Outrage has trailed the ongoing crackdown by operatives of the Nigerian Security and Civil Defence Corps (NSCDC) in Enugu State, who have been arresting and intimidating security staff employed directly by various organisations, including hospitals and hotels.

The clampdown, which reportedly intensified on Thursday, has forced many businesses to begin laying off their security personnel in a bid to avoid arrests and the hefty penalties imposed by the NSCDC.

The operatives allegedly demanded payments ranging from ₦200,000 to ₦300,000 from those arrested, which were reportedly paid into private Point-of-Sale (POS) accounts allegedly provided by the state command before the victims were released.

The Guardian learnt that the operation is part of the NSCDC’s enforcement of the Private Guard Companies Act, Cap 367 Laws of the Federation 1990, and the NSCDC Amendment Act of 2007.

However, a 2020 Federal High Court ruling had barred the NSCDC and the Ministry of Interior from compelling organisations to hire security personnel exclusively through registered Private Guard Companies.

In suit no. FHC/ABJ/CS/1301/2019 filed by Reiz Continental Hotel against the NSCDC and the Minister of Interior, the court held that any individual or corporate body employing more than one security staff to protect its property is not mandated to use the services of a Private Guard Company.

Despite this ruling, the NSCDC in Enugu has allegedly continued to target private institutions such as hospitals, hotels, and other businesses, arresting their security staff and imposing financial penalties for not registering with the Corps.

One affected organisation, Memfys Hospital, Enugu, recounted its ordeal. The hospital’s director, Dr. Emeka Ohaegbulam, said three of the hospital’s security personnel were arrested by NSCDC operatives, prompting the hospital to pay ₦616,000 into a private POS account to secure their release.

“We received a letter from the NSCDC on May 9, stating that our security staff wear uniforms and must be registered under their regulations, or we should contract a registered security company,” Ohaegbulam said. “We responded on May 14, explaining that we are a hospital, not a security company—and that our security unit is simply part of our staff structure.”

He added that despite this clarification, the NSCDC returned on May 29 and arrested three of the hospital’s guards during a management meeting, throwing the hospital into chaos.

“When we asked to pay the penalty into an official account, they gave us a private Opay account—6106159698—belonging to one Veronica Amarachukwu Unegbu,” he said. “Out of frustration and with no one ready to engage us officially, we paid and the staff were eventually released.”

He added that an additional ₦2,000 per person was demanded as an “administrative fee,” bringing the total payment to ₦616,000.

Ohaegbulam noted that following the incident, the hospital had shut down its in-house security unit, stating that the staff previously handled basic gatekeeping and monitoring tasks and did not carry arms.

In another case, a 77-year-old man arrested at a hotel in Enugu told journalists he spent three days in detention before being released after paying ₦300,000 into a private account. “The trauma is still with me,” he said.

When contacted, Deputy Commandant of Corps Intelligence Abdullahi Rogo confirmed the enforcement action, stating that the NSCDC is legally empowered to act under existing laws. He claimed that the law requires any entity with more than one uniformed security guard to register as a private security company.

Rogo also denied that the Corps used a private account for payments, insisting the money was remitted into an official account. He said those penalised chose to pay rather than face prosecution.

Similarly, the Personal Assistant to the Enugu Commandant, Emeka Nwatu, defended the operation, describing it as a lawful effort to enhance security in the state. He urged residents and businesses to comply with the regulations.

However, legal experts and civil society observers have called for an urgent review of the NSCDC’s actions in light of the court ruling, citing the risk of abuse of power and infringement on fundamental rights.