Category: Emeka Omeihe

By Emeka Omeihe

Are we contending with a verity of the 2014 situation when President Goodluck Jonathan reportedly said members of Boko Haram had infiltrated his cabinet? That is one question thrown up by President Buhari’s response to a question on the proscribed Indigenous People of Biafra IPOB during his interview on Arise Television.

Though Jonathan later clarified what he said was that Boko Haram had infiltrated the government, that explanation did not change much given the further insights he provided. He had cited the arrest of a serving senator, the sacking of a serving judge and the arrest of some security personnel for alleged links with the insurgents to buttress his position on the infiltration of Boko Haram in the government that he headed.  The same scenario was evoked when President Buhari spoke the way he did on the IPOB during the said interview.

He had said, “IPOB is like just a dot in a circle. Even if they want to exit, they will have no access to anywhere. And the way they are spread all over the country, having businesses and properties, I don’t think IPOB knows what they are talking about. In any case, we say we’ll talk to them in the language they understand. We will organize the police and the military to pursue them”.

This writer does not have much issue with the categorization of IPOB as a dot in a circle. But when the president proceeded further to talk of ‘the way they are spread all over the country, having businesses and properties’, it became obvious that something had gone awry. The question that immediately came to mind is whether IPOB is really spread all over the country, owning businesses and properties? And if it is so, is it still right to classify it as a dot in a circle?

These posers underpin the inherent contradictions in Buhari’s statement. And in them, can be located his disposition, mindset and bias on issues that concern the people of the southeast. It is obvious Buhari equates the IPOB with the Igbo or peoples of the southeast zone. He made no mistake about that. And he did not hide his feelings of disdain for the people.

For him, IPOB is all about the Igbo and the Igbo are all IPOB members. There are no exceptions; not even some of his Igbo appointees like Minister of Labour, Chris Ngige who has been bandying dubious statistics as evidence of the purported benefits the southeast gets from the Buhari’s government. The president did not even spare any of his appointees, apologists and governors of his party in the zone from this sweeping generalization. All of them are IPOB because they are Igbo.

They all fit into the tribe of persons that will be talked to in the language they understand. They are the ones for whom the police and the military will be organized to pursue. Would it then be out of place to infer that IPOB’s infiltration of Buhari’s government has made a mockery of the complaints raised by Jonathan about the Boko Haram? That is the dialectics at play.

In truth, nothing of such exists. IPOB is not spread across the country. It neither owns businesses nor properties. For a proscribed organization that has been termed ‘terrorist’, such businesses and properties would have since been confiscated by the government Buhari heads. But we are yet to see any evidence of that. So Buhari could not have possibly been talking of the IPOB that is led by someone outside the shores of the country in that manner.

The IPOB of his mind is the Igbo ethnic group. Those are the people spread all over the country. They are the people that own businesses and properties all over the country. Yet, with such wide spread across the country and ownership of investments, it would seem a misnomer to still refer to them as a dot in a circle.

That is beside the point. It smacks of dangerous profiling and double standards for the president to equate IPOB to the Igbo ethnic group. Some of his apologists have argued that his reference was to the IPOB and not the Igbo. That cannot stand in the face of the fallacies of IPOB spread all over the country, owning businesses and properties. Igbo businesses and properties have been there as victims of uprisings and destruction before the IPOB was floated. Let nobody be deceived. The message is clear.

The bias and utter disdain with which the president treats affairs of that section of the country are not anything new. They can be clearly seen from the military operations currently going on in that zone. Harassment, intimidation, profiling, killing and incarceration of people especially youths had since become the order of the day. It matters little if you had nothing to do with the IPOB as any and every young man is considered a suspect IPOB member.

In contrast, we do not see the same measure of anger from the president in other instances of more complicated security infractions across the country. Boko Haram insurgents that were allowed to ‘repent’ and absorbed into the military have not been spoken to in the language they understand. We have heard of kinetic military and non-kinetic approaches to resolving the lingering insurgency.

The bandits that have reduced parts of the north to a verity of the state of nature have been interfacing with fiery Islamic preacher Sheikh Ahmad Gumi and some government officials for solutions. Gumi had told whoever cared that government should engage the bandits. Fulani herdsmen (local and foreign) that have been the greatest source of insecurity across the country have continued to enjoy the sympathy of the president in a very curious manner.

But this understanding of engaging insurgents by tackling issues that forced them into armed insurrection quickly evaporates when it comes to any security infraction from the southeast. For people of that zone, the only language the government speaks is that of force. That was what played out in the president’s interview in a season democracy was being celebrated. Ironically, the strength of democracy lies in plurality of views, identifying and finding peaceful closure to perceived grievances. But not here!

The president’s stern and uncompromising disposition on issues affecting the southeast contrasts sharply with his conciliatory and patronizing role on the insurgency of the herdsmen. He loathes the idea of profiling and criminalizing all herdsmen as Fulani herdsmen or killers. He has tried time without number to blame the killings on foreign herdsmen.

Yet, he would even go to the archives to dust up a purported stale gazette on grazing routes and grazing areas to get even with the resolutions of southern governors banning open grazing. That is how low he can go on such matters.

The president is heading for a showdown with the governors all in a bid to protect the touted grazing rights of his Fulani kinsmen and cousins both within and outside of the country. He has directed the Attorney General of the Federation Abubakar Malami to exhume the said gazette to give him powers to enforce the moribund open grazing practice. He is bent on doing so despite the fact that the Land Use Act of 1978 vests all lands on state governors.

The president wants to enforce the stale gazette irrespective of the killing, raping, kidnapping and serial invasion of farms that have been pinned down to the herdsmen. Are we now progressing or retrogressing by exhuming a rusted gazette even with the establishment of a cattle ranch in Obudu in the present Cross River State before independence? What kind of progress is that if nepotism is not the motivating factor? The same clannish proclivity and protectionism featured in his rationalization of the domination of the commanding heights of the military and para-military institutions by people from the north. He had talked of merit and seniority.

Yet, the current Chief of Army Staff, Yahaya Faruk was picked above many of his seniors who are now to be forced to retire. Sadly, the touted merit as the basis for political action is alien to such policies as quota system and educationally disadvantaged states that deny admission to very qualified candidates in favour of those with very low grades. And we still grandstand on merit?

Those who wanted President Buhari to address the country have heard him. He has now clearly spoken. But did he assuage feelings of despondency and fears arising from multifarious existential challenges pushing the country to the edge? I doubt!

By Emeka Omeihe

Keen observers of events leading to the floating of the Ebube Agu security outfit by Southeast governors will be least surprised at its inability to take-off two months after it was announced with fanfare.

Its formation after the governors’ April meeting in Owerri, Imo State had generated mixed reactions given the hasty manner it was announced. The pronouncement came without the necessary personnel, equipment, logistics and organizational structure for the take-off of the outfit. There was neither an enabling law to regulate its operations nor specifics on how the respective governors would go about the project.

