that claim to champion the course of democracy and justice to beg the president to tamper with a matter that is already before a court of competent jurisdiction.
The Northern Ethnic Youth Group Assembly (NEYGA said it is dangerous for SERAP and AI to accuse the DSS of “misusing the judicial process,” saying their language paints a wrong picture that the DSS is dictating to the courts.
“It is said that both NGOs are encouraging the President, who is the head of the executive arm of government, to meddle in the internal affairs of the judiciary,” noted NEYGA, saying the request by SERAP and AI is capable of undermining democracy.
NEYGA spokesman, Mallam Ibrahim Dan-Musa, in a statement he signed, took a swipe at AI and SERAP, saying “both NGOs ought to know better.”
He said, “AI and SERAP ought to know, like we all do, that there are three arms of government. It is a tragedy that the same NGOs that claim to promote the cause of democracy are the same ones trying to undermine it.
“When the DSS sued Omoyele Sowore, we joined many in hailing the secret police. Before now, the DSS would have hounded Sowore in detention. Remarkably, the new DSS leadership chose to embrace the rule of law for which we commend the leadership.
“That the DSS decided to turned its back on its previous jackboot stance and decided to tow a new path and test the judicial waters on the legality or otherwise of a citizen calling the President or any other person for that matter a criminal should be commended.
“We are therefore at a loss as to why AI and SERAP, rather than encourage and support Sowore to pursue his counter-suit against the DSS to its end, they are the same groups encouraging the President to illegally interfere with our judiciary,” noted NEYGA.
Another group, Northern Minorities Back Tinubu, expressed disappointment with the position taken by AI and SERAP.
Said the group, in a statement signed by it’s convener, Comrade Jacob Edi, “We are shocked and at the same time disappointed that SERAP and AI, NGOs that ordinarily should be championing the deepeening of democracy, are the same groups working overtime to destroy democracy.
“If the courts do not decide the suit by DSS, we shall never get to know if it is right or wrong to call the president a criminal. Had Peter Obi in 2007 not approached the courts to determine how long the tenure of a governor who came through the courts should be, it is certain we never would have had off cycle guber elections today,” the group declared.

Nnamdi Kanu's displays of emotion appear to be strategically aimed at discrediting the judiciary and, as a result, eroding public trust in the legal system which Justice Haruna Tsammani ought to acknowledge. The unauthorized recording of court proceedings by Linda Kanu, in conjunction with the misleading claims made by Barr. Aloy Ejimakor, exemplifies a pattern of contempt that has been consistent from his camp. The muted reaction to these actions reveals that the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) is taking a calculated approach to manipulate judges and prosecutors for the purposes of applying coercion and intimidation.

Following the failure of the IPOB's strategy of intimidation, the organization shifted its focus to propaganda. A recent request was made to Justice Kolawole Omotosho, requesting that the charges be dismissed on the grounds that they originate from the Terrorism Prevention Amendment Act of 2013, which has since been repealed. The validity of this assertion is called into question, particularly when one takes into account the fact that the Supreme Court has previously upheld the continuation of Kanu's trial, despite earlier challenges that were related to his return from Kenya. The validity of their claims is called into question by this circumstance, which raises significant concerns.

IPOB has recently changed its strategy to include the use of health-related propaganda. To delay the trial and garner sympathy, one can anticipate allegations of illness, mistreatment, or even allegations of international conspiracies. The purpose of all these allegations is to prolong the trial. It would appear that this approach places a higher priority on undermining accountability and damaging the reputation of Nigeria's judiciary than it does on seeking justice.

As October 10th draws closer, it is imperative that Nigerians maintain a state of heightened vigilance. Some of the activities that are associated with the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) include the dissemination of malicious reports, the harassment of judges, and the spread of disinformation. Kanu's past acknowledgment that decisions made by the Supreme Court are legally binding is noteworthy. This acknowledgement reinforces the idea that there are no more justifications for evading accountability.

The trial's outcome will have far-reaching effects. According to a report published by Amnesty International in 2025, more than 1,800 people lost their lives in the Southeast region between the years 2021 and 2023. The International People's Liberation Army (IPOB) and its armed wing, the ESN, have been linked to these deaths. Positive resolution of Kanu's case is crucial. It is the responsibility of the Nigerian judiciary to ensure that a fair trial is conducted in court, to uphold the rule of law, to be resistant to coercion, and to deliver justice to those who have passed away.

