Connect with us

News

The DSS Operates within its Mandate

Published

on

The DSS Operates within its Mandate

By: Peter Afunanya

Recently, about five major newspapers called out the DSS for bashing of sorts. The papers, which used their platforms to express varied views about the modus operandi of the Service include Vanguard, Daily Trust, The Sun, Tribune and Punch. While Vanguard’s piece on 2nd June 2023 was Dousing the DSS/EFCC Feud, Daily Trust, on 6th June 2023, published an editorial titled The DSS Must Conduct Its Duties as a Secret Service. The Sun, on 7th June, published The Needless DSS/EFCC Fracas while Tribune on 8th June 2023 wrote on The EFCC/DSS Confrontation. Similarly, on 14th June 2023, Punch featured DSS, Others Need Radical Reforms. It did not seem that the editorials which sought the reforms of the DSS or to criticise it for its public statements or actions on various subject matters of national security concern were, by any means, an accident or a coincidence. It looked every inch planted or organised. It is a hatchet job or so it seemed. The judgement that the Service is excessively public or ubiquitous missed the point. The papers manifested predictable bias and patterns.

Relatedly, some respected legal personalities namely, Olisa Agbakoba SAN, Mike Ozekhome SAN and Femi Falana SAN opined that the Service operates outside its mandate especially with regards to the investigation of Godwin Emefiele. The fact that this matter has become sub-judice constrains the Service from making further statements about it. The celebration of the news of a court order to allow his Lawyers and family access to him is quite unnecessary. He was never denied access. Ever since he was taken into custody, his family has continually accessed him. Same with medical officials. The impression that the Service is going to act on the prompting of the Court is not correct. This is by the way.

Back to the subject under discourse. While it may be fair to admit that the news media and aforementioned personalities are entitled to their opinions, measured ignorance predominantly played out in their arguments. First, they failed to recognise that security threats are evolving and so do the approaches to managing them. Instructively, the security landscape in Nigeria, like many other countries, has become increasingly complex and dynamic. The periodic issuance of press statements to educate or carry citizens and residents along has undoubtedly become part of strategies to manage national security challenges. Extensive research would have revealed to the critics that the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and other world intelligence Services deploy similar tactics including occasional statements and advisories. The CIA includes demographic information on its website to provide the public with valuable insights and data about various populations so to enhance understanding of different regions and communities. Does it mean CIA is operating outside its mandate? Or will that be accepted because it’s CIA, a foreign body?

The need for the agencies to be responsive, transparent and apprise taxpayers has become the global norm in national security and intelligence management. It is called security/intelligence accountability. The tenets of security and intelligence governance expect that agencies remain transparent, accountable and compliant to democracy. World over, Intelligence Services operate in ways and means not too discernable to the uninitiate. But the institutionalisation of democracy as preferred political culture has nonetheless forced such agencies to communicate often with the Public. You can see why the public statements can never be out of place. Without public consciousness and support, countering threats may remain a herculean task for security agencies. Democratic subordination and legislative oversight are basic principles which make it an obligation for these agencies to operate openly even when some of their activities are secret. Ask the USA, UK, France, Canada and other advanced democracies. This level of openness does not vitiate the expected secrecy or in any way compromise their operations.

Regarding the matter concerning the DSS and EFCC, both agencies have refuted claims of a rivalry. It is important to note that comparing the 30th May, 2023 incident at 15 Awolowo Road, Lagos to the barricade of National Assembly in 2018 is inaccurate and unjust due to the substantial differences in the nature and context of the two events. While it is essential to emphasize inter-agency relations and cooperation, it would be unfair to generalise and imply that the Service is in rivalry and power struggle with the Commission. Each agency operates within its distinct mandate and context.

Meanwhile, the editorials accurately alluded to the constitutionality of the DSS as an intelligence organisation in detecting, preventing and neutralising threats against Nigeria. They commended the Service for its commitment to the security of the country as well as the many feats it had accomplished in the course of discharging its duties. Thank you indeed. It has to be understood that the Service is not only an intelligence organisation. It is also a law enforcement agency. It is a security and policy advisory organ. Its establishment law expects it to prevent. To prevent unarguably means to enforce. Should the Service seek media endorsement or permission before deploying operatives and equipment to conduct its job? Should it rather play to the gallery? Characteristic of intelligence operating systems, DSS’ activities may never be completely explained or understood particularly to those who do not need to know.