Parallels were drawn between the clinical efficiency Southwest governors went about the formation of the Amotekun security outfit to underscore the point that either their Southeast counterparts lacked clear direction on what they intended to make of the outfit or they were not seriously committed to it.

In the face of the raging doubt, Governor Okezie Ikpeazu of Abia State came out to re-assure that “Ebube Agu will be a security outfit both in name, purpose and action. It will be properly equipped, rural-based and intelligence-driven”.

With these soothing words, we were left with no other option than to give the governors the benefit of doubt despite the belatedness of their action. At any rate, the zone had no other choice in the face of the escalating security situation that was fast threatening the existence of its people. Given the desperate need for some form of security platform to check the rising insecurity in a zone that had been one of the safest in the country, it was better the governors were late than the late.

Despite these shortcomings, expectations were still high that the governors would move with speed and determination to put in place the necessary legal framework for the regional security outfit to take off unhindered. Emerging events have miserably proved this an exercise in wishful thinking.

The promise by the governors to tap into the pool of vigilante services in the various states to facilitate the rolling out of Ebube Agu, has only been fulfilled in its breach. The outfit did not go beyond the paper in which the announcement heralding its coming into being was scripted even with worsening insecurity in the zone.  Nothing bears out the dire straits the project has been entangled than last week’s resignation of the chairman of the Southeast security committee, Major General Obi Umahi (retd.).

In his letter to the chairman, Southeast Governors Forum, Umahi said his committee had “thoroughly prepared and submitted the modalities, including the structure, for the take-off of Ebube Agu to the governors’ forum meeting, attended by the President-general of Ohaneze Ndigbo Worldwide and some other Igbo leaders, a request that Ebube Agu should be jointly rolled out as a matter of urgency and also funded by the governments of the five southeast states. From inception to date, southeast security committee was never funded at all in any capacity not even an office space was provided”.

His resignation drew attention to the gravity of the challenges the situation presented. As it is now, the Ebube Agu security outfit appears to have hit the rocks. Nobody knows for certain whether that will signal its death or the governors will move fast to retrieve it from the precipice into which it is inevitably headed. Nobody can also say for certain whether the issues raised by Umahi for which he resigned his appointment are the only reasons for the current quagmire the outfit has been mired.

But one thing that emerged from the development is the absence of seriousness and commitment by the governors to a strong and virile regional security outfit for the zone. Before now, the Ime-Obi Ohaneze Ndigbo had asked the governors to hasten up the formation of a home-grown security protection for the zone. But this was not immediately heeded as the governors displayed questionable lethargy and preference for the so-called community policing project of the federal government despite the inability of security agencies to find a handle to the serial security infractions across the country.

It would appear however, there is more to the resignation of Umahi than ordinarily meets the eyes.  This is especially so given that previous attempts to set up the outfit were said to have flopped due to pressure allegedly mounted by the federal leadership against the outfit. It is being speculated that Umahi may have been under pressure to resign for political motives especially in view of the complicated security situation in the zone following the deployment of the military.

In the wake of the attacks on security agencies and governmental facilities in the zone, there have been accusations and counter accusations on those responsible. The federal government had been quick in blaming the Indigenous People of Biafra IPOB and its security arm, the ESN for the attacks which they have denied. Initially, some of the governors bought into this allegation. But as time passed, they changed the narrative.

After the attacks at the Imo State Police Command headquarters and the correctional facilities in Owerri, Governor Hope Uzodinma had placed the blame on the IPOB. But he was later to accuse aggrieved politicians. The description of the sponsor of the attacks he gave then, narrowed down to a particular politician. He has since expanded his scope of suspects to now include aggrieved politicians, the opposition and bandits from outside the state.

Governor David Umahi of Ebonyi State veered off the usual profiling when he raised alarm of a plot to incite war in the zone: “Of late, we have bandits that are doing a lot of evil and saying they are of Eastern Security Network ESN. They commit a lot of crimes and say they are IPOB members, and most of the time, IPOB would say we have no hand in this, we have no hand in that”. All these have injected complications into the spate of insecurity that has of late engulfed the Southeast.

They present a difficult scenario on what to believe as to the masterminds of the attacks and complications of partisan political hue as well. The feeling is high that some people are intent in making political capital out of the degenerating security situation in the Southeast. They see the situation as an opportunity to get even with the opposition, to possibly decimate them and shore up their political chances in future elections. It will not be surprising if this devious disposition is behind the seeming disagreement of the governors that had stood against the take-off of the much-needed regional security outfit.

In the wake of the military operations going on in the zone; the subsequent harassment, killings and selective profiling of youths for incarceration and all forms of human rights abuses, suspicions have been rife that some of the governors may be sabotaging the outfit to please their masters known to have strong aversion for regional security platforms. That could be the development actually playing out.

The timing of Umahi’s resignation fuels suspicion that there is more to it than we are being made to believe. It is also curious why his brother and chairman of the Southeast Governors Forum, David Umahi could not be of help in averting the current pass. As I write, no word has been heard from any of the governors or the chairman of their forum on the development. That speaks volumes on the kind of leadership in that zone.

It is inconceivable that the security of the people of the Southeast could be toyed with at a critical period like this. Perhaps, some of the extant security complications in the zone may have been averted had there been a strong regional security outfit before now. The governors can ill-afford to abandon their people in times of serious threat to their existence.

They must rise above partisanship, show direction and protect their peoples from the looming danger. Recent killings by herdsmen militia in Igangan, Ibarapa North Local Government Area of Oyo State despite the existence of a strong regional security platform, should be instructive enough. History will be unkind to those who by actions or inaction see to the incapacitation of the security outfit. Ebube Agu must not be allowed to die!

By Emeka Omeihe

The outcome of the sit-at-home order by the proscribed Indigenous Peoples of Biafra, IPOB, in honor of souls lost during the Nigerian civil war is already in the public domain.

Opinions are however, divided on factors responsible for the total shut-down of economic and social activities in zone that fateful Monday. Those who offered opinions on the high level of compliance with the order fingered the fear of being caught in a cross fire arising from possible confrontation between the IPOB group and security agencies. For this group, compliance was vicariously procured through the fear of the unknown.

There is the second school that sees the success of the order as evidence of the popularity of the cause which the IPOB group is currently propagating. This group views obedience to the order as the identification of the peoples of the southeast and other areas where it had some measure of compliance with the Biafra cause.

This would imply that the southeast people and such other areas share in the grievances that gave rise to the agitations either physically or spiritually. In this wise, we can talk of Biafra of the mind denoted by resentment to injustice, inequity and non-inclusiveness in the running of the affairs of this country. There is also the physical Biafra manifest in extant agitations by the IPOB that led to its proscription and association with alleged attacks on security agencies and governmental facilities in the southeast.