By Lewis Chukwuma

Arguably the poster-boy of Nigeria’s activism ecosystem, online publisher of SaharaReporters and rambunctious politician, Omoyele Sowore, has probably earned his epaulets, tracking his nimble interventions and a wide swathe of comic escapades he has scripted in the last two decades, often laced with quaint rhetorical violence.

But has the fire-eating activist derailed currently? Has he weaponized freedom of expression! Though he has never publicly claimed to be a candidate for sainthood awaiting final Papal proclamation, Sowore would appear to have goofed in his recent unfortunate and curious virulent attack on President Bola Ahmed Tinubu. On his "X" handle page on August 25, 2025, Sowore had spawned a storm by calling out President Tinubu as a criminal.

In consequence, the Department of State Services (DSS) on Tuesday initiated legal action against Omoyele Sowore for allegedly making false claim against the person of President Bola Tinubu by referring to him as a criminal. The suit filed before a Federal High Court in Abuja, trailed refusal of the defendants to pull down the said false and misleading message, as requested by the DSS.

It could be recalled that earlier the security agency had threatened legal action against X, formerly known as Twitter and Facebook, for offering their platforms to Sowore, who in a post called the Nigerian President a "criminal." In the separate letters to the social media platforms, the DSS had requested that the false statement against the president be pulled down or it would initiate legal action.
Defendants in the suit marked: FHC/ABJ/CR/484/2025, include; Sowore, Meta (Facebook) Incorp and X Incorp. In the five-count charge, the DSS is alleging that Sowore, the presidential candidate of the African Action Congress (AAC) in 2019 and 2023, and convener of the #RevolutionNow protest against the administration of former President Muhammadu Buhari, contravened the provisions of the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, etc.) Amendment Act, 2024.
Following the filing of the charge, Sowore is expected to be arraigned soon. One of the five-count charges read: "That you, Omoyele Sowore, adult, male on or about the 25th day of August, 2025, within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, did use your official X handle page, @Yele Sowore, to send out a message/tweet as:
"THIS CRIMINAL @ OFFICIAL PBAT ACTUALLY WENT TO BRAZIL TO STATE THAT THERE IS NO MORE CORRUPTION UNDER HIS REGIME IN NIGERIA. WHAT AUDACITY TO LIE SHAMELESSLY!," which you know the said message to be false but posted it for the purpose of causing a breakdown of law and order in the country, especially among individuals, who hold divergent views on the personality of the President and Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, Bola Ahmed Tinubu (GCFR) and thereby committed an offence contrary to Section 24 (1) (b) of the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, etc) Amendment Act, 2024.
However, in a counter-suit, Sowore also took the DSS, social media giant Meta (owners of Facebook), and X Corp (formerly Twitter) to the Federal High Court in Abuja over what he described as a coordinated attempt to silence him and suppress free speech in Nigeria.
According to a statement issued by his lead counsel, Tope Temokun, on Tuesday Sowore filed two fundamental human rights enforcement suits, challenging what his legal team called “unconstitutional censorship” and attempts by state agencies to influence global tech platforms to restrict citizens’ speech. Temokun stressed that the suits were not just about Sowore personally but about the principle of free expression for all Nigerians. It is interesting that Sowore is now seeking refuge in the same judicial system he has, time and again, labelled "corrupt." There's literally no judge in Nigeria that Sowore has not denigrated, including past and serving judicial officers at the highest level. Well, that is a matter for another day.
Three instances, for the purpose of this analysis, illustrate that unlimited free speech doesn’t exist - even in well-known liberal democracies.
Freedom of expression is not absolute and must be balanced against other fundamental rights. Such include the right to privacy, honor, and reputation. Making speeches that incites hatred, constitutes libel or slander, or causes serious offense may not be protected under freedom of expression. Nothing perhaps better conveys the weight of the consequences of freedom of expression than in the small East African country called Rwanda. Under the guise of freedom of expression, in April 1994, a seemingly harmless broadcast by one person was made on radio. This broadcast triggered the start of 100 days of genocide that left more than one million people dead.

Freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequences. For instance, you can't, banking on freedom of expression, say something that will cause other people harm- or kill them. One can't, for instance, under the guise of freedom of expression, barge into a crowded hall and yell "Fire!" In the same vein, one cannot under the guise of exercising his or her freedom of expression scream "I have a bomb" on an airplane.
Worried by the need to balance freedom of expression with hate speech the United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres, in May 2019, said, it was the duty of all to keep "hate speech from escalating into something more dangerous, particularly incitement to discrimination, hostility and violence, which is prohibited under international law."