Even though some of its high officials and operations are known and their veils of secrecy uncovered, there are thousand undercover personnel and actions that have no business going public. It is expected to remain so. With its broad mandate and legal authority to investigate crimes of national security significance, the DSS is well within its rights to initiate an inquiry into any relevant matter. The DSS is primarily charged to detect and prevent crimes and threats against the internal security of Nigeria. More profoundly, it is to undertake such other responsibility as maybe assigned to it by the President and Commander-in-Chief. Appreciating this role of the DSS is instructive for some sections of the media, lawyers and other interested parties. The Service operates on the basis of rule of law. Its operations are rule governed. As required, it obtains arrest and detention warrants when and if needed. For the fact that such instruments are not advertised does not suggest otherwise. Critics should get conversant with the law and rules of engagement and desist from misinforming, misleading or inciting the public. Those seeking to weaken the Service through premeditated reforms may be on a wild goose chase. Consistent attack on it based on ignorance, unrealised interests and emotional assessments and judgements does the country no good. The DSS has stood so firmly for Nigeria. It will continue to.

Considering the warped mentality that has triggered these writeups, it will, no doubt, be unsurprising to witness an upsurge in malicious articles, criticisms and baseless attacks in the public space following the investigations of Messrs Godwin Emefiele and Abdulrasheed Bawa among other flimsy matters. Certain groups and people are bound to come up with frivolous allegations against the Service and its leadership. These entities may also exploit unpatriotic members of the Service to spread falsehoods, propaganda and hate in order to project the Organisation in a bad light. Given their reach and war chest to mobilise forces against Government and its key officials, the adversaries may intend to cause distractions to the on-going investigations as directed by the C-in-C. However, the Service will not depose its professionalism for cheap backlash nor discharge its duty with prejudice or fear.

For those who canvass the opinion that the DSS has no business in investigating the matters referred to it are obviously not taking seriously the omnibus powers of the President, as enshrined in the enabling Acts of the SSS and the NSA. As argued by a onetime Director of the DSS, Fubara Duke, “When a law confers on the President power to delegate ANY assignments he deems fit for a particular Agency to perform, I wonder how it falls outside the purview of (ANY) the stipulations of the President’s powers and by extension why the DSS is being faulted for carrying out the President’s directive”. Continuing, he added: “I have heard arguments of cases being thrown out by the courts over questionable prosecutorial powers of the DSS regarding some categories of cases including criminal cases. Without prejudice to the wisdom of the court on such judgements, they should not override the lawful investigative authority of the DSS. Should there be need for prosecution in due course, these determinations would be appropriately evaluated and where/if necessary, appropriate prosecutorial agencies which may include the Attorney General’s Office or other sister agencies may be deployed to prosecute. It is not the first time this has happened”.

Let it be clear, however, that the DSS will remain unshaken and professional in carrying out its duties. It recommits to diligently operate, as always, within the confines of the law and to uphold the fundamental rights of all Nigerians. The media must, as the fifth estate of the realm, remain balanced, accurate, impartial, and accountable. To sustain a deliberate misguidance of the public with any form of misconceptions is detrimental to nationhood. Therefore, to deepen the expected contributions, seeking veracity is not only ethical but obligatory. That should not be asking for too much.

The DSS Operates within its Mandate

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

News

CAN dismisses Christian genocide claims, says terrorist attacks have no religious pattern

Published

on

CAN dismisses Christian genocide claims, says terrorist attacks have no religious pattern

By: Zagazola Makama

The Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN) has dismissed recent claims by some foreign commentators alleging an ongoing “Christian genocide” in Nigeria, describing the assertions as misleading and not supported by facts on the ground.

The association’s reaction follows remarks by U.S. comedian and talk show host Bill Maher, who alleged that Christians were being systematically exterminated in Nigeria by Islamist extremists.

Maher claimed that over 100,000 Christians had been killed since 2009 and that more than 18,000 churches had been burnt in what he described as “a genocide attempt greater than what is going on in Gaza.”

Similarly, U.S. Senator Ted Cruz accused Nigerian officials of “ignoring and even facilitating” the mass killing of Christians by jihadist groups. Cruz said he had introduced a bill, the Nigeria Religious Freedom Accountability Act, to the U.S. Senate to sanction Nigerian officials allegedly complicit in such acts.

Also, Riley Moore, a U.S. Congressman from West Virginia, reportedly urged the U.S. Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, to designate Nigeria as a “Country of Particular Concern” and suspend arms sales to the country over alleged persecution of Christians.

Reacting to the allegations, the Director of National Issues and Social Welfare of CAN, Abimbola Ayuba, said the pattern of killings across Nigeria does not suggest a religious motive, as both Christians and Muslims have been victims of terrorism and banditry.