There is an additional dimension that seeks to account for the high level of compliance on a combination of the above two factors. And with this group, are many. They contend that compliance was in part, out of the fear of the unknown in a likely confrontation between security agencies and the IPOB and also a measure of the popularity of the agitation. It admits the reality that there exists a wide gamut of sympathy and support in the zone for the grievances that gave rise to self-determination agitations. Whether this sympathy translates to a total endorsement of the strategy of the IPOB promoters in redressing the perceived wrongs, is another kettle of fish.

The order and counter order by some governors in the zone persuading people to go about their normal activities with assurances for security protection also had their vicarious contribution. They heightened the fear of violence in the event the IPOB decides to enforce compliance. So, palpable fear reigned large and prevented those who would have ventured out to keep indoors.

Aggravated fear also arose from mounting allegations by the federal government and security agencies associating the IPOB with sundry killing and attacks on government facilities in the zone. IPOB is alleged to be the mastermind of the killing of security agents and burning of public facilities in the zone. Though the group has severally denied the accusation, the level of casualties in those attacks and the relative ease with which they were carried out without resistance from security agencies combined to create fear in the populace on the capacity of the security agencies to protect them in the event of an attack by the so-called unknown gunmen.

Sadly, those allegations portrayed the IPOB as a group with the capacity to enforce the order. Even those who would have obeyed government assurances of protection did not trust such promises. Not with what they were made to believe about the capacity of the IPOB for evil. Not with the clinical execution of some of the attacks attributed to them on security formation without serious resistance.

These brought with them complications that had all the trappings of a game situation. It involved choices, options and payoffs. Two options were at play – stay at home or venture out. Game theorists are interested in the rational choice open to the people in the circumstance. Which of the two options minimizes their losses in the event of the worst outcome?

The rational option is for the people to stay at home. By staying at home, they minimize the losses they could incur by venturing out in a fluid situation that could even consume lives. That is rational calculation. It may not necessarily translate to absolute obedience to the sit-at-home order. It may not translate to taking instructions from Nnamdi Kanu. That could also explain why state and federal government officials in those areas (except security agents) kept off the streets.

Even when one of the governors threatened to confiscate shops and business places of those that comply with the order, he was quick to rescind that decision because of obvious contradictions. If he had not moved quickly to rescind that order for whatever it was worth, he would have embarrassed himself given the interplay of the variables under consideration.

In effect, the actions and utterances of the federal government, security agencies and some state governors were largely contributory to the high level of compliance to the sit-at-home order. That is without prejudice to the rights of the people to decide to honor their loved ones who died during that civil war.  It is also by no means whittling down the deep-seated grievances that are behind the cause being championed by the IPOB. Is it not puzzling that one Nnamdi Kanu could sit in the comfort of his house outside the shores of the country to issue orders that are obeyed either by acts of omission or commission? That was not the first time such order secured high level compliance even beyond the southeast.

I have gone this far to highlight the wider dynamics of the sit-at-home order in view of the obvious misinterpretation of its outcome. Statements from the leadership of this country since after that fateful Monday, gives the miserable impression that the government equates the outcome to a declaration of war from that part of the country.

That was the message when President Buhari said a day after the incident that: “Many of those misbehaving today are too young to be aware of the destruction and loss of lives that occurred during the civil war. Those of us in the fields for 30 months, who went through the war, will treat them in the language they understand”.

This has been interpreted as ethnic profiling and veiled declaration of war against the southeast zone. It made no exceptions. It views any and every person from that zone as partakers in the attacks by unidentified hoodlums and the violence that has enveloped a zone once reputed for its tranquility and peace. Not unexpectedly, the indecent haste to remind the people of the zone of their travails during that war has again raised suspicions on the nature and character of the security infractions that of recent enveloped the zone.

Suspicions have before now, been raised regarding those behind the orgy of violence in the zone. Though the government had been quick to point accusing fingers on the IPOB, the nature of these attacks, their clinical execution in the face of the inability of the security agencies to put up some resistance had created doubts as to whether fifth columnists were not at work.

Before now also, there have been allegations that some of those infractions were being simulated to provide the basis for the federal government to attack the people of the zone. Sadly, events are beginning to bear out these suspicions especially given the ease with which some northern stalwarts are now routing for military action in the southeast.

Even before the military action, the security situation in the zone has been quite tense. Reports of harassment, killings, intimidation, abduction, and profiling of youths for selective arrests and incarceration by security agents have been quite rife. Imo State has been worst for it. We are faced with ethnic profiling in a matter that can be handled by security agents through intelligence. Identify the masterminds of the attacks and bring the full weight of the law against them instead of the posturing that all peoples in the zone are partakers in lawlessness.

The mindset that only the military option or a declaration of war is the solution to agitations in the southeast is wrong. Engagement by way of addressing the grievances propelling the agitations may turn out a quick therapy. But is this option of any appeal to the leadership?

Emeka OMEIHE

 

The position of the presidency on the 12-point resolution by southern governors elevated to the fore, government’s disposition on the festering clashes between herders’ and farmers. But more fundamentally, it gave out the primacy of herders’ welfare over other burning national issues in the overall calculations of the Buhari administration.

Southern governors cutting across party lines had during their epochal meeting at Asaba, Delta State taken far-reaching decisions which if seriously and honestly addressed would offer lasting solutions to some of the debilitating national challenges that had set the country on edge. Among others, these included: a ban on open grazing of cattle across Southern Nigeria; restructuring of the country to ensure true federalism leading to the evolution of state police, review of the revenue allocation formula and all appointments into federal agencies including the security agencies in keeping with the federal character principle.

But what caught the attention of the Buhari government in all those resolutions was just the ban on open grazing across Southern Nigeria. It was obviously the only thing of interest to the government given the prime attention it paid to it and the dismissive manner it handled others.  Others issues just paled into insignificance.

In a statement, the Senior Special Assistant to the President on Media and Publicity, Garba Shehu said the ban was of questionable legality “given the constitutional right of all Nigerians to enjoy the same right and freedoms within every one of our 36 states (and FCT) regardless of the sates of their birth or residence”. He dismissed other resolutions as “acts of politicking”.

Even on the ranching alternative proffered by the governors, the statement strove to get the public to believe that the idea was not original to them. It claimed President Buhari had In April signed off on the back of a report by the Minister of Agriculture, Sabo Nanono a number of measures to end the frequent skirmishes between herders and farmers among which ranching and the revival of grazing reserves featured prominently. The government further claimed it would soon embark on “rehabilitation of grazing reserves in the states, starting with those that are truly committed to the solution and compliant with stated requirements”.

The government accused the governors of just demonstrating power without offering solutions to the herders and farmers clashes. This accusation is a contradiction of sorts. Having accepted ranching which formed one of the governors’ recommendations, the presidency cannot successfully sustain the claim that there was no solution to the herders’ and farmers’ clashes in the recommendations of the governors.

Their solution is ranching and they said so unambiguously. It is a different thing altogether if they did not provide any timeline for its actualization. That may have stemmed from the reasoning that cattle rearing business engagement is essentially private. States and individuals are at liberty to approach it in their own ways. The governors were concerned with the imperative of ending recurring clashes between herders and farmers that are fuelled by the outdated open grazing practice. And they found solution in ranching. What other solution does the president expect of them?