Something remarkable recently happened in the n the UK that granted us independence. In the wake of the shooting to death in the US of President Trump's supporter, Charlie Kirk, President-elect of Oxford University Student Union, George Abaraonye, made a post on a Whatsapp chat group mocking Kirk's death. He also reportedly made a similar post on Instagram. Posted Abaronye, "Charlie Kirk got shot loool" - an elongated version of the phrase 'lol' which means 'laughing out loud'. The post appeared to welcome the incident. Upon realizing the backlash his comment on the shooting which - by the way- happened thousands of miles away in the US generated, Abaronye quickly deleted the post and apologized. The school authorities would have none of that. Oxford University insists Abaronye will be punished, saying free speech cannot and will not come at the expense of violence, intimidation or hate.
In a statement posted on X late on Thursday, the Oxford Union said it "unequivocally condemns the reported words and sentiments" expressed by Mr. Abaraonye, who was elected as the society's new president in June.
It is interesting to note that, even though Kirk was killed in faraway America, comments by a student in the UK were still considered offensive. The implications is that in the UK, as in everywhere, sometimes free speech has consequences.
In the US, in September 2022, Uju Anya, an associate professor of applied linguistics at Carnegie Mellon University, tweeted that the reign of Queen Elizabeth II was a period of suffering and colonization for many, a sentiment she also extended to the wealth amassed by individuals like Jeff Bezos.
"I heard the chief monarch of a thieving, raping genocidal empire is finally dying. May her pain be excruciating," she tweeted. Bezos responded to Anya's tweet, which led to widespread public discussion and support for Anya from a large community of faculty and students.
Interestingly, without informing Anya, Twitter pulled down her tweet. It would be interesting to know why Twitter quickly pulled down Professor Anya's tweet on Queen Elizabeth, the late Head of State of the United Kingdom, but has failed to pull down Sowore's post on Tinubu, the sitting President of Nigeria.
Even Prof. Anya's school, Carnegie Mellon, joined the fray by releasing a statement condemning her tweets. The ivory tower described her tweets as “offensive and objectionable." Stressed the school, "We do not condone the offensive and objectionable messages posted by Uju Anya today on her personal social media account. Freedom of expression is core to the mission of higher education; however, the views she shared absolutely do not represent the values of the institution, nor the standards of discourse we seek to foster."
In another case that is likely to stretch the freedom of expression to its limit, just this week, US President Donald Trump sued the New York Times, four of its reporters, and publisher Penguin Random House for at least $15 billion over alleged defamation and libel. Trump’s suit cites a series of New York Times articles, an editorial prior to the 2024 presidential election, which said he was unfit for office, and a 2024 book published by Penguin titled “Lucky Loser: How Donald Trump Squandered His Father’s Fortune and Created the Illusion of Success”.
“Defendants maliciously published the Book and the Articles knowing that these publications were filled with repugnant distortions and fabrications about President Trump,” Trump’s lawyers said in the filing lodged in the U.S. District Court, Middle District Florida, on Monday, September 15, 2025. The publications have harmed Trump’s business and personal reputation, thereby causing massive economic damage to his brand value and significant damage to his future financial prospects, Trump’s lawyers said in the filing.
“The harm to the value of TMTG (Trump Media and Technology Group) stock is one example of how the Defendants’ defamation has injured President Trump,” said his lawyers, citing “a precipitous decline in the stock price.”
“Today, I have the Great Honor of bringing a $15 Billion Defamation and Libel Lawsuit against The New York Times. The New York Times has been allowed to freely lie, smear and defame me for far too long, and that stops NOW.” Trump said earlier on Monday in a post on his social media platform Truth Social. There is more.
Like Trump, Tinubu, aside being a politician and Nigeria's president, is an accomplished businessman and is believed to have business interests spanning several countries.
In the same US, in response to the threats to peace and security that arise from violent extremism,
many states have adopted legislation to counter extremism and/or terrorism.
These laws aim to stem violence resulting from extremist beliefs and counter the
underlying ideology. In other words, Americans have come to realize that people cannot be allowed to hide behind the pillar of freedom of expression to promote religious extremism.
From the jungles of Guyana in the late 1980s where self-styled Reverend Jim Jones of the notorious Peoples Temple died alongside nearly 1000 cult members, to Osama bin Laden, instances abound where people have exploited freedom of expression to violently change the world.
Back home in Nigeria, through the lens of Boko Haram, we have witnessed and are still witnessing the harm that can become the lot of a nation when people are allowed to hide behind the pillar of freedom of expression to say anything they deem fit
We also are witnesses to the consequences of allowing people like Nnamdi Kanu and Simon Ekpa run their mouths. After all, aren't they entitled to enjoy their freedom of expression? That Finland, a first world country that is over 8,500 km away from Nigeria, waived Ekpa 's freedom of expression and convicted him, shows that such freedoms have consequences. Specifically, the the court said Ekpa exploited his extensive following on social media between August 2021 and November 2024 to promote violence and encourage unrest in the Southeast. In other words, his freedom of expression became a tool to unleash terror.

