By Abubakar Adam Ibrahim
Ihave always been fascinated by the human immune system and how it fights infections like TB, as described in Harold Shryock & Mervyn Hardinge’s three-volume book, Your Health and You. The description of how the white cells use a containment strategy to wall in the TBcausing bacteria, preventing them from spreading through the body, made me marvel at the level of coordination the body brings to protecting itself.
Recent developments in Katsina State, completely unconnected to the medical wonders of the human body, have had me thinking about this text. The controversial decision by the Katsina State government to arm-twist the law into freeing 70 bandits, convicted or facing trial for banditry, as part of a “peace deal” demonstrates not only questionable decision-making but also Nigeria’s general scatter-brained approach to dealing with the insecurity situation in the country.
I understand that the situation is dire and the government is desperate to find solutions that will save the lives of people in the state. However, we have also seen that variants of these treaties have been entered into with these bandits, who are pampered, lavished with cash and gifts and pardons, only to return a few months later to their criminal lives of marauding, maiming, and murdering.
Under the terms of the agreement, the bandits have apparently agreed to cease all attacks and kidnappings and will kindly allow farmers access to their own farmlands. In return for allowing farmers to go about their legitimate business of farming and trying to feed themselves and the nation, the bandits will be allowed free movement into towns, be allowed to trade and engage in commerce, and have access to social amenities and hospitals. And then finally, communities agree to support rehabilitation and ensure fair treatment of detained bandits released as part of the agreement.
Nowhere in the agreement terms is disarmament mentioned, so it won’t be surprising for these bandits to show up at the markets, hospitals, or schools armed to the teeth. It shouldn’t come as a surprise either if, when the bandits become disgruntled, they may decide to go berserk, as they have done countless times already each time previous “peace deals” have failed.
At the same time, while the terms of the agreement are explicit about the bandits being entitled to support and rehabilitation from the communities, nothing in the agreements stipulates restitution from the bandits to the communities they have destroyed over years of terrorism, nor to the victims they have killed or maimed. Neither has the government stated how it will address the damages done to these communities and families who have lost loved ones and breadwinners. Yes, the bandits apparently have agreed to release villagers they have abducted, and if claims by the government are to be believed, 1,000 abducted innocent Nigerians have been freed by the bandits to rejoin their families, but the price is freedom for criminals who are facing the law for their actions.
So, the desperate attempts by the Katsina State government to free these 70 bandits in return for the freed hostages, or “prisoner exchange” as the governor himself called it, indicate that the idea of justice for the victims is completely out of the question. While the perpetrators of the crimes don’t even get their sentences commuted, they have them completely pardoned. The government has not bothered to clarify any conditional clause, such as the exclusion of bandits who have murdered people or raped women from the list; we can assume that very dangerous criminals with blood on their hands will walk scot-free for the murder and mayhem they have caused.
It is safe to say that the terms of these agreements are incredibly favourable to the bandits, and the only thing the communities get out of it, if they get
Under the terms of the agreement, the bandits have apparently agreed to cease all attacks and kidnappings and will kindly allow farmers access to their own farmlands. In return for allowing farmers to go about their legitimate business of farming and trying to feed themselves and the nation, the bandits will be allowed free movement into towns, be allowed to trade and engage in commerce, and have access to social amenities and hospitals.
it eventually, is the chance to taste the freedom to life. Looked at from another perspective, they get nothing, as the right to life is divinely ordained and constitutionally guaranteed; so is the right to go about their business freely in their own country, on their own lands. So, the treaty offers them nothing they ordinarily should not be having.
Where this agreement differs from previous ones is that this one was originally communitydriven. A few months ago, communities in Katsina State came into the spotlight for negotiating separate peace deals with bandit groups. While highlighting the dangers of those deals, namely that they allow the bandits free rein over other communities, it provided some sort of relief, no matter how ephemeral, to communities that have suffered the ravages of these criminal gangs for years. It was easy at the time to argue, as I did then, that one must not blame the communities for entering into these treaties because they were effectively on their own—left unprotected by the government, and their chances of survival were best served by negotiating with their tormentors. It was also easy to see that this approach offered no containment and couldn’t because the villagers had no enforcement mechanisms, thereby directing the bandits away from their communities and states to neighbouring ones. In that period, we witnessed increased attacks on villages in Kano, for instance.
However, the Katsina State government decided in the end to become an active participant in these negotiations. While arguments have been made that this is a pragmatic approach to dealing with an intractable problem, the reality is different. It is an admission of the failure of the government (federal and state) to protect its citizens and guarantee them the rights—to life and freedom to pursue legitimate business—that the constitution promised them. The worst thing this demonstrates is a lack of clear adherence to the 2016 National Counter Terrorism Strategy (NACTEST), which is built around five key streams.
First, forestall, by preventing individuals from becoming terrorists through early intervention; then secure, through strengthening protective capacity; then identify, which is aimed at enhancing pre-emption through detection and an early warning system; next is prepare, which entails mitigating the impact of attacks and ensuring rapid response; and finally, implement, which revolves around mobilising a coordinated cross-government effort to deal with terrorism, and by extension, banditry.
This attempt by the Katsina State government vitiates several streams of NACTEST, but I will focus on the first. Forestalling more people from becoming terrorists or bandits starts with disincentivising terrorism and banditry. Wouldbe terrorists and bandits must not only see that terrorism and banditry don’t pay; they must also see that there is a price to pay.
By absolving these bandits and entering a lopsided agreement that mostly favours the bandits, the government inadvertently demonstrates to the young men in Katsina, who would see armed terrorists and bandits keeping the proceeds of their criminal activities, getting away with murder and rape, and swaggering about town brandishing their weapons and being revered by the people, that power is there for the taking for those who have the guts to carry arms against the state and its innocent citizens. This will not forestall the rise of new terrorists and bandits; it will embolden the ones already in this criminal enterprise and bolster enlistment in their ranks.
This is something that we can scarcely afford. Already, Nigeria is ranked 6th on the 2025 Global Terrorism Index (GTI) and accounted for six per cent of global terrorism deaths in 2023. That year, we were only 8th on the index. Now we are just behind countries like Burkina Faso in first place, Pakistan in second, Syria in third, Mali in fourth, and Niger in fifth.
Three of these five countries are in West Africa, meaning that, aside from homegrown terrorists and bandits, we are surrounded by a network of terrorists seeking recruits. If we don’t disincentivise terrorism and banditry, we are basically laying our heads in the gaping mouth of the beast.
The efforts by the Katsina State government are not entirely dissimilar to the federal government’s decision to hire a US lobbying firm for $9 million to communicate its efforts to defend Christians in Nigeria and change the recent narrative about the country in the US. If the government actually deals decisively with the insecurity situation, we won’t need to be sticking very expensive band-aids on a potentially life-threatening tumour. Like that TB bacteria, if the body’s immune system is not wellcoordinated, the containment strategy will only be futile. Nigeria needs to better coordinate its response to terror and banditry at all levels.
Abubakar Adam Ibrahim, a columnist with Daily Trust, can be reached through abubakaradam@dailytrust.com
Twitter: @Abbakar_himself
WhatsApp: 08020621270