The only difference between the measures the president was said to have endorsed prior to the governors’ resolutions was the rehabilitation of grazing reserves. Even then, all these measures have been in the public space ever since. Ranching is not original to the Buhari regime. As a matter of fact, his government had overtime shown strong aversion to it as evident from other contraptions it floated on the debilitating crisis that met stiff opposition across the country. But for opposition, we would by now be contending with the challenges of grazing routes, RUGA et al.

It is also amazing that the presidency could not find any merit in restructuring, the nagging need for quick intervention to ensure true federalism and reflect the federal character principle in the conduct of its affair. It found nothing of value in the skewed appointments into federal agencies including the security arm that is dominated by people from a section of the country in utter defiance of our laws. The government found nothing untoward in extant situation in which the Federal Character Commission FCC charged with ensuring equity and fairness in all federal appointments, is now in defiance of its mandate through its composition.

When sometime last year, a new chairman was appointed for that agency, observations were made on the anomalous situation the agency was embroiled given that both the incoming chairman and the sitting secretary are  both from the north in defiance of subsisting tradition. The excuse the government offered then was that the tenure of the secretary would soon expire and the anomaly would then be rectified. The narrative now is that that tenure had since expired with the incumbent confirmed for another four years.

These are fundamental breaches of our constitution as they relate to the federal character principle. What remains of the federal character principle if the very agency that should ensure its implementation to the letters is in utter breach of it in the appointment of its principal officers? That is how bad the situation is. And we are being made to believe that the governors were merely demonstrating power without offering solutions.

On the contrary, it is the presidency that is demonstrating power by refusing to act on the prevailing feelings and sensibilities on what needed to be done to get the country out of the precipice into which it is inevitably headed. The recommendations of the governors contain solutions to the country’s challenges. The snag has been lack of sincerity of purpose and reluctance or refusal to muster the political will to do what is right at the federal level.

It is hard to fathom how we can make substantial progress when government policies and programmes are colored by sectional, ethnic and religious considerations. National progress will remain a tall order when public officials are quick to deceive the country by inventing misplaced and skewed comparisons. That was the exact situation when the Attorney General of the federation, Abubakar Malami sought to compare the ban on open grazing with that on spare parts business.

Not minding the aspersions that comparison cast on a section of the country, it is obvious that the two issues stand out on account of their dissimilarities. In other words, they can only be compared in terms of their dissimilarities. But nothing illustrates these differences more poignantly than a post this writer came across in the social media.

A spare parts trader in Kano central market, James Okafor (not real names) had in reaction to the comparison said he rented his shop paid the necessary fees to the landlord and regularly pays his rent. He also pays all manner of rates in the market including sanitation fees, charges for offloading his wares and tax to the state government. He also rented a living accommodation, pays all the necessary bills and lives there based on the contract he had with his landlord.

He said when he has enough money to own a house in Kano, he would apply to the government for approval after meeting all the conditions. Okafor just stopped at that. His message is not lost in the comparison between herders and spare parts traders. The spare parts trader operates within the law while herders outside of it. They grab lands belonging to other people for their business with impunity. They obey no known laws even as their business had become a source of threat to the lives of their host communities. That says it all.

The same misplaced comparison featured when Malami claimed the ban infringed on the rights of herders to freedom of movement. Surprisingly also, the presidency bought that dummy. Their inability to draw a line between human rights and animal rights is at the centre of the feeling that parochial interests are behind it all. Nobody banned herders from their rights to free movement within the ambit of the law but cattle.

By Emeka Omeihe

It is a season of allegations, alerts and outright blackmail. Either our psyche is being assailed by alleged attempts to overthrow the government of the day or our sensibilities ruffled by fear of speculated terror attacks.

State and non-state actors are active players in this game. But, state actors have been the most potent purveyors of these allegations, alerts and warnings on impending subversion against the government and ancillary criminalities.

Governments all over the world, have the advantage of access to information especially on security matters. So whenever they come up with such information, it ought to be taken seriously. However, the frequency of such alerts and the manner they are currently traded are beginning to diminish their value, raising doubts in the minds of discerning public.

That was the exact situation when the Department of State Services DSS, alleged sinister moves by misguided elements to wreak havoc on the government, sovereignty and corporate existence of the country. The presidency joined the trend by alleging a plot to overthrow the regime of President Buhari. They further alleged a move to pass a vote of no confidence on the president in a bid to precipitate a forceful change of government, albeit, illegally.

But many saw in these allegations, an attempt to run away from the reality of a government that is unable to keep faith with its social contract with the people in the face of a failing economy and looming anarchy. Not many were convinced that an attempt to overthrow the government really existed in the absence of any evidence to that effect. But one thing certain is growing public disenchantment with government’s response to the debilitating challenges that had put the country on edge. There is no doubt the captain of the ship had lost control in the middle of a turbulent ocean.

Instead of alerts on touted coup plans, what the situation called for was effective responses and solution finding to the myriad of challenges behind the increasing loss of confidence in the leadership of the country. It called for reassurances and commitment from the president that he is still in charge and irrevocably committed to justice, fairness and the wellbeing of the constituents.

The feeling that pent up grievances behind the agitations will be doused by mere allegations or wished away is wrong. Neither will military might offer effective therapeutic response to the malignant tumor. The issues will rather become more problematic and complicated if nothing decisive is done to address them to the satisfaction of the citizenry.

Even then, there is a dangerous angle to the armada of allegations from state actors without any attempt to prove them conclusively. If the government has evidence of coup plots or covert subversive plans against the state, it should make them public. They should progress beyond accusations and alerts and apprehend suspects to face the law.

Where such evidence is not availed the public, then people are at liberty to ascribe whatever meaning to such allegations. The frequency of such allegations without any effort to provide evidence for them is beginning to send wrong signals to the citizenry. They may soon culminate to stigmatization and profiling even with lingering doubts in the minds of the public on the motive behind them.

Just recently, the DSS alleged that IPOB/ESN had acquired bombs and explosives which they were moving in articulated vehicles from Lagos to a hide-out in Orlu, Imo State to destabilize that state. Without prejudice to whatever information the DSS may have, one had expected they should have gone beyond alerts to actually apprehend the culprits. They knew the source of the bombs and explosives- Lagos.

They knew the type of vehicles the bombs and explosives were to be conveyed in- articulated vehicles. They were also privy to the destination of the bombs and explosives- a hide-out in Orlu. They had all it takes to burst the plan, arrest the masterminds and parade them. Yet, nothing of such happened. How do we then believe them?

And I ask, are there factories in Lagos that produce bombs and explosives for IPOB/ESN or any willing buyer? Where in Lagos State are such factories located and who are their owners? Why Lagos? Or do we presume they were brought in through the sea ports? If so, what investigations have the authorities conducted since then and what is the outcome?