For context, democracy would lose its defining egalitarianism if it foreclosed the free expression of viewpoints by its adherents - including often seeming unreasonable perspectives by forces that seek to diminish and divide. But there is a caveat. Absolute freedom exists only in Utopia, certainly not in the real world. It should never be wielded like a cudgel. What played out from last week speaks to the consequence of pushing the much-touted freedom of expression to the extreme. As always, there are consequence. Both in Nigeria and abroad.
Despite democracy’s leniency, those that, in contrast, enlist intellectual pretensions to push often illogical, flawed, antagonistic positions that misinform, diminish and obfuscate certainly deserve to be confronted and faulted.
The DSS is Nigeria's primary domestic intelligence agency, which plays a critical role in national security and intelligence gathering. Its main responsibilities are within Nigeria and include counter-intelligence, medical intelligence, economic intelligence, internal security, counter-terrorism, and surveillance as well as investigating some other types of serious crimes against the state.
It is also charged with the protection of senior government officials, particularly the president, vice president, state governors and visiting heads of state and governments with their respective families. In effect, any threat to the president - physical or psychological - as in this case, requires a specific action by the agency. To act otherwise would be shirking its responsibility, putting the President- and Nigeria- at risk. This is the line the DSS is towing, albeit, in a civil manner.
By its operational mandate, the DSS could easily have chosen to move roughshod against mischief and crises entrepreneurs who have wrongly opted to game the agency’s civility. But instructively, the DSS, under the administration of the new Director-General, Adeola Oluwatosin Ajayi, is towing a different engagement strategy with those who misalign with its objectives.
Plucky Funke Egbemode, a former president of the Nigerian Guild of Editors, NGE, recently aptly captured the persona of the DSS boss: “This new Sheriff is a thoroughbred secret cop who rose through the ranks, not a politician or political appointee who got lucky.”
For good measure she added: “Ajayi started as a rookie, and after three decades-plus of service, he’s here determined to restore the dignity of the service. The mask must stay on and the masquerade must stay in the grove unless there is reason for it to visit the people.” In effect, this ‘masquerade’ visits people or organisations for specific reasons - assuredly not picnics.

Certainly, the matter between Sowore and the DSS is no picnic!

Omoyele Sowore continues to cloak himself with the label of “pro-democracy activist,” yet his actions tell a very different story. What emerges is not patriotism, but a troubling alignment with foreign powers intent on destabilizing Nigeria. His methods mirror the old intelligence playbook particularly that of the CIA, where reckless opportunistic individuals are preyed upon, to advance their agenda as tools to undermine sovereign nations. Sowore’s record of incitement, propaganda, and hostility towards security institutions reflects this pattern with disturbing accuracy.

His drive is not rooted in service to the people, but in personal ambition and the demands of his sponsors. By manipulating crises and turning disinformation into a weapon, he fuels division and unrest. Crucially, this behavior is also part of his desperate attempt to gain cheap popularity and revive a political ambition that Nigerians have long rejected at the polls. In effect, every act of provocation becomes less about democracy and more about his own relevance.

The recent trial in the United States of the man accused of attempting to assassinate Donald Trump serves as a stark lesson: unchecked recklessness escalates into violence. If Sowore’s pattern of agitation is ignored, it risks radicalizing his followers, creating the very real possibility of violent action more than what was experienced during and after the EndSARS protest in 2020, innocence lives may be loss, and even possible murder against Nigeria’s president.

This is why Nigeria must remain alert. Democratic dissent is legitimate, but treachery masked as activism cannot be normalised. Sowore’s betrayal disguised as activism cannot be tolerated, it is a time bomb that must be defused before it explodes into chaos.

In this context, the decisive steps taken by the Police and DSS to contain his excesses deserve recognition. Safeguarding peace and stability is not the job of security agencies alone; it is a collective responsibility of citizens who value the survival of their country above the theatrics of an individual chasing lost political relevance.

