By Group Captain Sadeeq Garba Shehu (rtd)
The recent photograph of Senator Ahmed Lawan with two newly recruited personnel of Defence Intelligence Agency (DIA) accompanied by his public statement that he facilitated their recruitment, has understandably provoked public debate.
This is not the first time such discussions have arisen. On other occasions, social media has carried photographs and videos of newly recruited military personnel visiting the homes of prominent politicians and mounting a guard of honour, to express gratitude for allegedly helping them secure enlistment.
Without commenting on the facts of any individual case, these incidents present an opportunity to reflect on an important principle of democratic governance and national security.
Political office holders naturally advocate for their constituents and help them identify legitimate opportunities. They may even help by facilitating their attendance at recruitment or interview venues. However, recruitment into the Armed Forces, intelligence services, the Police and other security agencies should always be conducted strictly in accordance with established laws, regulations and professional standards.
There is an important distinction between informing qualified citizens in your constituency about recruitment opportunities and, creating the impression that admission into these highly sensitive institutions depends on political influence or personal patronage. Even where due process has been followed, public statements or images that suggest otherwise can unintentionally undermine public confidence in the integrity of the recruitment system.
Security institutions are different from most other public organisations. They are entrusted with the defence of the nation, the protection of classified information and the preservation of constitutional order. Their personnel must be selected through rigorous, transparent and merit-based processes that assess competence, integrity, loyalty, psychological suitability and security clearance.
The issue is therefore not merely whether procedures were followed in a particular case. It is also about protecting public confidence that recruitment into Nigeria’s military, intelligence and security institutions is free from undue influence and is seen to be so. Current Senator , former Senate President and almost permanent member of security committees @Ahmed Lawan should know and appreciate that.
This is why political office holders should exercise particular caution when publicly associating themselves with recruitment into security and intelligence organisations. Their words and actions should reinforce—not inadvertently weaken—the perception of institutional independence.
Related to this, is a growing practice where lawmakers weigh in on security agencies to use their meager budgets to build roads or schools in the lawmakers constituency thus diverting security resources that’d have gone to improving operational capacity.
Nigeria’s security challenges require institutions that are professional, politically neutral and trusted by all citizens. Preserving those values is a shared national responsibility.
Strong security institutions are built on merit, integrity and public confidence—not on the perception of patronage.
Being on the oversight committees of security agencies should not be used to subvert such agencies.
Group Captain Sadeeq Garba Shehu (rtd) is a Security & Defence Analyst/Conflict Security & Development Consult Ltd