Ayuba said, “Empirical facts exist all over showing the spate of killings in Nigeria, but the pattern has not been religious. In some areas like Benue, it may appear as if Christians are being targeted, but the same insurgency has claimed several Muslims some even during early morning prayers.”

He described the situation as a national tragedy rather than a religious conflict, stressing that bullets from terrorists do not “look for a Christian or spare a Muslim.”

According to him, “Sometimes, our situation is being exploited by groups with foreign interests. They benefit from spreading misinformation abroad. Those foreign interests may have a right to express concern, but we must also report things as they truly are.”

Ayuba urged Nigerians to adopt an all-of-society approach to end insurgency rather than seeking external sympathy.

“Instead of running to America, why not use our own institutions like the Senate to seek redress? When they place Nigeria on a blacklist, all of us will suffer. But those who go abroad to look for sympathy know why they do that,” he said.

The Presidency had earlier dismissed similar claims of a religious genocide, reiterating that the ongoing insecurity in parts of the country is driven by terrorism, banditry, and criminality rather than faith-based conflict.

CAN dismisses Christian genocide claims, says terrorist attacks have no religious pattern

Continue Reading

News

IPCR, KAICIID, NIALS Set To Tackle Herdsmen-Farmer Clashes at Policy Review Meeting in Abuja

Published

on

IPCR, KAICIID, NIALS Set To Tackle Herdsmen-Farmer Clashes at Policy Review Meeting in Abuja

By: Michael Mike

The Institute for Peace and Conflict Resolution (IPCR), in collaboration with King Abdullah bin Abdulaziz International Center for Interreligious and Intercultural Dialogue KAICIID and the Nigerian Institute for Advanced Legal Studies (NIALS), has joined forces to address Nigeria’s escalating tensions between farming and pastoralist communities.

At the First Quarter Policy Review Meeting themed “Livestock Policies in Nigeria: Implications for Peace, Security, and Reconciliation,” stakeholders highlighted the urgent need for reforms to address policy gaps driving communal violence.

The event which held on Tuesday at the IPCR Director-General’s Conference Room in Abuja, stakeholders gathered for a high-level dialogue led by the Director-General of the IPCR, Dr. Joseph Ochogwu.

Ochogwu set the tone by emphasising that livestock production, while a backbone of Nigeria’s rural economy, has become a trigger for recurring conflict, displacement, and national insecurity.

He said: “We are all witnesses to the devastating impact of these clashes,” stressing that: “From loss of lives to destruction of properties and disruption of food supply chains, the consequences are eroding national cohesion and fuelling organised crime.”

He noted that despite existing frameworks like the National Livestock Transformation Plan (2019–2028), the National Dairy Development Policy (2021), and anti-open grazing laws, implementation has remained inconsistent and, in many cases, polarising.

“Too many communities still view government efforts with scepticism. Policies that are not inclusive or culturally sensitive will continue to fall short of expectations,” Ochogwu warned.

He noted that: “Every insight shared here today has the potential to prevent conflict tomorrow.”

The meeting, which featured policymakers, religious leaders, civil society representatives, and researchers, served as a platform to review livestock governance policies and their intersection with peace and security outcomes.

Ochogwu underlined the indispensable role of the Network of Policymakers and Religious Leaders (NPMRL) as a forum for inclusive dialogue. He stressed the power of religious and traditional institutions to mediate conflicts and counter misinformation where government efforts may fall short.

He said: “Religious leaders are trusted voices in times of crisis. By meaningfully engaging them in livestock governance, we build trust, legitimacy, and ownership at the community level.”

He further called for a shift in how policies are monitored, not merely by economic metrics, but by how they enhance peace and human dignity.

“Behind every policy are real lives — the farmer feeding his family, the pastoralist protecting his herd, the woman whose livelihood is disrupted, and the child whose future is at stake.”

Since 2016, the IPCR-KAICIID partnership has fostered interfaith dialogue platforms like the Interfaith Dialogue Forum for Peace (IDFP) and has hosted quarterly policy review meetings since 2021. Dr. Ochogwu noted that these engagements have proven the effectiveness of inclusive dialogue in resolving sensitive national issues.

The session also featured a lead paper by Dr. Andrew Kwasari and discussants from government ministries, academia, and research institutions. They examined alignment between livestock policies and mandates of key institutions, including Ministries, Departments and Agencies (MDAs), faith bodies, and civil society organisations.

“Peace-sensitive livestock governance is not optional it is a national imperative,”

“This gathering is not just a policy review. It is a moral and social obligation to ensure no Nigerian is left behind in our pursuit of peace.”Dr. Ochogwu concluded.