These posers are compelling now the Lagos State Commissioner of Police, Hakeem Odumosu has also alleged of an impending plot by the same IPOB to attack soft targets in the state. He said the threat by IPOB agitators had been put on the radar of the commands intelligence gathering and other security services. The commissioner said the command has also taken note of threats by agitators of Oodua Republic and other Yoruba separatist groups- ‘24 of such groups have been identified and closely monitored’.

But the IPOB described the allegation as baseless just as they denied acquiring and ferrying bombs from Lagos to Orlu. The group said they nurse no such plans and it is a ploy by the security agencies to cause disaffection between the existing peaceful relations of the Igbo and Yoruba ethnic groups. As if to corroborate the position of the IPOB, nine Pan-Yoruba self-determination groups promptly issued a statement in which they picked holes with public declaration by the police of the alleged plans by the IPOB to attack Lagos.

The groups contended that if the police really had credible information on the issue, they should have discretely gone after IPOB members and arrest them instead of raising an alarm. The groups saw in the alarm an attempt to set the Yoruba against the Igbo and urged the Yoruba to ignore such attempts as the two groups need each other.

They also warned against ethnic profiling given that in the recent attack on the Yoruba at Mile 2 Lagos, the ethnic group of the attackers was known. Yet, at no time did the police make any attempt to speak about the ethnic identity of the perpetrators. They have said it all. And that highlights the contradictions in the flurry of accusations that have inundated the public space in recent times

It is not clear what the security agencies intend to achieve by these allegations, propaganda and potentially divisive alerts. But it is getting clearer by the day that there is more to them than ordinarily meets the eyes. The tempo and texture of the allegations add to the suspicion on the source of the escalating insecurity in the country. The feeling is that insipient hands of fifth columnists can be seen in it all.

No thanks to the inability of security agencies to demonstrate beyond reasonable doubt that some of these infractions now providing the basis for military action are neither contrived nor simulated to achieve predetermined ends. If anything, trending video from Akwa Ibom State gives further boost to the air of suspicion surrounding heightened spate of insecurity in parts of the south east and south-south.

In the video, Governor Udom Emmanuel lamented the freeing by the state’s police command of heavily armed bandits in fake army uniform arrested with 18 AK-47 riffles. According to him, the criminals were released through the order of the state police commissioner as soon as they were arrested and their riffles returned to them. He accused the police of naked partisanship to precipitate mayhem and provide basis for security agencies to attack the state. That captures the dilemma in the attacks on security personnel and ancillary governmental institutions in the southeast and south-south for which an engagement plan has been approved by the president.

It is hoped we have not boxed ourselves to a tight corner. It is hoped we have not through actions or inaction, created a Frankenstein monster. The challenge is gargantuan but not entirely insurmountable. But the scorching heat can be doused if the recommendations of southern governors are taken seriously.

By Emeka Omeihe

Nigeria is obviously passing through perilous times. It is visible from the parlous state of the economy hallmarked by unbridled corruption in public offices; spiraling inflation, jobs losses and the attendant abject poverty that now ranks our citizens the poorest of the poor.

Evidence of the hazardous setting the country is seemingly irretrievably entangled can also be felt from the plethora of security challenges that have continued to question the ability and capacity of the Buhari administration to maintain law and order. Boko Haram insurgency; agitations for secession, herdsmen militia attacks, unceasing banditry and kidnapping for ransom form part of the debilitating security infractions that are fast sliding the country to a verity of the atavism of the state of nature.

Anarchy hovers around the landscape menacingly. Nobody knows for certain the next victims of the unbridled bloodletting as non state actors with devious technology for inflicting maximum damage on humanity are on prowl. Matters are not made any easier by the glaring inability of the government to be of reasonable help.

The situation has so much degenerated that self-help has become the option for victims of the marauding killers and kidnappers. We are contending with governments that discourage the payment of ransom, yet, have nothing on ground to make kidnapping a dangerous enterprise. They threaten and dare kidnappers. Yet in their very faces; these agents of awe and sorrow abduct students in their numbers, without any help from the same grandstanding government. What a country!

Faced with degenerate security situation and other national challenges assailing the unity, progress and development of the country, there have been calls from some quarters for the president to resign or get impeached by the National Assembly. This is in addition to subsisting agitations for the restructuring of the country with threats that the 2023 elections may not be without political re-engineering of the convoluted and defective federal set-up. So, the heat of something ominous has always been there fuelled by rising signals that Nigeria is fast sliding into a failed state.

This pervading air of uncertainty and despair appeared to have got further impetus when the Department of State Services DSS alleged sinister moves by misguided elements to wreak havoc on the government, sovereignty and corporate existence of the country.

The danger alert from the DSS was quickly followed by a pledge by the military that it will not overthrow the government of President Buhari. In a statement, the acting Director of Defence Information, Brigadier-General Onyema Nwachukwu said the military has no intention of taking over power again in Nigeria.

Warning politicians nursing ambition of ruling Nigeria outside the ballot box, the statement pledged the commitment of the military to remain apolitical, subordinate to civil authority and firmly loyal to the president and commander-in-chief of the Armed Forces of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. This is not the first time the military is making such a pledge. It had cause to issue similar statement during Buhari’s first term.

But the ante to the alarm seemed to have been upped by the presidency which quickly alleged of a plot by some leaders working with foreigners to forcefully sack president Buhari from office. The statement by the Special Adviser to the President on Media and Publicity, Femi Adesina claimed the plot “is to eventually throw the country into a tailspin, which would compel a forceful and undemocratic change of leadership”.

Adesina accused the masterminds of recruiting the leadership of some ethnic groups and politicians with the intention of some form of conference where a vote of no confidence would be passed on the president. He warned against such plans claiming “the only accepted way to change a democratically elected government is through election”.

The DSS alert, pledge of loyalty to the president by the military and the allegation of an attempt to procure a change of government albeit, unconstitutionally bear the imprimatur of a country under serious systemic stress. That is by no means an admission of the allegation of a forceful change of government. What is obvious is that the government has been under intense attacks from various groups in the country in the face of the mounting security challenges that have become serious threat to human existence. The government has also been under fire for not addressing observed imperfections of our federal order and its mismanagement of our diversities.

On a daily basis, Nigerians are kidnapped and killed by a coterie of marauding bandits. Those who are lucky to pay ransom get spared even as some are equally killed after ransom had been paid. Herdsmen are on rampage in many parts of the country killing and maiming without the government doing something serious to stop the carnage. Boko Haram insurgents wax stronger with more states feeling the heat.

Fiery Islamic scholar Sheikh Ahmad Gumi shocked the nation when he disclosed that some of those behind the spate of kidnapping in Kaduna State are members of the Boko Haram and not bandits whom he claimed the government knows where to find them. Gumi who was reacting to allegations of complicity for hobnobbing with the bandits in states of the north had said the bandits were fighting an ethnic war. But he is yet to disclose the nature of this ethnic war and the issues to it except some complaints that are not different from those of the herdsmen.