By any standard, Omoyele Sowore is a familiar name in Nigeria’s political space. He brands himself as a revolutionary, a voice of the masses, and a fearless critic of the government. But let’s be honest: there’s a big difference between activism and reckless agitation, and Sowore often crosses that line. That’s why the Department of State Services (DSS) is right to keep him in check.

We must face the truth: Nigeria is not a playground. The country is dealing with fragile security, economic pressures, and social divisions. In such a climate, words are not just words; they can be sparks. When Sowore talks about “revolution” or throws around rhetoric that sounds more like a call to insurrection than constructive criticism, he’s not just exercising free speech—he’s toying with national stability.

The DSS has a mandate: to protect the state from threats, both internal and external. Whether we like it or not, agitation that hints at overthrowing order qualifies as such a threat. If they fold their arms and chaos erupts, the same people who cry foul today will ask, “Where were the security agencies?” Prevention, no matter how unpopular, is better than cleaning up the mess later.

Critics will say, “But Sowore has rights.” Absolutely, and those rights should be respected. But rights are not a blank cheque to cause disorder. Every freedom comes with responsibility. If your speech can push people to violence or deepen instability, don’t expect the state to look away. Even in the most advanced democracies, when speech crosses into incitement, law enforcement steps in. Nigeria should not be different.

Let’s be clear: this is not about silencing opposition. Sowore still has platforms, still grants interviews, and still shares his views. But there is a fine line between dissent and disruption. The DSS is drawing that line, and frankly, it’s about time someone did.

The truth is simple: Nigeria needs critics, but it doesn’t need chaos. Sowore should learn that agitation without responsibility is a danger to the very people he claims to fight for. Until then, the DSS is right to treat his rhetoric with the seriousness it deserves.

Sowore should be arrested and made to face the law

The disappearance of Sunday and Calista Ifedi, a couple from Ezeagu in Enugu State, has been framed by some interest group as “abduction” carried out by the Department of State Services (DSS). However, a closer look suggests the narrative may be more complicated than it meets the eye. The Nigerian populace has over the years been pitched against the security agencies.

Security agencies in Nigeria, including the DSS, often conduct sensitive operations tied to the country’s internal security challenges, particularly around separatist movements such as IPOB, which has become a nightmare for both government and the populace in the southeastern part of the country. While allegations have been made that the Ifedis were specifically targeted and taken away due to suspected links to IPOB, no concrete evidence has been publicly provided to substantiate these claims. It is not unusual for individuals to be invited by security for questioning in relation to allegations leveled against them.
It is a standard operational procedure for security to parade their suspect before the court of law with thin the first 24-48hrs after their arrest to commence criminal proceedings. But in these case that Amnestty international are raising allegation four years later should be looked into. Why should the family be keeping quiet for the past four years begs for more question than answer..

The fact that Amnesty International and the family of the couple are unable to confirm their current whereabouts raises serious concerns, but that should not be construed for setting up the security agencies against the public, although the operation of DSS especially when national security is involved. The lack of transparency has fueled speculation and assumptions, but speculation should not be mistaken for fact.

It is also important to note that the DSS has not officially acknowledged the arrest or detention of the Ifedis, which casts doubt on the whole story whether DSS is actually involved. In Nigeria, disappearances can sometimes be attributed to communal disputes, criminal abductions by terrorist group, or politically motivated misinformation. Without verified documentation or legal records tying the couple’s fate to the DSS, the claim of “abduction” remains unproven. This is 21st century where law operates in every country.

While the anguish of the Ifedi children is undeniable and deserves empathy, the case may reflect a broader challenge of misinformation, unverified allegations, and the weaponization of human rights discourse to paint a one-sided picture of security operations. The more balanced approach would be to demand transparency and legal clarity from relevant authorities rather than amplifying unverified claims that risk inflaming tension

Thomas Johnbosco, writing from Abakiliki

A group, Northern Ethnic Youth Group Assembly (NEYGA) has praised the National Security Adviser (NSA), Mallam Nuhu Ribadu for finally confirming weeks of speculation on the capture of two most-wanted leaders of terrorist groups in Nigeria.

The NSA had at a press conference Saturday in Abuja formally announced the capture of the leadership of the ANSARU terrorist organisation, otherwise known as Jama’atu Ansarul Muslimina fi-Biladis Sudan, Nigeria’s Al-Qaeda affiliate, and the Mahmudawa terrorist group.

The terrorists’ leaders are Amir Mahmud Mohammed Usman, aka Abu Baraa, and the Deputy Amir Marmuda.

