Reported by: Ijeoma G | Edited by: Gabriel Osa
Controversial comments by veteran activist and former Senator Shehu Sani have reignited national discourse on the nature of terrorism and insecurity in Nigeria, particularly in the North‑East and North‑West regions. Sani’s assertions that many of the armed groups responsible for widespread violence are Nigerian northerners and Muslims rather than foreign mercenaries have drawn sharp public attention, fuelling debate about the root causes of insecurity and the need for honest national reflection.
Speaking during a public discussion on insecurity in late 2025, Sani dismissed prevalent narratives that blame external actors for the country’s persistent security challenges. “The terrorists killing people in Nigeria are not from Congo, Malawi, Libya or Egypt; they are northerners, and they are Muslims. We must be honest about this,” the former lawmaker said, emphasising that local voices must lead efforts to confront violence.
Sani, who once represented Kaduna Central in the National Assembly and now heads the Civil Rights Congress of Nigeria (CRCN), argued that denial and the tendency to externalise the problem have hindered effective solutions. He specifically mentioned that armed groups are composed of local fighters who speak languages such as Fulani, Hausa and Kanuri, underscoring his belief that the insurgency is a domestic phenomenon rooted in Nigerian communities rather than imported from abroad.
The senator’s remarks reflect a broader call among some political and civil society leaders for honest national discourse about the drivers of violence in Nigeria. In interviews and public forums, Sani and others have linked banditry, terrorism and other forms of violent crime in the northern regions to internal dynamics such as poor governance, entrenched criminal networks and political complicity. According to reports, he has warned that political actors sometimes exploit insecurity for strategic advantage rather than address its underlying causes.
Sani’s stark characterisation of the militants counters narratives that attribute much of Nigeria’s insecurity to foreign elements or cross‑border incursions. While groups such as Boko Haram and its offshoot, the Islamic State West Africa Province (ISWAP), have historical links to broader jihadi movements in the Sahel and beyond, Sani’s comments emphasise the local composition of fighters and the need for internal solutions driven by northern communities themselves.
His framing has generated mixed reactions across the country. Supporters of his view argue that acknowledging the local roots of terrorism and banditry allows policymakers and community leaders to pursue targeted interventions that address structural issues such as poverty, youth unemployment, inadequate governance and limited education. They maintain that combating insecurity effectively requires confronting uncomfortable truths rather than defaulting to simplistic external explanations.
Critics, on the other hand, caution that such statements risk reinforcing ethno‑religious stereotypes and inflaming regional tensions in an already fragmented national landscape. They stress the importance of nuanced analysis that distinguishes between criminal groups, ideological insurgents, and the diverse communities affected by violence. Some analysts point to the complex interplay of local grievances, transnational extremist influences and economic deprivation as key factors that have shaped the current security environment.
Security experts note that Nigeria’s insurgency and banditry landscape comprises multiple actors and motivations. Boko Haram and ISWAP, for example, have engaged in violent jihadist campaigns for years in the North‑East, drawing condemnation from local communities and international partners alike. Banditry in the North‑West has frequently been linked to criminal networks involved in kidnapping for ransom, cattle rustling and armed robbery. While these groups operate within Nigeria’s borders, they have also been influenced by cross‑border dynamics and wider Sahelian insecurity trends.
Sani’s remarks dovetail with calls from other leaders, including religious figures and community organisers, urging Nigerians to take collective responsibility for security in their localities. Some clerics and traditional leaders have acknowledged the presence of locally rooted armed militias, emphasising the need for regional collaboration to reduce violence and create safer communities. These voices often highlight the limitations of relying solely on federal security forces without fostering deeper societal engagement.
The senator’s comments also tap into ongoing debates about how best to classify and respond to armed groups in Nigeria. While the government has made efforts to label specific organisations as terrorist entities, others argue that labels alone are insufficient without comprehensive policies addressing governance failures, community resilience and socio‑economic inequality.
As Nigeria approaches future elections, discussions about national security are likely to remain central to political discourse. Figures like Shehu Sani, whose outspoken views draw both acclaim and controversy, contribute to a broader national conversation about accountability, citizenship and the role of local communities in shaping Nigeria’s security outcomes. Whether his perspective will drive concrete policy changes or further polarise opinion remains to be seen, but the debate underscores the urgency of finding sustainable solutions to one of the country’s most enduring crises.
📩 Stone Reporters News | 🌍 stonereportersnews.com
✉️ info@stonereportersnews.com | 📘 Facebook: Stone Reporters | 🐦 X (Twitter): @StoneReportNew | 📸 Instagram: @stonereportersnews
Add comment
Comments