The Country Expert from KAICIID Dr. Joseph Atang revealed the urgent need to critically assess Nigeria’s livestock policy, particularly in terms of its sensitivity to existing conflicts. Without understanding whether the policy mitigates or aggravates tensions, meaningful recommendations cannot be made.

“So how conflict sensitive is the livestock policy in Nigeria? We would need to know that. Because if we don’t know what the policy is all about, and we don’t know whether it is conflict sensitive or not, we will not be able to give recommendations that are cogent and practicable and implementable.”

He acknowledged that the farmers-herders conflict is often a catalyst for broader tensions,sometimes framed through religious or ethnic lines making the policy not just an agricultural issue, but a peace and security concern.

“We know that what we call the farmers-hunters conflict is perhaps an indirect reason why we have the policy ,Sometimes, the conflict is executed on the platform of ethnicity, sometimes on the platform of religion.”

Atang stressed that while the Ministry of Livestock Development is the lead agency, the success of the livestock policy depends on all stakeholders including religious bodies, MDAs, and security agencies actively promoting, integrating, and supporting its goals.

“Although our eyes are all on the livestock ministry for implementation, we still have to do our own bit to make sure that it succeed

“All the MDAs, Ministries, Departments, and Agencies What are the religious organisations doing about this?”

Atang emphasized that all stakeholders religious groups, security agencies, and civil society must go beyond attending meetings and actively mainstream livestock policy into their respective programs and constituencies.

“We are supposed to mainstream this policy into our own programmes. What is CAN doing about this livestock policy? What is JNI doing about this livestock policy? How are we promoting it within our constituencies?”

The President at SCL Future Food Systems, Dr. Andrew Kwasari cautioned that livestock reform should not be viewed merely through an economic lens. Instead, it must be firmly rooted in Nigeria’s broader peace and stability strategy to address the root causes of conflict.

He said: “Livestock reform should not be pursued solely as an economic modernisation agenda, but as a cornerstone for Nigeria’s peace and stability strategy.”

He stressed the need for peace-sensitive monitoring and evaluation frameworks that go beyond economic metrics like productivity. These frameworks should also measure community perceptions, institutional collaboration, and actual conflict reduction.

“Monitoring frameworks must track not only productivity gains, but also reduction in violence and improvement in intercommunal relations.”

Kwasari emphasized the importance of listening to the communities most affected by livestock policies. Independent evaluations must amplify these voices to ensure inclusive and equitable policy outcomes.

“Commission independent evaluation of livestock policy implementation that prioritises the voices of affected communities, particularly marginalised groups.”

IPCR, KAICIID, NIALS Set To Tackle Herdsmen-Farmer Clashes at Policy Review Meeting in Abuja

Continue Reading

News

Zulum inaugurates housing complex for teachers in Mafa

Published

on

Zulum inaugurates housing complex for teachers in Mafa

By: Michael Mike

The governor of Borno State, Professor Babagana Zulum has inaugurated a 72-unit housing complex, comprising two and three-bedroom apartments, for teachers in Mafa Local Government Area of the state.
 
The project is part of the efforts by the administration of Zulum to address the critical shortage of teachers’ accommodations and improve welfare in the education sector.
 
The commissioning ceremony, which was held on Tuesday, was part of the Zulum administration’s ongoing efforts towards revitalising education, particularly in rural communities that were affected by over a decade of insurgency.
 
Zulum, while presenting the keys to the beneficiaries, said the welfare of teachers is paramount to achieving qualitative education.
 
According to the governor, providing decent and secured housing is one of his administration’s key priorities.
 
The newly commissioned complex comprises 24 two-bedroom semi-detached units and 48 units of eight blocks, three-storey buildings, three bedrooms, and basic amenities. Each unit was designed to provide a comfortable and dignified living space for teaching staff and their families.
 
Earlier, the Commissioner for Education, Science, Technology and Innovation, Engr Lawan Abba Wakilbe, explained that the beneficiaries were selected from primary and secondary schools.
 
Wakilbe commended Governor Zulum for prioritising the welfare of teachers by providing them with a decent accommodation.
 
Those who were present at the event included the House of Representatives member for Maiduguri Metropolis, Abdulkadir Rahis; the Acting Chief of Staff to the Governor, Dr Babagana Mustapha Mallumbe; the Commissioner for Works, Engr Mustapha Gubio and the Commissioner for Local Government and Emirates Affairs, Sugun Mai Mele.

Zulum inaugurates housing complex for teachers in Mafa

Continue Reading

Trending

Verified by MonsterInsights