Recall that the media had for weeks been awash with reports on the capture of the terrorist group leaders by the DSS. The secret police failed to confirm or deny the speculation.
Last Tuesday, Niger State Governor, Hon. Mohammed Bago became the first government official to officially confirm the capture of the terrorist leaders.

He praised President Bola Tinubu for carrying out sweeping reforms in the military and security sectors, particularly, for appointing competent heads of military and security agencies. Governor Bago specifically commended the DSS for the capture of the two most-wanted terrorists.

In a statement on Sunday in Abuja, the northern group expressed satisfaction with the NSA for publicly addressing a security issue they said had troubled most parts of Northern Nigeria. More significant, they said, was the NSA's reference to the fact that it was an intelligence-led operation, which included weeks of surveillance , tracking and use of human assets, that led to the capture of the terrorists' leaders. This, noted the group, lent credence to the statement by Governor Bago and reports quoting various other community sources that it was a covert operation by the DSS that resulted in the capture of the terror kingpins.

The statement was signed by NEYGA spokesperson, Ibrahim Dan-Musa.

"As a group with special interest in happenings in Nigeria, especially the northern part of this great country, we have been consistent in observing the new approach of covertness and studied silence by the new DSS leadership that has been working tirelessly to rid our region of insecurity.

"We are particularly happy with the kind of DSS leadership we now have that is not interested in self-adulation or self-praise, but in results. Even when it was clear to all that the DSS was behind these security gains, the leadership of this security service refused to speak out or take the credit. We are pleased to note that this is in line with the DG's promise on assumption of office to return the Service to covertness.

"We are particularly pleased that, even after the NSA severally mentioned that the feat was a result of intelligence -led operations, the DSS Director General, Mr. Tosin Ajayi, who was physically present at the press conference, did not behave like someone whose agency has just recorded a major milestone in the global war on terror," noted the group, stressing, "we commend his composure, humility and studied silence."

Added the group, "We are not surprised. As Assistant Director in charge of Operations in Kaduna, Mr. Ajayi, in 2009 coordinated the rescue of a Canadian woman, Julie Ann Mulligan (45 years old at the time), who had been kidnapped whilst on a Rotary International exchange programme. The operation involved the same covert approach; surveillance, tracking and use of human assets, which resulted in locating Mulligan in a village near Kaduna municipal. No ransom was paid, no single shot was fired, and, of course, there were no casualties during Mulligan's rescue. We remember that, at the time, the Canadian and Kaduna State Governments, as well as Rotary International, issued statements commending the DSS," noted the group, adding, "the news reports of Mulligan's rescue are well-documented on the Internet, including the May 1, 2009 edition of Thisday newspaper captioned "Kaduna Kidnap: How Canadian Was Rescued."

NEYGA concluded that, "this new approach of covertness and efficiency displayed by the DSS in the capture of the terror group leaders are clear signs that Nigeria is on the true path to winning the war on terror."

Boom💥💥

Prof, see intellectual difference! You, of all people, ought to know better.

How on earth would you allow your interviewer poke you so much that you talk about a case you rightly acknowledged is presently before a competent court.
Did you say that Shadow Govt is absolutely functional, despite the ongoing litigation? 👉Whereas SAN Adamson clearly declined comment, knowing his onion. Hmmmm! That's clearly contemptuous and subjudice . I thought His Lordship warned parties against speaking on the matter? 🤷‍♀ Another case in waiting...
Don't run to Ghana seeking asylum cos the law is also sacred there!

A report from the Nigerian Electricity Regulatory Commission (NERC) says that electricity customers in Adamawa, Borno, and Yola States will have to pay the most for electricity as the federal government tries to stop giving subsidies to the electricity sector.

The 2024 Annual Report from NERC says that the states that are served by the Yola Electricity Distribution Company (YEDC) have an average of N266.64 per kilowatt (kWh), which is N91.33 kWh more than the N175.31 kWh.

The report says that the high cost was because of higher operating costs and other unique factors, like vandalism and safety issues in some parts of the franchise area. The federal government agreed to these factors as part of the 2021 effort to privatize the franchise again. The report also said that the DisCo had the highest subsidy cost per unit of energy delivered (twice the average subsidy per kWh of other DisCos) because it could charge its customers like other DisCos. It did say, though, that Ikeja and Eko DisCos had tariffs and subsidies per unit of energy delivered that were lower than average.

I've always been an advocates for community policing. It is safer, and closer to the people. Police and other security outfits have been overstretched.