Any serious security policy must therefore begin by recognising the experiences of victims. The voices of those who have suffered directly from violence cannot be pushed aside in the search for solutions. A nation that focuses only on those who surrender while neglecting those who were attacked risks creating a dangerous imbalance. The victims of terrorism and violent crimes deserve justice, support and recognition, not silence.
By Shu’aibu Usman Leman
There is a question every nation confronting prolonged insecurity must eventually face. That is; when an individual who has taken up arms against society decides to surrender, what should happen afterwards? This question is not merely a matter of security policy; it is also a test of a nation’s commitment to justice, compassion and the protection of its citizens. The answer cannot be shaped by emotions, political convenience or the desire for quick solutions. It must be guided by wisdom, accountability and a clear understanding that the safety and dignity of innocent citizens remain the primary responsibility of any government.
Nigeria is currently grappling with this difficult and sensitive question. The ongoing debate over the rehabilitation, deradicalization and reintegration of surrendered terrorists has become one of the most important issues in the country’s national security discussion. The recent position taken by the Senate has brought renewed attention to the matter and has compelled Nigerians to examine whether existing approaches are achieving the right balance between the pursuit of peace and the demand for justice. While every responsible government must explore ways to end cycles of violence, it must also ensure that such efforts do not undermine public trust or ignore the suffering of those who have endured years of terror.
For many years, Nigerians across different regions have carried the painful burden of violent insecurity. Terrorist attacks, banditry, kidnappings and other forms of organised criminality have destroyed communities, weakened livelihoods and left lasting emotional wounds. Behind every violent incident are human stories that must never be forgotten, families mourning loved ones, children growing up without parents, communities forced to abandon their homes and survivors struggling to rebuild their lives after unimaginable experiences. These Nigerians are not statistics; they are citizens whose rights, security and wellbeing must remain at the centre of every national decision.
READ ALSO:
The enemy within: State fragility, public distrust and Nigeria’s crisis of governance
Any serious security policy must therefore begin by recognising the experiences of victims. The voices of those who have suffered directly from violence cannot be pushed aside in the search for solutions. A nation that focuses only on those who surrender while neglecting those who were attacked risks creating a dangerous imbalance. The victims of terrorism and violent crimes deserve justice, support and recognition, not silence. Their pain should serve as a reminder that the ultimate purpose of every security programme is to protect human lives and preserve the dignity of society.
At the same time, there is no doubt that a country facing prolonged conflict must consider every legitimate pathway towards reducing violence. Programmes focused on deradicalization, rehabilitation and reintegration can play a role when they are carefully designed, properly supervised and supported by credible evidence. In many conflict situations around the world, individuals who genuinely abandon violence have been successfully reintegrated into society. However, such programmes must never operate on the assumption that every person who lays down arms has automatically changed. Rehabilitation must complement justice, not replace it.
The most important distinction in this debate is one that Nigeria must clearly understand, that surrender is not the same as repentance. A person may surrender for several reasons, including military defeat, pressure from security forces, loss of operational capacity, internal disagreements within criminal groups or the realisation that continued violence is no longer sustainable. These circumstances may explain why an individual chooses to abandon the battlefield, but they do not necessarily prove that the person has accepted responsibility or developed genuine remorse for the harm caused.
True repentance goes beyond the simple act of giving up weapons. It requires a deeper transformation demonstrated through words and actions. It involves acknowledging wrongdoing, accepting responsibility for the suffering inflicted on others, rejecting the ideology or motives that encouraged violence and showing through consistent behaviour that a genuine change of heart has taken place. Without these elements, surrender may only represent a temporary adjustment rather than a permanent commitment to peace.
This distinction is critical because the consequences of confusing surrender with genuine transformation can be extremely dangerous. A society that welcomes individuals back without properly assessing their intentions may unintentionally create opportunities for those who have not truly abandoned violence to return to their previous activities. Security decisions based on assumptions rather than evidence can place communities at risk and undermine the confidence of citizens who expect government policies to prioritise their safety.
However, justice must never be confused with revenge. A responsible and democratic society cannot punish individuals simply because of public anger or pressure. Justice requires due process, careful investigation, reliable evidence and fair legal procedures. Those accused of terrorism, murder, kidnapping or other serious crimes must be assessed according to the law. Where sufficient evidence exists, they must face prosecution and appropriate punishment. Accountability is not an obstacle to peace; rather, it is one of the foundations upon which lasting peace is built.
The painful killing of retired Major General Rabe Abubakar, reportedly by bandits, serves as another reminder of the serious security challenges confronting Nigeria. Although banditry and terrorism are distinct forms of criminal activity, both reveal the devastating impact of armed groups operating outside the law. They demonstrate the urgent need for a comprehensive security strategy that addresses not only immediate threats but also the underlying weaknesses that allow violent organisations to survive and expand.
Nigeria’s response to insecurity must therefore extend beyond any single policy or programme. Security agencies require stronger intelligence capabilities, modern equipment, better coordination and the institutional support necessary to protect communities effectively. The fight against violence cannot depend only on the bravery of individual officers and soldiers; it requires effective leadership, strategic planning and sustained commitment from government at all levels.
Communities must also be recognised as important partners in restoring peace. Traditional leaders, religious authorities, civil society organisations and local stakeholders often understand the realities of their communities better than anyone else. Their involvement can help identify warning signs, prevent radicalisation, rebuild trust and support reconciliation efforts where genuine change has occurred. However, community participation must go hand in hand with accountability, ensuring that peace efforts do not become excuses for ignoring serious crimes.
The sacrifices of Nigeria’s Armed Forces and other security personnel must never be forgotten. Many have lost their lives while defending the nation and protecting civilians from violent groups. Their commitment deserves more than public appreciation; it requires responsible leadership, adequate resources, proper welfare and policies that enable them to perform their duties effectively. A nation cannot demand sacrifices from its defenders while failing to provide them with the support needed to succeed.
Equally important is the responsibility to remember the victims of insecurity. The widows who lost their spouses, the children who lost their parents, the families displaced from their homes and the survivors carrying physical and emotional scars all deserve attention and assistance. Their suffering cannot be ignored while national policies are designed around those who caused their pain. Any genuine peace initiative must include justice, healing and support for those whose lives have been permanently affected.
For this reason, any rehabilitation and reintegration programme must be transparent, carefully monitored and guided by evidence rather than political pressure. There must be clear standards for determining who qualifies for such programmes, continuous assessment of participants and strong safeguards to protect communities. National security and public confidence must remain the foundation of every decision.
The Senate’s intervention provides Nigeria with an opportunity to have a serious and honest conversation about its approach to insecurity. The goal should not simply be to silence the guns temporarily, but to create a peace that citizens can trust and sustain. Ending violence without addressing injustice, accountability and the concerns of victims will only produce a fragile peace that may collapse when old grievances resurface.
A lasting peace cannot be built on forgotten victims, unanswered crimes or weakened institutions. It requires justice, strong security structures, responsible leadership and respect for the rule of law. Nigeria must continue to pursue every genuine opportunity for peace, but peace must never be achieved at the cost of justice. Surrender may mark the end of one stage of violence, but only genuine repentance—demonstrated through accountability, responsibility and consistent action—can provide the foundation for meaningful reintegration and a safer future for all Nigerians.