There are also rising agitations for self-determinations from the ethnic nationalities and serious calls for the restructuring of the country to make it more effective and responsive to the needs of the various groups in the union. Political parties are in this call for restructuring, so also are ethnic nationalities and many well-meaning Nigerians as well. But behind all these are rising feelings of alienation, system injustice and marginalization. The raging feeling is that one part of the country had become the lords of the manor from whom the others take instructions.

Nepotism has become so manifest with the glaring mismanagement of our diversities by the Buhari administration. We have never had the lure of self-determination and recline to centrifugal tendencies as intense as they are presently. And these are rooted in injustice. Disenchantment with the system is palpable. So, when the government came out to levy allegations of an attempt to overthrow it through unconstitutional means, they were obviously not oblivious of the discontent in the land. They may have been reacting to these feelings.

The current pass was fuelled by the passiveness of the Buhari regime to genuine concerns and feelings of the people. The challenges the country is passing through now, are manifestations of unaddressed grievances. Why the government prefers to evade reality even as things get worse is behind the raging feeling that the regime has abdicated its mandate by the electorate.

Nobody gets to see the president in action leading from the front as he had promised. The president hardly gets to address the nation in serious emergencies even as such sensitive issues are trivialized through statements by media aides. The impression one gets is that nobody seems to be really in-charge.

So, the solution does not lie in alarms or speculations on plots to overthrow the government. It is also not correct as Adesina claimed, that the only way to change an elected government is through an election. There is the impeachment clause in the constitution that requires the National Assembly to remove the president under certain conditions. That clause could be called into action if a president become a liability to the very people he was elected to protect.

The issues are real and complaints clear. What has been in short supply is the necessary political will and commitment to address the grievances that are fast tilting the country to the precipice. A government cannot be above those it is elected to serve. It must be seen to be constantly responding to their needs, desires and aspirations. And what is left of an elected government if it cannot read the temperament of the people and assuage their genuine feelings?

By Emeka OMEIHE

 

With heightened insecurity across the country, it would seem inappropriate to single out a state for special interrogation. Such inquisition could also be faulted by the desperate outcries of three governors last week on the degenerate security situations in their states.

Borno State governor, Babagana Zulum, his Niger State counterpart, Sani Bello and Samuel Ortom of Benue State had independently raised serious alarms on the degenerating security situation in their states. While Zulum was piqued by the increasing momentum and dexterity of Boko Haram attacks with huge casualties in military and civilian population, Bello is scared stiff by the sacking of about 42 communities and hoisting of flags by the Boko Haram insurgents. He painted a pathetic picture of how the insurgents kidnapped many indigenes, their wives seized from them and forcefully attached to Boko Haram members.

Ortom spoke pathetically and emotionally on the killing of seven Internally Displaced Persons IDPs in their camp by herdsmen militia. He painted a gory and moving picture of how the IDPs fled their ancestral homes for refuge on account of the insurgency of the herdsmen only for the same herdsmen to attack and kill them at their camps.

Elsewhere, it has been a tale of attacks, ambushing and killing of security personnel for no just cause, kidnapping for ransom, burning down of police stations and sundry criminalities. With the catalogue of complex criminalities across the country, what makes Imo a special case and does it make sense singling events there out for special investigation?

Yes.  Imo stands out not only in terms of texture and nature but the weight and momentum of violent attacks that have taken place there.  The character of security infraction in the state since the beginning of this year stands it out among its counterparts from the zone. In those infractions can be located, the imprimatur of a state primed by acts of omission or commission for some form of cataclysm. If anything, emerging allegations from the Department of State Services DSS that the IPOB/ESN has acquired bombs and explosives to destabilize the state further supports the peculiarity of the Imo situation.

Reports quoting a letter from the DSS to the Brigade Commander, 34 Artillery Brigade Obinze, credited the secret police to have alleged that bombs and explosives were being moved in articulated trucks from Lagos to a hide-out in Orlu, Imo State ostensibly to attack security and government installations in the state. Though IPOB has dismissed the allegation as baseless, it adds to the puzzles on the precise nature and texture of the insecurity in a state that before now, ranked among the most peaceful in the country.

So, what really went wrong? How did Imo get to the current situation? Is the state now the headquarters of the IPOB/ESN or are we contending with the verity of a choreographed simulation of violent attacks with the aim of achieving pre-determined ends? What really are the issues behind the sudden prominence of Imo in the insecurity matrix? Or do events there have a link with the way the leadership of the state emerged after the last elections?

Before the ENDSARS protests turned awry across the country, Imo had no known history of violent attacks on security operatives and government installations. It also harbored no organized violence of the magnitude that could attract serious national attention. But the state suddenly came under national focus early this year, when Governor Hope Uzodinma imposed a dusk to dawn curfew in 10 local government areas of Orlu senatorial zone citing the activities of a “group of militants who unleashed a shooting spree in the Orlu area killing and maiming innocent citizens”.

The governor said he was appalled by what appeared as a breakdown of law and order in Orlu and admitted inviting the military to quell the attacks which he claimed were beyond the capacity of the local arrangement. Before then, his Attorney General and Commissioner for Justice, Cyprian Akaolisa had said the state government invited the military to Orlu after members of the IPOB/ESN killed several policemen and innocent citizens alleging attempts by the group to attack Orlu people and the government in the guise of looking for herdsmen.

Imo people were taken aback when military helicopters entered the scene firing sporadically in a manner reminiscent of war situations. But the military deployment and the reasons for it did not go down well with the people. They did not see anything in the security situation in Orlu that could not be managed by the regular security agencies.

Uzodinma was deemed to have over-reacted and his invitation of the military seen as an escalation of whatever security challenges that hitherto existed in the area. There were others who imputed a dubious agenda to the matter. It is not surprising that Imo has since that controversial outing remained on national focus albeit, for the wrong reason. Whether that misadventure was a harbinger of events that had since unfolded is a matter of conjecture.

As if that was not enough, Imo was thrown into serious confusion when the state police command headquarters and the correctional facility in Owerri were attacked by unidentified gunmen without resistance from the array of security agencies that maintain serious presence around there. The bravado of the gunmen, the ease with which they overran both facilities, freed prisoners and detainees without challenge, gave vent to all manner of conspiracy theories.

Immediate past Inspector-General of police Mohammed Adamu was quick to attribute the attack to the IPOB/ESN and the state government easily bought into the narrative. But the governor later said he had information on where, how and when the attacks were planned and the brains behind them. He fingered aggrieved politicians for sponsoring the attacks. Curiously, the description of the aggrieved politician and sponsor of the attacks the state government gave fitted into the profile of a well-known former governor. Yet, he walks the streets free. Uzodinma’s disclosure that 40 to 50 suspects from both the state and outside had been arrested for the attacks further widens speculations on the motive of the attacks.

Another dimension to the security challenges emerged when a combined team of security agents ambushed and killed a man identified as Ikonso with about six of his men. The security agents claimed Ikonso was an ESN commander and was shot dead in an exchange of gun fire. Curiously, IPOB admitted that Ikonso was their ESN commander but denied he was killed in a shootout.

