The apprehension of many Nigerians over planned release of 613 ‘rehabilitated’ terrorists to various state governors is not unfounded, amidst the subsistence of terrorism and related violence ravaging parts of the country. The main fear is whether the terrorists will not exploit their freedom to recoup their terrorism venture, given the nature of their trade. But there are equally fundamental issues revolving around the propriety of the release, considering that heinous crime were committed and the government’s resolve appears to avoid the course of justice for the state and for victims of the crime. Beyond this, the Federal Government is far from convincing Nigerians that the military observed due and thorough diligence in screening the suspects before approving them for release; and besides, what mechanism has been provided to effectively monitor more than 600 terrorists and to ensure that they do not veer into mischief again?
It is no news that the military is planning to release no fewer than 613 rehabilitated terrorists to some state governors anytime soon. This move is in furtherance of a counter-terrorism mechanism, Operation Safe Corridor, introduced by the Federal Government in 2016 to deradicalise, rehabilitate and reintegrate repentant Boko Haram insurgents into society.
However, this disclosure has left many Nigerians, particularly those residing in the terrorised regions of the country, in a state of fear and uncertainty. The reasons for this reaction are not far-fetched. Firstly, the country is still being ravaged by insurgency despite previous disarmament, deradicalisation and rehabilitation exercises; the victims of terrorism are yet to get justice; and very insignificantly, the ‘repentant’ terrorists can be conveniently manipulated by political gladiators to undermine the integrity of the forthcoming general elections.
Ventilating his reservation, Mr. Timothy Avele, a security expert, remarked as follows: “You cannot release so-called repentant terrorists back into society when the war is still raging on. Who monitors them? How is the government or military sure of their loyalty to the country instead of their terrorist brothers still on the battlefield?” Also, Senator Ali Ndume, while kicking against the deradicalisation and reintegration policy, stated that the “Federal Government cannot be resettling and pampering former terrorists while the country is still at war.”
Also discrediting this strategy, Brigadier General Sani Usman (rtd) stated thus: “There is nowhere in the world where you have such a huge number of terrorists surrender, hence there is a need to come up with a unique approach to handle them. First, we need to work on our justice system. I have said on several occasions that people should not be allowed to get away with their crimes. We must ensure that justice is done to the victims.”
Reportedly, many of the beneficiaries of Operation Safe Corridor not only returned to their old ways but also now act as spies for terrorist organisations. In July 2022, some Boko Haram defectors, who had been rehabilitated and resettled at the Government Girls Secondary School Bama, Borno State were accused of still transacting business with their former colleagues, Boko Haram fighters, in a market known as Daula located on the outskirts of Goniri village.
Obviously, the loyalty of the former insurgents is very suspicious. The military owes an explanation on how it arrived at the conclusion that the soon-to-be-released insurgents are now repentant. Were they subjected to proper mental, psychological and emotional assessment? Terrorism transcends the boundaries of mere crime – it is a movement that is deeply rooted in strong indoctrination. Terrorists are not like regular violent criminals; they are adherents of a particular cause who use the instrument of extreme violence to propagate their beliefs. Echoing this concern, the Governor of Kaduna State, Nasir El-Rufai, and the Theatre Commander, Operation Hadin Kai, Major General Christopher Musa, had separately expressed doubt over the sincerity of the repentant terrorists.
While lenient counterterrorism measures are practised globally, it is doubtful whether Operation Safe Corridor is properly and comprehensively designed to address the underlying factors that have facilitated extremism in the hope of preventing further acts of terrorism. For instance, Saudi Arabia is believed to run one of the best terrorist rehabilitation programmes in the world because its policy also includes counter-indoctrination elements that seek to significantly re-orientate and re-indoctrinate violent extremists.
This strategy has generated very positive and intriguing results as recidivist and rearrest rates are extremely low in Saudi Arabia.
This achievement may also not be unconnected with the fact that terrorists have either of two options: Surrender or execution.
In contrast, Nigeria’s defector programme has not made any considerable difference in the security crisis of the nation. Rather than abating, terrorism has now assumed various forms in the North such as banditry, kidnapping and other related violent crimes. It appears Operation Safe Corridor has become a mill that continuously churns out ‘renounced’ terrorists into society without more. Indeed, it lives up to its name as a safe haven for terrorists to escape criminal liability for their evil acts. It has failed to effectively incentivise or deter violent persons from engaging in terrorism.
Significantly, the government is quick to present an olive branch to terrorists but not keen on adequately assuaging the pain and sorrow of those at the receiving end of terrorism. Framing a counterterrorism policy without considering the rights and interests of the victims of terrorism and those who had to endure the brutal, predatory and rapacious rule of Boko Haram is biased and insensitive. It is befuddling that a government that failed to provide security for its citizens will proceed to foreclose the fundamental rights of the persons directly affected by acts of terrorism to access to justice with this “go and sin no more” strategy. Why treat vicious human slaughterers with such kid gloves?
Boko Haram fighters have unleashed irreversible pain and unprecedented horror that are better seen in Hollywood blockbusters than in reality! They have slaughtered and abducted tens of thousands of people, including civilians and servicemen, forcibly married off women and girls to their fighters, decimated several communities and conducted mass-casualty terrorist attacks against mosques, churches, markets and camps for internally displaced persons (IDPs). Yet not even a single member of the Sect is standing trial in any court of law in Nigeria!
Therefore, the amnesty being considered by government as the only solution to complement military combat is inappropriate. It casts doubts on the seriousness of the government to decisively and aggressively prosecute the anti-terrorism war. To assume that religious extremists can change overnight is nothing but pure naiveté. Even Saudi Arabia had had its fair share of terror attacks in recent times despite its efficient soft anti-terrorism policy.
Curiously, in 2020, the Federal Government, through the Central Bank of Nigeria, hastily published the names of alleged EndSARS financiers but to this day, the identities of the sponsors of Boko Haram remain a mystery. Whereas, in 2022; the U.S. government blacklisted six Nigerians following their conviction by the United Arab Emirates for financing terrorism in Nigeria.
Furthermore, releasing the so-called repentant terrorists to states governments that were never part of the deradicalisation and rehabilitation process is questionable. Do the concerned states even have the capacity to productively engage and proactively monitor the ex-insurgents? The handover, without any concrete arrangements on ground, will most likely turn catastrophic because “an idle mind is the devil’s workshop.”
Reports indicate that the communities where the repentant terrorists are billed to resettle are against the plan. It is nothing but sheer arrogance for the military to unilaterally decide to release and reintegrate erstwhile extremely violent persons without first consulting the communities involved. Expectedly, no society will welcome the return of the self-same cold-hearted murderers who had killed, maimed and displaced their loved ones. Why attempt to brutally twist a knife in their old wounds without seeking their opinion?
The planned release and reintegration of another set of ‘repentant’ terrorists into society is also potentially hazardous on the eve of general elections. It is ill-conceived, ill-timed and may prove counter-productive if eventually carried out. If the public is against it, as has been widely reported, whose interest does the planned release then serves?
The Federal Government needs to review this counterterrorism strategy, which has proved ineffective and was last assessed in 2016. Every region in the country now faces security threats, and those tasked with protecting Nigerians should be held accountable.
