Former military head of state, General Ibrahim Badamasi Babangida, may have stirred debate with his recent comments on the fight against banditry. But the most consequential line in his message is not about battlefield tactics. It is his call for the military and security agencies to invite negotiators and sympathizers like Sheikh Abubakar Gumi for comprehensive questioning. That is the line Nigeria must not ignore.
For years, Nigerians have watched, bewildered, as a private citizen, not elected, not appointed, not mandated, freely assumes the role of mediator with armed criminals. We have seen Sheikh Gumi travel to their hideouts, sit with terror leaders, relay their demands, and then emerge to lecture the rest of the country on why these killers deserve amnesty, empathy, and legitimacy. Meanwhile, families mourn, communities flee, farms are abandoned, schools are shuttered, and the nation bleeds.
Who sent Gumi? On what constitutional authority does he negotiate? And in whose interest does he speak?
This is not about gagging dissent or criminalizing opinion. It is about the dangerous line between commentary and complicity; a line that becomes blurred when someone repeatedly serves as the public relations channel for violent groups, rationalizes their crimes, and pressures government to reward them.
No responsible state negotiates from a position of weakness, and none should normalize dialogue with killers as if they are a political constituency entitled to bargaining chips. When civilians insert themselves into such delicate security operations without mandate, they risk becoming enablers, intentionally or not. They risk laundering the image of those who abduct children, extort communities, and hold the nation hostage.
Gumi’s repeated meetings, statements, and self-appointed mediations demand scrutiny. Not applause. Not indulgence. Scrutiny.
IBB’s call is therefore not only reasonable, it is overdue. Security agencies must invite Sheikh Gumi and any similar actors for comprehensive questioning — transparent, lawful, and thorough. Nigerians deserve to know:
- What relationships exist between negotiators and armed groups?
- Who funds or facilitates these travels and contacts?
- What promises are made in these conversations?
- Have such engagements obstructed, undermined, or influenced military operations?
If there is innocence, questioning will clear it. If there is complicity, the law must take its course.
And it must not stop with Gumi. Anyone — sympathizer, financier, courier, fixer, “go-between,” or elite sponsor, who aids, excuses, or empowers terror networks must face the same uncompromising scrutiny. The days of hiding behind religious titles, elite networks, or convenient “peace missions” must end. Peace built on appeasing criminals is not peace; it is surrender dressed in piety.
This is not a witch-hunt. It is governance. Nations survive only when the rule of law stands taller than those who seek to bend it. The Nigerian state cannot outsource its security strategy to private mediators, nor can it continue tolerating parallel channels of negotiation that weaken public trust and embolden criminals.
General Babangida has pointed to the right question. Now the authorities must supply the right answer: invite, question, investigate and where evidence exists, prosecute. Anything less is complicity by neglect.
Nigeria cannot defeat terror while flirting with its apologists. The time for ambiguity is over.
Facebook Comments
GIPHY App Key not set. Please check settings