Few hours after Ikonso’s death, a group of gunmen set the country home of Uzodinma on fire in what appeared a reprisal attack. They burnt some vehicles in the premises and left in their trail human casualties. It is worthy of note that Awomama where Ikonso was killed and Omuma, the country home of the governor are in the same local government. This proximity perhaps, accounts for why the attack at the governor’s house happened around 9am in the morning in full glare of villagers.

Again, Uzodinma has blamed the attack on aggrieved politicians. The consistency with which he points accusing fingers at aggrieved politicians, suggests he may have his facts. Why they have not been turned in to security agencies and if he has, their inability to arrest the suspects is behind the suspicion that some unseen hands are behind the orgy of violence in Imo state possibly to justify invasion of the state. The sophistication and clinical execution of the attacks seem beyond what ragtag operators could do.

This suspicion is amplified by DSS allegation on ferrying of bombs and explosives to destabilize Imo State. Why Imo and why Orlu? Since the DSS knows the source of the bombs and their destination, what prevented them from arresting those behind it? The allegation reinforces the suspicion of a hidden agenda to escalate insecurity in Imo in particular and the southeast to provide grounds to attack its peoples. With the difficulty in differentiating IPOB/ ESN operatives from the ordinary residents, the outcome of such invasion could be dire. That is the potent and present danger as signs of anarchy loom all over Imo state.

By Emeka Omeihe

Controversy involving the Minister of Communications and Digital Economy, Isa Pantami presents a paradox of some sort. This is not only evident from the force and potency of its dialectical outcome but a consequence of the sensitive office the minister occupies.

The dynamics of this contradiction accounts for calls on Pantami to resign his appointment or have it terminated by President Buhari. But the presidency has pitched tents with the embattled minister thus, reinforcing the uncanny irony in the emerging situation. What are the issues? A news site, (which has since retracted), had reported that Pantami was on the terrorism watch list of the American Intelligence Service.

According to the report, Pantami, a former student of Salafist ideologies was trained in Saudi Arabia and the Middle East with other top Islamic jihadists. It also claimed that before his appointment as minister, Pantami was a known Islamic preacher who held dangerous views against the American government.

But the minister denied nursing extremist views claiming that criminal and ‘entrenched interests’ were behind the attacks on him. He heaped the blame on forces purportedly opposed to federal government’s policy on the National Identification Number NIN registration which his ministry is carrying out.

Issues turned sour for the minister when video and audio clips surfaced in the social media corroborating some of the extremist views he held in the past. In those clips, Pantami was heard voicing support for terror groups like Al Qaeda and the Taliban. His views clearly showed obvious support for the killing of certain group of people who do not share his religious faith.

Rattled by the sheer weight of evidence against him, the minister changed his position. In admitting some of those radical and extremist views, he said they were based on his understanding of religious issues at that time and that he had since changed several positions he held in the past based on new evidence and maturity. “I was young when I made some of those statements; I was in the university, some of the comments were made when I was a teenager” he pleaded.

Even with his owning up to these views, the Nigerian factor has miserably weighed in heavily. Instead of seeing the issue for what it is, comments tainted with religious and ethnic sentiments have begun to blur perceptions.

One of such disingenuous views came from Prof. Ishaq Akintola, director of the Muslim Rights Concern MURIC, who claimed that the campaign against Pantami was “being pushed by forces against the federal government’s NIN policy, Boko Haram terrorists, bandits and criminals. How Akintola got his facts remains largely curious. But the man at the centre of the storm has admitted some of the extremist views attributed to him. Akntola also claimed the allegations were malicious and frivolous. How?

But that is beside the issue. The matter to consider is whether really the minister has changed his extremist world view as claimed and when? Can we then absolve him of the incalculable harm such weird views may have wrought on society in the past and in his present job?  What of the plea of teenage age and does religious extremism wane with age?

The presidency was hasty and wrong in absolving Pantami on the touted grounds that he had repented and apologized. Its fingering of the opposition and unnamed ICT companies for being behind the campaigns did not capture all there is to the matter.  Genuine grounds exist for contradicting his occupation of his current office. There is no evidence on ground to prove he has come off his extremist tendencies as the government would want us to believe. Yes, he could have enemies; those who want him out of office. But to seek the cancellation of the genuine concerns of Nigerians on account of these and the purported good job he is doing by virtue of his office is patently ludicrous. The issue at stake is clear. It has nothing to do with his qualifications for his office or performance.

As the presidency was busy inventing all manner excuses to defend Pantami, more evidences of his extreme ideological leaning in his present office and while in the university are emerging. Last month, he was said to have contracted just an Islamic television station (to the exclusion of all others) to cover a federal government’s event which his ministry hosted. That station broadcasts mainly religious matters. Is that the evidence of a changed man? When Pantami was the Chief Imam of the Abubakar Tafawa Balewa University ABTU, Bauchi his preaching was linked to some religious uprisings in that university. Of particular note was the strangling in 2004 of a student of ABTU and member of the ECWA Church, Sunday Nache Achi for allegedly distributing a Christian tract some people considered offensive to their faith.

The father of the late student, Prof Samuel Achi in an interview since the Pantami controversy resonated said there was nothing in the tract that should warrant a death sentence on his poor son. He gave a chilling account of how his son was strangulated in the university mosque and thrown out of the window when Pantami held sway as the Imam of that mosque.

This case brings to the fore some of the lethal consequences of the extremist positions held by Pantami in the past. Who knows the number of other innocent people led astray by his rabid posturing or exposed to mortal harm by the excesses of such dispositions?

Even then, the circumstance that made him plead immaturity and now a changed man was forced on him through superior evidence on his sordid past. It was not a product of repentance. He had denied links with extremist views accusing imaginary enemies for attacks on him only to retract in the face of superior evidence. His excuses strike as an afterthought propelled by the vaulting desire to remain in office by all means possible. Unfortunately, the presidency is unable to reason beyond these narrow confines.

There is neither any record nor evidence that Pantami had become a changed man before he was embroiled in this controversy. He could not have changed in the midst of the crisis. At any rate, security experts are reluctant to buy into the idea that an extremist can be de-radicalized. If anything, experience with the so-called repentant Boko Haram fighters bear this out most poignantly.

Mounting concerns on possible compromises on account of his access to sensitive government documents, information and data of all individuals in public and private places are very genuine. The risk of a religious extremist warehousing the date base of Nigerians including traditional and faith-based organizations is very grave.

In saner climes, Pantami would have by now thrown in the towel or forced out by those that appointed him. But not here! Not when those in the corridors of power have consistently shown clear dispositions and comfort with such biases. Blames being heaped at the door steps of security agencies and the senate for lack of due diligence in the screening of political appointees may not be quite right. Pantami’s past is so conspicuous that he could not have escaped the prying eyes of the security agencies.

