Reported by: L. Imafidon | Edited by: Gabriel Osa
Abuja, Nigeria — A fresh political storm is brewing in Nigeria’s already fraught security landscape after the Coalition of United Political Parties (CUPP) claimed that the federal government has been engaging in discussions with criminal bandit groups amid the persistent violence that has plagued large swathes of the country.
During Channel News Sunrise TV show on Monday, CUPP’s Secretary-General, Peter Ameh, asserted that “there is some level of discussion between the government and bandits,” framing it as a troubling development that risks undermining national security and the rule of law. Ameh’s remarks reflect growing frustration within opposition ranks over what they describe as a lack of transparency and accountability in how the government is addressing the increasingly complex and violent banditry crisis. It is clear that there is some level of discussion between the government and bandits, Ameh said, adding that such dialogue appears to be happening without adequate public explanation or parliamentary oversight.
For years, armed groups commonly referred to as bandits — loosely organised criminal networks engaged in kidnappings, cattle rustling, and mass violence — have wrought havoc across northern and central Nigeria, with thousands killed and many more displaced. Analysts say the scope and lethality of these groups has forced governments at both federal and state levels to explore a range of responses, including military offensives, community-based security partnerships, and occasional overtures aimed at reducing violence. Recent high-profile atrocities have kept insecurity at the centre of national debate. In late November 2025, President Bola Tinubu declared a nationwide security emergency in an attempt to stem ongoing attacks and kidnappings, ordering the recruitment of additional police officers and expanded operations by forest guards and intelligence units to protect remote populations.
Ameh’s comments appear to crystallise longstanding concerns among critics who argue that elements within the government may be resorting to clandestine negotiations or tacit understandings with bandit leaders as a short-term expedient. While the federal government officially denies any policy of negotiating with criminal groups or paying ransoms, some voices within states where banditry is endemic have, in the past, openly lobbied for negotiations with certain factions to secure the release of hostages or stem cycles of violence — a tactic that critics say only reinforces criminality. Government officials, including defence authorities, have sought to reassure the public that ransom payments are discouraged and that sustained military pressure is the primary strategy for confronting bandits.
The debate over negotiation reflects a broader dilemma in Nigeria’s security policy: the balance between hardline military action and pragmatic engagement aimed at reducing immediate harm. Proponents of conditional talks argue that dialogue with lower-level commanders can sometimes yield temporary reprieves in violence and secure the release of abducted civilians. Opponents counter that such engagements embolden criminal groups and erode the state’s monopoly on legitimate force, effectively legitimising terror as a tool of leverage.
Ameh’s intervention on Monday underscores political tensions surrounding this policy debate. CUPP, a coalition of opposition parties, has criticised the ruling government across multiple fronts, from economic governance to democratic norms. In recent months, Ameh has publicly scrutinised the government’s security, economic, and political strategies, including outright condemnation of elected officials defecting to the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC), saying such moves showed a lack of respect for the electorate.
Security experts note that the bandit conflict, particularly in the northwest and parts of the North-Central region, has evolved into a sophisticated criminal enterprise with deep roots in local grievances, porous borders, and weak institutional presence in rural areas. This complexity has made a purely military solution elusive, leading some regional leaders and community representatives to experiment with multi-pronged approaches that include negotiation, amnesty considerations, and local security arrangements. Yet, the federal government’s official posture remains one of rejecting ransom-based settlements and prioritising forceful disruption of criminal networks.
In addition to the armed violence, the crisis has exacted a heavy human cost. Schoolchildren continue to be targeted for abductions in the impoverished north, contributing to education disruption and deepening social trauma. A long-running trend of kidnappings has drawn international attention, spotlighting Nigeria’s struggle to protect its most vulnerable populations and uphold human rights amid competing security imperatives.
The government’s strategy to bolster police numbers and deploy specialised units is part of an effort to shift the security paradigm. Still, critics like Ameh contend that without clear policies that address underlying drivers of insecurity, such as poverty, unemployment, and inter-communal tensions, military force alone will fall short. The spectre of undocumented negotiations with bandit groups adds another layer of complexity, fuelling both political polarisation and public anxiety.
Opposition figures and civil society organisations are now demanding greater transparency from the federal government, calling for parliamentary scrutiny of any engagements with armed groups. They argue that Nigerians have a right to know whether elected leaders are entertaining back-channel talks with criminal organisations and, if so, what terms and objectives guide such discussions.
For its part, the presidency and security agencies have yet to provide detailed responses directly addressing these accusations. Government spokespeople have previously emphasised a commitment to pursuing all lawful and effective means to defend citizens, while cautioning against rumour and misinformation that could weaken collective efforts to restore peace. The tension between public statements of security resolve and allegations of unofficial talks illustrates the profound challenges facing Nigeria as it navigates one of its most intractable security crises.
As Nigeria enters a period marked by heightened political contestation ahead of the 2027 general elections, debates over security policy and governance will likely remain at the forefront of national discourse. The allegations by CUPP’s Secretary-General now add another chapter to the ongoing debate about how best to secure the country and protect its citizens without compromising the principles of justice and accountability.
📩 Stone Reporters News | 🌍 stonereportersnews.com
✉️ info@stonereportersnews.com | 📘 Facebook: Stone Reporters | 🐦 X (Twitter): @StoneReportNew | 📸 Instagram: @stonereportersnews
Add comment
Comments