By Zainab Suleiman Okino
The Director-General, Department of State Security, DSS, Adeola Ajayi recently ignited a heated debate when he advocated for self-help and communal approach to insecurity and crimes.
Many commentators argued that his suggestion may provoke anarchy and mutually assured destruction that could plunge the country into technical warfare.
However, DG Ajayi was not pioneering this perspective. In 2022, General Theophilus Danjuma reiterated the same position at a public event in his home state of Taraba, echoing his earlier 2018 statement responding to widespread violence that left destruction and misery in its wake.
“As a soldier, the best defence is attack. Right now, we are all sitting ducks. These people are armed to the teeth with weapons of mass destruction, but we don’t have them. We have the numbers and the land belongs to us…we must find out the source of the arms of terrorists; Nigerians should equally find a means of arming themselves to face the terrorists.”
As a general, former Chief of Defence Staff and Minister of Defence, Danjuma’s military expertise lends weight to his assessment. His prescription for self-defence, though controversial, addressed the brazen impunity of perpetrators of heinous crimes. His stance was also perceived as an indictment of Nigeria’s failing security architecture and the ruling elite, to which both Danjuma and DG Ajayi undeniably belong.
The escalating killings in Plateau, Benue and other parts of the country have given these views increased traction. Public opinion now increasingly favours what would ordinarily be considered unthinkable. In recent weeks, over 100 lives have been lost in Plateau and Benue, victims of heavily armed unknown assailants terrorising defenceless communities. Simultaneously, Boko Haram resurgence in the Northeast and banditry in the Northwest continue unabated. Political, ethnic and religious polarisation persists, fostering an atmosphere of mistrust. The critically low ratio of law enforcement personnel to the population compounds these challenges.
The government appears bereft of solutions. Experts are proposing alternative approaches based on models that the DSS boss observed succeeding elsewhere. He cited incidents in Azare and Bogoro communities in Bauchi state where residents effectively repelled Boko Haram. At a security personnel event, DG Ajayi urged “Nigerians to emulate the people of Azare and rise to the occasion of supporting the security agencies in their bid to reduce security challenges…If we want to stop this terrorism, we should learn from them.”
Outlining his ‘practical approach,’ he acknowledged, “it is impossible for us to deploy to every community in the country, it is unimaginable that any security agency has the resources to do it… What we have to start experimenting with is how we can make the community a force in the first line of defence. What is our culture? Our culture is communal. We do things together. We celebrate festivals together. We hold ceremonies together. So why can’t we fight some miscreants, some shenanigans among us, together?”
Other prominent Nigerians have aligned with DG Ajayi and General Danjuma, including former military governor and Senate President, David Mark and Governor Caleb Mutfwang of Plateau. “We can no longer stand to watch people killed needlessly for no just cause,” David Mark stated regarding the Benue murders.
Governor Mutfwang, having witnessed repeated failures to restore peace in Plateau state, appears disillusioned with security agencies. “Let me remind you that whatever arrangements the security agencies will make may not solve the problem; the solution will come from the communities. We have come to a point in Nigeria, where every community must defend itself,” though he cautioned against lawlessness, adding, “I will not, however, support lawlessness, but we can’t afford to go to sleep.”
Historically, communities relied on local heroes who defended their territories with unwavering commitment. This tradition waned with the advent of political opportunists who exchanged security promises for votes. The military initially provided some semblance of safety, but politicians’ broken promises, underinvestment in security technology, outdated weaponry, and the emergence of various militias—some disguised as state security but serving as governors’ personal enforcers—have exacerbated security challenges and nullified earlier gains. The situation has devolved into a landscape of mercenaries, insurgency, and armed incursions that have transformed communities into killing fields.
The absence of national outrage, with only localised protests from affected areas, suggests widespread apathy. The DSS Director-General’s admission that resources are insufficient to “deploy to every community” underscores the necessity for self-protection initiatives.
His commitment to organise communities as a “first line of defence” should be fully embraced by vulnerable populations. Self-protection principles should be codified into national law, potentially encompassing community policing, intelligence gathering, collaboration, and neighborhood watch programmes, while prioritising peaceful approaches and human rights. Indeed, isn’t community mobilisation for self-protection preferable to pooling resources for ransom payments?
Critics cite America’s gun violence epidemic as evidence against armed civilians. However, Nigeria faces organised, premeditated attacks on an unprecedented scale, distinct from American dynamics. Finding localised solutions to indigenous challenges is more appropriate than importing foreign models.
What, then, is the controversy about self-protection when traditional security measures have proven inadequate? A fresh approach warrants serious consideration.
*Okino is chairperson of Blueprint Editorial Board and a syndicated columnist.
