By Malik Bello Bayewuwon
The recent reports that the Katsina State Government plans to release 70 so-called “repentant bandits” were initially dismissed by many Nigerians as mere rumours. Sadly, further investigation has confirmed that the reports are true.
This development raises a disturbing and fundamental question: at what point will northern state governments stop negotiating and frolicking with terrorists?
For years, successive negotiations with bandits and terrorists have yielded no tangible results. They have not reduced attacks on villages and farmlands. They have not led to the laying down of arms. They have not produced useful intelligence to aid security forces. Instead, these negotiations have only emboldened criminal networks and deepened public distrust in government.
It is, therefore, not surprising that many Nigerians have concluded, rightly or wrongly, that the government is either complicit or deliberately indifferent to the sponsors of terrorism in the country. When a government entrusted with protecting its citizens chooses to negotiate with terrorists and reintegrate captured criminals back into society, it inevitably fuels the perception that such a government is sympathetic to, or supportive of, terrorism.
There is, in truth, nothing like a repentant terrorist. A terrorist who is alive remains a potential threat to society, while a dead terrorist poses none. A self-acclaimed repentant terrorist has a high probability of returning to violence, as past experience in Nigeria has repeatedly shown. Negotiating with terrorists under the guise of peace deals is not only a sign of weakness; it is an open admission of the state’s inability to enforce law and order. These are classic symptoms of a failing state.
History has shown that savagery rarely reforms itself. Many terrorists previously “rehabilitated” and reintegrated into society have been caught returning to their old ways, killing innocent citizens and terrorising communities. Worse still, releasing captured terrorists severely damages the morale of security personnel who risk their lives to apprehend them. It sends a dangerous message that their sacrifices are neither valued nor respected.
Nigeria’s legal position on terrorism is unambiguous.
Under the Terrorism (Prevention) Act of 2011, as amended in 2013, committing an act of terrorism attracts life imprisonment, while acts resulting in death are punishable by death. One therefore wonders why the Katsina State Government would choose to release 70 terrorists instead of allowing the law to take its full course and sending a strong deterrent message to criminal elements across the country.
The position of the Federal Government on this matter has also been clearly stated. Nigeria’s Minister of Defence, General Christopher Musa (rtd), recently issued a firm warning to state governments against negotiating or sustaining peace deals with bandits. He rightly described such arrangements as dangerous, counter-productive, and a grave threat to national security.
According to the minister, bandits are not trustworthy, and negotiations only embolden criminal networks, weaken military operations, and prolong insecurity. He stressed that the Federal Government’s position remains clear: no negotiated settlements, no ransom payments, and no legitimisation of armed groups terrorising communities. He further urged governors to align with the federal security strategy, emphasising that sustained military pressure, intelligence-led operations, and community cooperation remain the only viable path to lasting peace.
The growing public outrage over state-level peace initiatives and the planned release of suspected bandits is therefore justified. Such actions undermine justice, erode public confidence in government, and demoralise the armed forces. If Nigeria is serious about ending terrorism, then appeasement must give way to justice, firmness, and strict adherence to the rule of law.
Malik Bello Bayewuwon, bellomalik001@gmail.com, writes from Ogbomoso.