We crossed this path before. It happened in the case of the former acting chairman of the EFCC, Ibrahim Magu. The DSS wrote a damning report advising he should not be confirmed on account of his double personality as a no-nonsense anti-corruption helmsman while discretely hobnobbing with corrupt people. The senate promptly rejected him twice as President Buhari pushed to have him confirmed.

Magu continued in acting capacity for years until the prediction of the DSS came through. The rest is now history. Maybe the social dynamics of history will resolve the Pantami entanglement and once more, prove wrong the presidency that seeks to absolve him of extreme ideological incubation. But in all, the image of this country, confidence in the fairness and impartiality of the regime is seriously weakened.

By Emeka Omeihe

Criticisms trailing the formation by Southeast governors of the Ebubeagu security outfit are not indications of the undesirability of a common platform to secure the region. Far from it!

They rather denote the disenchantment of the people with the tardiness of their governors in floating such outfit in the face of security challenges that have set the zone on edge. Before now, the Ime-Obi of the Ohaneze Ndigbo had advised the governors on the imperative of regional protection but nothing came out of it except nebulous sympathy with the touted community policing agenda of the federal government.

Sadly, as this prevarication persisted, criminal activities of all manners came to an all-time high in the zone which hitherto stood low in the rungs of the ladder of insecurity in the country. Gaps were created and a serious vacuum emerged. The people watched helplessly as kidnapping, armed robbery, attacks and despoliation of communities by herdsmen and sundry criminalities rendered life a miserable lot.

Apparently capitalizing on this gap and the yearnings for some form of self-defense, the proscribed IPOB had announced through its propaganda machinery, the setting up of a security outfit known as the Eastern Security Network ESN. The aim they claimed is to fight insecurity in the southeast with special attention to the insurgency of herdsmen.

Opinions are divided as to whether ESN actually exists on ground or part of the trademark propaganda of the IPOB. One man in the vanguard for self-determination, who subscribes to the view that ESN is social media hype, is Ralph Uwazuruike, leader of MASSOB. But governments (federal and state) had through statements attributed some of the criminal activities in the southeast to ESN.

The implication is that these governments believe ESN operatives exist on ground. IPOB has somewhat been reinforcing the existence of ESN through regular statements claiming they maintain serious presence in the bushes and forests ridding them of the menace of the herdsmen. But they had serially denied the burning down of police stations, killing of security personnel and sundry acts of banditry that of late resurged in the southeast. The situation remained confused with governments and the IPOB trading blames in the face of the inability of the security agencies to be of reasonable help.

The prevailing circumstance must have pushed the governors to a joint security meeting in which they announced the setting up of the Ebubeagu security platform. Coming a few days after the attacks at the Imo State Police Command headquarters and the correctional facility in Owerri, it was not surprising that the Ebubeagu project showed signs of an enterprise put together in a hurry.

The haste with which they announced the outfit and many policy issues left unaddressed, combined to fuel the controversy the exercise has been embroiled. Public skepticism on the governors’ seriousness was further fuelled by the casual manner they announced the ban on open grazing which they asked security agencies to implement. It is little surprising that questions have been raised regarding the absence of an enabling law by the state assemblies to give legal backing to both the Ebubeagu outfit and the purported banning of open grazing.

There are also issues regarding the relevant equipment, manpower and structures to give quick operational effect to the outfit. You do not just announce such a sensitive security platform without the men and material to give effect to its goals. But the governors’ answer to this is that they will draw from the pool of vigilante services already in existence in the states. What seems to have emerged is that the security outfit is still on the drawing board.

Parallels have been drawn with the clinical efficiency and operational readiness southwest governors launched the operation Amotekun outfit to underscore the point that Ebubeagu was set up with an indecent haste. Some others have raised issues on the nomenclature (Ebubeagu, meaning the aura or reputation of the lion)

This school contends that the aura or reputation of a lion is not the same as the lion and therefore incapable of doing what a lion is known for. They see a weakening of the whole idea of a strong regional security unit through the nomenclature. But what is that reputation or aura for which a lion is known? It lies in its awesome strength and prowess as the king of the jungle. That reputation frightens other lesser animals. And as it is put in Igbo- (Ebubeagu na-eche agu, meaning the reputation of the lion protects the lion)

That reputation can as well protect the southeast through the instrumentality of the new security unit. So we should proceed beyond semantics to the substantive issue of the action plans put in place by the governors to halt the degenerate security situation in the zone. That is the real issue than what a name connotes. Yes, the governors could be accused of solving a mathematical puzzle from the answer.

Yet, that is not to suggest the outfit cannot live up to its mandate. It can if the governors move with speed and put in place all that is required for it to function optimally. It is better late than the late. We find some comfort in Governor Okezie Ikpeazu of Abia State’s assurance that: “Ebubeagu would be a security outfit both in name, purpose and action. It will be properly equipped, rural based and intelligence-driven”.

The governors should in liaison with their respective state assemblies, quickly enact laws to ban open grazing and give legal teeth to the Ebubeagu project. With the law in place, operatives of the security unit will be better equipped to live up to their mandate especially in the enforcement of the ban on open grazing. That will also be of immense help to the law enforcement agencies that are now being asked to implement the touted ban.

Without an enabling law, nothing is likely to change in the current attitude of the security agencies on the insurgency of the herdsmen in the zone.  Ebonyi State which has been having a raw deal in the hands of the herdsmen in the last one month is a serious case in point. Unfortunately, the leadership of that state had been in the habit of playing down the potent danger such criminalities portend for the zone until lately. But it appears events have woken them up from the deep slumber into which they had sunk.

Thus, when Governor David Umahi of Ebonyi State and chairman of Southeast Governors’ Forum raised the alarm of a plot to incite war in the region; the gravity of the situation began to dawn on us all. Hear him, “of late we have bandits that are now doing a lot of evil and saying that they are of Eastern Security Network ESN. They commit a lot of crimes and say they are IPOB members and most of the time, IPOB would say we have no hands in this, we have no hands in that”.

Coming from a man who hitherto downplayed the precarious security situation of the region, we have every reason to take him seriously. In both his positions as the governor and chairman of Southeast Governors’ Forum, he is in a better stead to access vital security information. So when he said bandits carry out a lot of evil attacks and claim they are members of the ESN, he was drawing serious attention to the other angle of insecurity in the region. And it is damn serious.

It is not clear who these bandits are or where they are coming from. But it is good Umahi is thinking outside the hallmark stereotypes and hasty assumptions typical of governors from that region. Some of his counterparts often rush to attribute security infractions in the zone to the so-called ESN even when their actual existence is still a matter of speculation. Recent deployment of the military in Orlu, Imo State ostensibly to flush out the IPOB and ESN is a case of reference. The same biased mindset also featured during the attacks on the states’ police command headquarters and the correctional facility.

The new lead linking fifth columnists to the insecurity in the zone reinforces the imperative for a strong security outfit. It is instructive governors are beginning to see other dimensions to the rising insecurity in the region as Ebubeagu prepares to take-off.