The world is an arena where you can negotiate anything – war, businesses, alliances between nations etcetera. That is why some leadership scholars refer to the world as a “Giant negotiating table.” We have seen the United States of America (USA) negotiate with the Taliban so that there can be peace in Afghanistan and the world.
If the world is a giant negotiating table, why did some of our state governors argue that they cannot negotiate with bandits? If a governor cannot negotiate with bandits, then he must provide security for citizens in his state. Our governors ought to remember that Nigerians voted for them because of campaign promises. In the spirit of good governance, there must be a contingency plan by governors to rescue innocent children held in captivity by bandits.
At a public lecture, someone drew my attention to the provisions of Chapter II, Section 14, Subsections 2a and 2b of the 1999 Constitution (As Amended) which states that: “Sovereignty belongs to the people of Nigeria from whom government through this constitution derives all its powers and authority; the security and welfare of the people shall be the primary purpose of government…”
If sovereignty belongs to the people, and security and welfare of the same people are truly the primary purposes of any government, Nigerians deserve much more than we get from our state governors. After all, Nigerians who voted for politicians to occupy elected positions in the government are not fools. We handed over our sovereignty to those in the government so that they can use the instruments of the state to protect us. But what did we get in return? We were told to calm down as some citizens are being killed.
Well, as some Nigerian intellectuals and analysts were still seriously debating whether Kaduna State Government should negotiate or not negotiate with bandits, the media ran headline news. The news was about the Senate of the 9th Assembly proposing a bill seeking to prohibit the payment and receipt of ransom for the release of any person kidnapped, imprisoned, or wrongfully confined.
The Bill, titled Terrorism Amendment Bill 2021, has passed the second reading. I hope it has not passed the third reading because of groundless reasons in the proposed Bill. The Senator that sponsored the bill observed that the United Kingdom and the USA do not support payment of ransom to kidnappers. Very untrue! National interest determines what the UK and USA do often. In the UK and the USA, citizens’ lives and properties are protected by security agents. If Nigerians are secured in their country, no one would pay ransom to bandits within the country.
In Nigeria, what have we seen recently? We observed with much regret that people are either murdered or kidnapped on highways, villages, and at home without the arrest of perpetrators of crimes in most cases. Police officers and soldiers are killed at will by criminals. Any arrest made? Only the police can answer this question correctly. Unfortunately, civilians are the greatest casualties.
Maybe our lawmakers at state and federal levels are so busy legislating that they do not appreciate the security challenges some Nigerians are currently facing. Anyway, It is good to look at international best practices in any endeavor. But what the UK and the USA are capable of doing for their citizens in terms of security, Nigeria has not been able to do the same. We have not forgotten that the USA came to Nigeria to rescue an American recently.
Many of our citizens are internally displaced in their own country. It is rather sad. I do not know who gave our political office holders the erroneous impression that Nigerians want to pay the ransom. But “Criminalizing ransom payment is nonsensical,” according to a public intellectual. I agree absolutely. Before the third reading of the Bill, May I remind our senators that a few days ago, the USA was reported to have recovered millions in cryptocurrency paid as ransom to Colonial Pipeline ransomware hackers.
In a fragile economy, no Nigerian wants to pay ransom to bandits. But when most state governments cannot protect their citizens, traumatized families whose relations have been kidnapped for several months have sold their properties and borrowed some money to pay the ransom. I think the question we should all ask is: What can we do to state governors that cannot provide security for their citizens? The proposed bill is not addressing this critical issue.
A situation where there is no contingency plan to solve a security challenge leaves much to be desired. Too often, leaders wait. When citizens expect their leaders to take necessary actions on insecurity, and there is no timely response, citizens resort to self–help; pay the ransom, or carry weapons of destruction.
Whenever any of our governors do not want to listen to voices of wisdom, I remember the psychologist William James who affirmed that there is one factor that can make the difference between damaging a leader’s relationship and deepening it. “The factor is attitude.” So, a leader must calm down and come to a place of agreement especially when there are dissenting voices on any issue. It is always imperative for a leader to find out if citizens agree with him or her on any governance issue.
In a democracy, elected leaders must learn to dialogue when there are disputes between leadership and the followers. Leaders can seek the help of professional negotiators to assist them to negotiate with anyone. I join numerous parents to urge the Niger State Governor Abubakar Sani Bello to put in more effort in getting the kidnapped children from the Tegina Islamic School back. In the final analysis, all good leaders do is solve problems. Thank you. (Concluded)
